Why Not Magic?

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, my observation in the game system/setting where it was most true (Runequest) was that people didn't insist on avoiding magic. Even in versions where it wasn't pretty much the only route to higher levels of power, nobody was bent out of shape avoiding having Healing and Bladesharp.

Right, if an effective tool exists that can make you better at a craft, and it is feasible to obtain it, we generally will do so.

And so to accommodate the players who just want to play a fully mundane character, without having to just handwave the strangeness of the choice, you have to have in universe reasons a person might never learn any magic, or just expect them to compromise and be minimally magical, rather than fully non-magical.

 

[Bluenose]

Right, if an effective tool exists that can make you better at a craft, and it is feasible to obtain it, we generally will do so.

And so to accommodate the players who just want to play a fully mundane character, without having to just handwave the strangeness of the choice, you have to have in universe reasons a person might never learn any magic, or just expect them to compromise and be minimally magical, rather than fully non-magical.

Of course if you believe what the Kralorelans and others say about MYsticism, they're very specifically not doing magic. They're merely removing limitations through negating their limits. Refuse to accept that gravity limits you hard enough, and you can fly. And some western societies restrict use of magic to Wizards (or try to, that peasant trying to move a particularly large rock from out of the way of his plough may well assist himself furtively with a bit of magic) and their soldiers are extremely well trained mundane warriors who have magic cast on them by their supporting Wizards.

Of course in Glorantha, not taking part in magic is equivalent to not taking part in society. You literally can't be an adult as a theist without going to the God World and visiting your gods' home, and you will have magic if you do that. Other forms of worship exist (and also deliver magical powers).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Of course if you believe what the Kralorelans and others say about MYsticism, they're very specifically not doing magic. They're merely removing limitations through negating their limits. Refuse to accept that gravity limits you hard enough, and you can fly. And some western societies restrict use of magic to Wizards (or try to, that peasant trying to move a particularly large rock from out of the way of his plough may well assist himself furtively with a bit of magic) and their soldiers are extremely well trained mundane warriors who have magic cast on them by their supporting Wizards.

Of course in Glorantha, not taking part in magic is equivalent to not taking part in society. You literally can't be an adult as a theist without going to the God World and visiting your gods' home, and you will have magic if you do that. Other forms of worship exist (and also deliver magical powers).

A lot of that is gibberish to me because I don't know what a Glorantha or a Kralorelan is, but I think I get the gist.

And your peasant farmer example raises another issue, of course, that has many times had it's own thread, which is that we all know deep down that DnD societies don't make sense if you stop squinting and actually look at them. If that farmer can use magic to help him move the boulder, but doing so is illegal and could get him in trouble because magic is strictly for wizards, that society will fail. Either by revolt, or by neighboring lands that aren't actively stabbing their own feet deciding that the backward fools to the west would be better off with foreign landlords, or whtaever

 

[Lord Shark]

Because after 40+ years of playing D&D and other RPGs, I find magic in most games dull, flavorless, and repetitious. When "magic" means a 100-page list of spells, only a handful of which most players will ever use, I'm going to avoid interacting with that system as much as possible.

Also, D&D spellcasting is silly. I'd rather play the person who can do awesome things because they're Just That Damn Good, not because they wiggle their fingers and throw around bat guano.

 

[Bluenose]

A lot of that is gibberish to me because I don't know what a Glorantha or a Kralorelan is, but I think I get the gist.

Fair enough.

And your peasant farmer example raises another issue, of course, that has many times had it's own thread, which is that we all know deep down that DnD societies don't make sense if you stop squinting and actually look at them. If that farmer can use magic to help him move the boulder, but doing so is illegal and could get him in trouble because magic is strictly for wizards, that society will fail. Either by revolt, or by neighboring lands that aren't actively stabbing their own feet deciding that the backward fools to the west would be better off with foreign landlords, or whtaever

Western society typically has four castes . The Lord wants the field ploughed. The Wizard (who may also be the village priest) wants to keep the Lord's favour. The Knights want to fight an enemy and perhaps get noticed enough to have a little bit of land carved out for them to become a Lord. And the Peasant (who could be anything from a person living in a cottage who collects firewood to the wealthiest merchant in a city) just wants to get their job done without attracting attention that would have to do something about a little bit of improper behaviour. Everyone knows that people who shouldn't use magic will sometimes do so, and as long as no real fanatic notices then all is well. It's hypocritical, maybe the peasant feels bad about it and tells the village's priest-wizard and gets some penance, but it gets things done; and it's not as if other societies don't have their own hypocrisies.

 

[Tonguez]

Of course in Glorantha, not taking part in magic is equivalent to not taking part in society. You literally can't be an adult as a theist without going to the God World and visiting your gods' home, and you will have magic if you do that. Other forms of worship exist (and also deliver magical powers).

The important point about Glorantha though is 1) Magic is divine and ritualistic (its not Arcane in the D&D sense but comes from gods/spirits/patrons(grimoire) under limited conditions) 2) the system is skill based (so inherently limited) 3)the cults/patrons and their magic are fully integrated and integral to the bronze age setting

That last one really is the crux of the matter - how does magic enhance the Narrative of 'my characters' story, do I want my story to be that my character has access to magic that does wonderous things or do I want my character to be of such superlative skill that their talents seem magical? they're both valid.

Its the difference between Tarzan being raised by Apes and learning the 'ways of the jungle' and Tarzan being taught the speak with animals spell.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Right, if an effective tool exists that can make you better at a craft, and it is feasible to obtain it, we generally will do so.

And so to accommodate the players who just want to play a fully mundane character, without having to just handwave the strangeness of the choice, you have to have in universe reasons a person might never learn any magic, or just expect them to compromise and be minimally magical, rather than fully non-magical.

A lot of it depends on whether the culture involved considers magic at all distinct from other skills (that's not a given). If they do, then there's always going to be outgroups that decide its bad or undesirable on some level. If they don't, its not only kind of nonsensical, from any in-world perspective it simply makes no sense.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

A lot of it depends on whether the culture involved considers magic at all distinct from other skills (that's not a given). If they do, then there's always going to be outgroups that decide its bad or undesirable on some level. If they don't, its not only kind of nonsensical, from any in-world perspective it simply makes no sense.

I mean there are taboos about totally mundane stuff IRL. There would certainly be no-magic straight edge folks or whatever.

But they probably wouldn’t be Rangers (a word which here refers to people who are Wise to the supernatural and go about helping people, so the PCs and thier most useful allies), or would have a much harder time doing the job.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Fair enough.

Western society typically has four castes . The Lord wants the field ploughed. The Wizard (who may also be the village priest) wants to keep the Lord's favour. The Knights want to fight an enemy and perhaps get noticed enough to have a little bit of land carved out for them to become a Lord. And the Peasant (who could be anything from a person living in a cottage who collects firewood to the wealthiest merchant in a city) just wants to get their job done without attracting attention that would have to do something about a little bit of improper behaviour. Everyone knows that people who shouldn't use magic will sometimes do so, and as long as no real fanatic notices then all is well. It's hypocritical, maybe the peasant feels bad about it and tells the village's priest-wizard and gets some penance, but it gets things done; and it's not as if other societies don't have their own hypocrisies.

So my question would be, what prevents violent popular revolt? It can’t just be fear of wizards and knights. People revolt against governments with bombers and mercenary armies who won’t hesitate to shoot civilians, they aren’t going to not do so because fireball exists. Especially when they can apperently learn magic in secret and there is a culture of pretending the peasant class doesn’t know magic.

Is it somehow a fair society?

 

[Garthanos]

Right, if an effective tool exists that can make you better at a craft, and it is feasible to obtain it, we generally will do so.

Another item might be if they specialize in something mundane tools do better.
Thing is if there is magic as an enhancer then they will do both.