Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7523055" data-attributes="member: 6688937">Well its true that they aren't the kind of people who would go on adventures to thwart and eventually destroy a powerful dark wizard like D&D characters would....oh wait, they do.Not correct. When defending his brother in the tunnel, he fails once (at least) before getting it right. I don't have a real problem with a chance to learn spells.Kinda like Harry and his friends, its not like he wasn't adventuring.Right...Ritual magic seems to be more reliable in Discworld, that's true. (I would also add that the wizards' attitude toward using magic in general seems to change a bit over the course of the series, depending on narrative needs. To my eye, things seemed to change a bit after Sourcery, and then drift back.)He also comments that he's not confident in his abilities when trying to calm the earthquakes in the labyrinth. Casting in Earthsea is regularly portrayed as very tricky business, even if you the right magic words. (Although, IIRC, its a little unclear if the casting is all basically impromptu or not.) Word of God has it that that was part of the point of the novels, that there are consequences for working magic.I think its unclear whether that's a ritual or not. I'm not sure why the sword or ring's performance matters when we are talking about reliable casting. However, Gandalf isn't human, and as one Reddit user commented, its unclear whether he's casting spells or just using is innate Maiar ability to tell physics to shut up and sit down. (Possibly aided by the Ring of Fire, as well.)While I disagree, I'm not sure this is a profitable conversation anymore. The reliability of magic/casting is a matter of choice for authors, and varies.Good gaming, either way.</blockquote>

Verification