If D&D magic were real, andyou had to explain it...

[Umbran]

Besides, I'm not sure it should be explicable - even sufficiently advanced magic, if explained properly, becomes indistinguishable from technology.

Yep. As a physicist, I'd need to actually know something about how it manages to apparently break most of the laws that otherwise govern the universe before I'd try to explain it. The energy to do these things has to come from somewhere. There must be some way that energy is controlled, and so on.

Explanation without that information is like saying, "Here's a car. There's an accelerator pedal, a brake, a steering wheel, and the automatic gear shift. You use these to control the car's motion. Go!" That's not an explanation of how it works, but an explication of how to operate it, which is by no means the same thing.

 

[Celebrim]

The central way I explain Vancian magic is that 'memorization' is a misnomer in the sense that memorization is only a very small part of what a wizard does to prepare a spell. 'Preparation' is a fuller and more accurate description of the system.

The central tenets of Vancian magic are:

1) Everything in reality is connected to everything else. In particular, the human mind is connected to the fabric of reality.

2) There is an infinite amount of untapped power ready to burst into the world. It is held outside the world by a relatively thin veil. Everything in the world that 'does something' fundamentally taps into this outside energy. After the energy is spent it is consumed. Note this world violates conservation of energy! Energy isn't merely transformed, it is extinguished. Fortunately, the amount of available energy is infinite. The human mind and body are already tapped into this outside energy - it's how we are alive and mobile.

3) By careful practice, a Wizard can learn to manipulate the fabric of reality directly, moving it with his mind by carefully controlling his mind. The simplest way to do this is to direct the mind by directing the body. The wizard controls his thoughts by reciting words and performing motions that create the very thoughts needed to perform the manipulations he desires.

4) The human connection to reality through the mind is exceptionally weak. A pureblooded human is not able to manipulate reality by brute force. However, just as machines can be constructed in order to amplify small forces into larger effects, by causing a small force but large motion over a longer time to translate to a small and powerful motion with greater force, so to can a wizard create machines in his mind that use the small force of the mind to create surprisingly large effects.

5) Creating these magical machines out of reality stuff is extremely elaborate and time consuming, on a scale of minutes or days or even years. Most such magical machine creating rituals are completed unsuited to day to day use and impractical for ordinary tasks, and as such are rarely or never codified but instead invented on a by need basis for the specific job a wizard would want to do. However, a small subset of these rituals have a very particular and important property - they can be brought to the point of almost being completed and then left in this 'waiting' state indefinitely. When the desired effect is needed, a short trigger is all that must be performed in order to direct the machine and set it in motion. These rituals are called 'spells'. Casting a spell is therefore a three step process. First, a lengthy preparation phase involving several minutes where the spell-caster does all the work to set up the complex mental machine in his mind. Secondly, a shorter memorization phase where the caster commits to memory the very short ritual needed to finish the machine. And thirdly, a casting phase where the wizard draws the machine from his mind and body and sets it in motion using the previously memorized trigger/targeting ritual.

6) The process of preparing and casting a spell is extremely taxing. In effect, the Wizard is exercising 'muscles' that most people don't even know that they have. It requires training to develop the strength and endurance of these mystical 'muscles', just as it does to develop the strength of the limbs and body. Initially, even quite weak rituals drain the Wizards mystical strength to the point that he cannot safely attempt any additional spells during a day. Wizards that attempt to cast spells beyond their ability typically fail, just as a weakling would fail to move a heavy stone from its resting place. However, occasionally far worse happens to those with almost enough strength - you get crushed by the stone. In my world, this is called 'spell burn', and its extremely dangerous. For this reason, Wizards are quite careful to never attempt any spell until they are quite certain that they've mastered it. Indeed, there are established guidelines for what a wizard should and should not attempt. In this way, Wizards know somewhat how hard rituals are - at the metagame level we'd say 'what level is the spell' - and which combination of rituals are approved for him to try once he's ready - at the metagame level we'd say 'what spell slots do you have'.

Interestingly, this means wizards are the only class in my game that knows its own level, though they wouldn't put it in those terms exactly.

It's conceivable within this framework that there are alternative approaches to Wizardry, but because of the world's backstory renegade approaches to magic tend to get one accused of witchcraft and brutally executed.

 

[Celebrim]

Yep. As a physicist, I'd need to actually know something about how it manages to apparently break most of the laws that otherwise govern the universe before I'd try to explain it. The energy to do these things has to come from somewhere. There must be some way that energy is controlled, and so on.

Explanation without that information is like saying, "Here's a car. There's an accelerator pedal, a brake, a steering wheel, and the automatic gear shift. You use these to control the car's motion. Go!" That's not an explanation of how it works, but an explication of how to operate it, which is by no means the same thing.

I entirely agree. However, it's worth noting that lots of people in this world - even some very smart ones - operate cars without knowing how they work at all or in more than in a very vague way.

In the same manner, it's assumed that the vast majority of wizards in my world only know how to operate magic (say these words, with this tone of voice, while holding this thought in your mind, performing these dance steps, and holding you finger like this), but don't in fact know how it works at all or only in the most vague way. Indeed, many might even hold erroneous views about how magic works, while still being able to perform it!

Also, it's abundantly evident that since magic breaks the laws of this universe, that the universe in which magic is real and works must have very different laws!

Very basic physical experiments in my world could be presumed to have very different results:

Kinetic energy might increase linearly with velocity rather than with the square of it, which might explain why high level characters can survive falls relatively well.

The Rumford experiment, if repeated, might observe that heat generated from motion is not inexhaustible.

The Lavoisier experiment might show that if a thing is burned, it's total mass decreases rather than increases.

And so forth. It is a mistake to assume that our understanding of physics greatly informs how the fantasy world of magic works. After all, prior understandings of how the world worked - the same views that tend to inform the magical system, such as the existence of 4 classical elements - survived a great deal of casual inspection. It is therefore reasonable to assume that such a world could conceivably superficially resemble or own, while still having a radically different set of governing laws (which we might be able to scarcely conceive, but which would be presumably understood by masters of arcane lore).

 

[Greenfield]

I think you've hit upon the difference between being a spell caster, and having Spellcraft skill.

Spellcraft is a measure of how well we understand the forces we're dealing with. Being a spell caster is the ability to deal with them, whether we truly understand them or not.

As noted, Sorcerers, Bards and other spontanbeous casters, as well as any number of magical creatures with spell like abilities can cast spells without even an attempt at understanding the underlying principles.

 

[Umbran]

I entirely agree. However, it's worth noting that lots of people in this world - even some very smart ones - operate cars without knowing how they work at all or in more than in a very vague way.

Yep. That's why I draw the distinction between explaining magic, and explicating the methods for performing it. I can explicate how to perform D&D magic to a real-world person, as-is, based on descriptions in the rulebooks. I cannot do what the OP asks - explain magic - as the actual mechanism behind it are not well-stated in those same books.

Also, it's abundantly evident that since magic breaks the laws of this universe, that the universe in which magic is real and works must have very different laws!

Well, okay, I actually can make up an explanation for magic out of whole cloth for myself - I do so for any campaign in which the metaphysics of the world is going to be a plot-driving issue. But then, I'm doing so for reasons of what it does for the story.

So, asking me to explain magic is more like asking me to give the basis for one particular story about magic.

 

[Celebrim]

I think you've hit upon the difference between being a spell caster, and having Spellcraft skill.

I break down knowledge slightly differently. Standard D20 allows the following divergence of knowledge:

a) Knowing how to cast a spell: This is the ability to actually use magic, with or without understanding.

b) Spellcraft: This is practical knowledge of how spells are cast. A person with lots of spellcraft can recognize what a spell is likely to do by observing how it is cast, either because he simply knows the forms even if he can't use them, or because he's familiar with the shared tools by which spells are commonly built and cast. A person requires a large amount of spell-craft to devise new spells.

c) Knowledge (Arcane): This is knowledge of how the world actually works. I joke that this is the equivalent in my world of Knowledge (Physics). With this knowledge you may not be able to cast spells, and you may not know much about how to cast spells, but you know the theory behind how spells work. You've just possibly never put it into practice unless you also have the other sorts of knowledge. This is like being the difference between a physicist an electrician. Given enough time, a physicist can figure out how a house should be wired, but he probably still shouldn't be trusted to be your general contractor or to repair a electrical substation after a lightning storm.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

"It's magic. That's how it works."

 

[howandwhy99]

The best thing about early D&D is it was so customizable per character, yet had a strong backbone for satisfying play.

The rules of the game are designed for strategy. "What spells do I memorize today?" Your answer to this when playing a Magic-User could mean the difference between succeeding in your goals for the day or not. It could also mean the difference in whether you lived out the day depending on everything that happens that you didn't plan for. NPCs usually don't adventure and don't take as many risks with their spellcasting, so they are usually prepared and have spells left for the day when encountered. This makes them more powerful defensive opponents, but it also means they learn and grow at a much reduced rate compared to PCs. Of course, if all you did was defend your hidden wizard tower and hoard your hard earned arcane lore you might be cautious with how many spells you cast each day, what spells you prepared, who you taught them to, and so on. The work lends itself towards seclusion.

However, each character, PC or NPC, is on a personal journey.* They are trying to work out how to perform magic individually. Even if they went the common route, years training as an apprentice to gain basic abilities, they are now on their own road to discovery. Their spells are going to be unique to them as well as their understanding of spells. Apprentices learning from their mentor may elect to learn his or her spells rather than design their own, but each of their understandings too will be unique to the individual. This same idiosyncratic nature comes up not just in wholly custom spells like Bigby's Hands, but in designs of common spells. My invisibility spell may be higher level, last longer, and be harder to dispel, but I fulfill the game effects by summoning an invisible, temporary ethereal cloak to remove the target from sight. In D&D that isn't fluff, but mechanical reference. I can do things with my spell you cannot and vice versa. If my Grease spell summons pork fat, then somewhere nearby a pig is potentially losing weight. ...or it doesn't get summoned. Tenser's grease spell is different. As is Mordenkainen's. My mentor's spell is basically the same though as I learned it from her, at least by my understanding of the spell it is. That might change as I see her cast her version more.

D&D's spell system uses prepared castings for a day's work in mind with more difficult, higher level castings taking more effort and requiring more intelligence and proficiency. Perhaps your castings are cast differently, aren't justified as rote formulae, are prepared differently than what others may take as preparation, they may not even be referred to as "magic" or "spells". Whatever the personalization, these are all treated as magic use. They are tracked by similarity by the DM, support strategic play for the Player, and count as resources in balancing the game.



*Yes, schools might spring up in cooperative areas where arcane lore is shared, but even those don't freely disseminate powerful knowledge lest it get into the wrong hands. They are selective with apprentice students admitted and the knowledge these students learn is recognizably derivative as a school of learning. Illusionists for instance.

 

[Empirate]

How 'MagIc' works? Actually, that's really simple, if you shear off unnecessary detail any educated person would know about.

Obviously, before nanotechnology was sufficiently advanced, there was no such thing as the kids nowadays like to call 'MagIc' in their shorthand speech mannerisms. 'Magnifying Iconography', as some old geezers (like me) like to call it, is apparently too much to ask for. Now where does Magnifying Iconography come from, you ask?

Well, it all began when 'SoodInMates' (Pseudo-Intelligent Matrices) were first successfully interfaced with the human brain. Since then people with the right kind of cortex nanomods have been able to turn their own body's and the surrounding environment's nanosphere into an extension of their personalized cortical infosphere. In other words, thought, especially visualized information, can be made to find expression in matter and energy: modifying the body or even the surrounding environment.

Of course, not any kind of thought or idea can be allowed expression - not only would this be almost impossible to control enough for stable effects to materialize, it could also lead to massive, unintended side effects. Hence, Magnifying Iconography: a way to channel the user's thoughts and ideas into specific mental images, using prerendered matrices downloaded from a 'MagIc Tome', i.e. a library of many individual Magnifying Iconographies, nanocortical procedures designed to have a specific effect if called up. How many, how massive and which specific Magnifying Iconographies can be called up depends on the degree to which a person's brain is suffused with nanomods. This, in turn, is mostly a function of prior successful use of Magnifying Iconographies. There are persisting rumors that MagIc is addictive, but the truth is just this: the more you use, the more and the better you can use it, depending on individual nanomod outfit, and natural suitability of the brain in question.

Technobabble? Yeah, sure, but what did you expect? "It's magic!" or some such nonsense? It's all really simple really, like most things are if you know a bit about them.

 

[MoonSong]

didn't read the whole thread in order to keep true to my ideas, sorry if this sounds similar to something being told before (Imagine this being told by a certain androginous elf on a red robe):

"Of course you don't just forget a spell after you cast it, that's silly you just don't forget stuff so easilly, in fact a good memory is a requisite to be able to cast spells in teh first place. That is frankly a myth, and of course it seems weird when we say 'I have no more spells for today' it has to appear, after all since we draw energy from the cosmos there is no limit on how many spells we get to cast.

But here is the explanation, a very simple one, spells are very complex and precise formulas that have to be followed to the letter, incluidng cantrips, even the most intelligent wizards get to know a dozen or so from memory, that is why spellbooks are that important to us. Casting a spell takes time, a lot of time, and requires special controled circumstances for it to be practical, that is why the ancient wizards devised a way to seal a spell, so you cast it on ideal conditions and then immediately you seal it before it takes effect, then later you unseal it by making the propper gestures and chants to remove the seal and have the spell take effect. Now here is the important part, the universe is fundamentally complex and is very impredictable at certain level, not to mention the conditions aren't uniform, that is why the gestures and chants are slightly different each time you unseal a spell, this is what you have to memorize each time you prepare a spell, the keys to unseal it, they are different each time, and you have to perform them with precision, once you unseal it you still remember the spell and the gestures, but there is no more spell to unseal. That is why it seems as if we forget a spell each time we cast it.

On magical writings, while each spell is a true and tried formula of great preciision, the wizard casting it isn't ideal, there are variations on a personal level that have to be taken into account, and this gets more complex because there are lots of other factors involved on the writing, that is why a wizard borrowing a spellbook need to study it very carefully before being able to cast from it. When you write a scroll you don't commit the full spell to it, instead you write down the gestures and chants needed to unseal it, but unlike a normal casting you have to modify the sealling to allow anybody to use it. It is possible to learn a spell from a scroll however, by unsealing it under controled conditions you can study it and deduct the right formula.

Clerics seem to have it easier their deities do the heavy work for them and yes, they also use gestures and chants to unseal the spells granted by their patrons, but their benefactors just impregnate their mind with the right keys, and being supernatural in nature, they get to cheat a little and don't need such a strong precision when they cast.

Sorcerers, well we don't really know how they do it, there are many teories on how, some are based on the few dragon disections that have been possible, but the truth won't be able to be known until we get to perform a vivisection on one while they cast, something that might never happen given it is very impractical... and that would be wrong"