Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
How magic is portrayed as working.
I thought about writing a long-ass essay about this, but I want to get some other opinions before doing so.
See, my problem with the way magic is often portrayed in modern fiction (especially video games) is that it often doesn't feel... well, magical. Between D&D's set list of spells and the way video games reduce it to fireballs and lightning magic feels less like actual magic and just like a path of superpowers.
Fantasy novels tend to be less bad, but still fall into the trap of being generically showy rather than putting any mystery or showiness to magic.
Hell, come to think of it, Doctor Strange -an actual superhero- often gets the feel of magic and mystical adventure down better than a lot of other fantasy stuff does.
I'm not against the spectacle of fireball magic. I just want it to feel more like it's something unique unto itself rather than another superpower.
Comments
Would any superhero really be that different if you changed the rationale behind their powers to "because magic?"
That said, I agree with you, and in the RPG I'm working on right now, I'm trying to find a way to allow magic to be freeform without unbalancing it.
It's funny, I see what you mean, but I actually don't mind it that much when it comes to gaming, simply because when you're the wizard, I don't think it feels that mystical, and it shouldn't feel as so.
I like magic when it's, well, magic. It does stuff without concerns for realism. Fireballs are one thing, but there's so much more.
Wait, is the complaint uncreative magic or just "Not feeling as if what I'm doing is Magical but rather an extension of what I could do?"
I don't know.
most things don't seem as magical when you yourself is doing them, as opposed to seeing it done by someone else, right?
I think that it's simplyy a matter of whether you're the wizard or if you're walking alongside the wizard. If you're the wizard, you can't feel as if what you're doing is particularly impressive simply because you've trained yourself to having those skills. However, I feel that games should try to impress on you the feeling of improvement and how over time, your spells grow bigger and strongers, as well as varied.
And not completely outclassed by swinging a sword around?
Those generic attack spells and telekinesis are just relatively simple and readily manipulable manifestations of magic -- also some of the most practical in the long term, in that they scale easily with how much sheer brute force you can channel.
They're bread and butter skills for a good reason. Any idiot can roll up a ball of bat crap and set things on fire. A good wizard can do it considerably better, as well as control the fabric of the universe on a much more delicate level.
INUH: Check out Mage: The Ascension. It's far from perfect but it has a very simple-yet-in-depth look at magic.
Also, a lot of superheroes actually depend on a scientific background for them. Reed Richards, for example, would be a very different character with magic as would the Flash.
Wicked: I get what you're saying, but I think a lot of writers have managed to make an intimate experience with magic while still maintaining an ethereal sense of wonder. Dresden Files manages to make magic and magical beings engaging and otherworldly all the while including fireball magic. Hellblazer's another good one though it lack fireball magic.
Bee: I get where you're coming from, but that world 'practical' stings me. Maybe it's just me, but magic shouldn't be about practicality. if it's something that you can just use completely reliably under a specific set of rules that's just another type of science.
Will do, thanks. Though I already have a general idea of where I'm going with it.
Yeah, I should have clarified that I meant that in terms of capabilities. On another note, I need to read more comics.
Upon reflection 'simple' is the wrong word for M:tA. 'Easy to understand' would be better. Yes, I know they're technically the same thing. Shut up.
I'd argue that when you come down to it, most people would approach magic as science if they know how it works.
Only if it operated as reliably as science does.
Which is part of my point.
Fair enough, I suppose. Part of the prooblem is that writing a chaotic system does not bode well for a game.
Well, I think games like Mage: The Ascension and (much more so) Don't Rest Your Head have good systems for a magic system like that.
Granted, I don't have a solution for video games.
I don't know much about roleplay, so I can't say much about that
I think that a videogame where you're an apprentice and your first spells tend to fail and crap out would be interesting, but it definetly would cause more headaches and anger than enjoyment.
Yeah, that's the conflict.
I mean I understand that the reason most people would want to to play a wizard in a game would be TO CONTROL THE ELEMENTS AS YOUR PLAYTHING but... well, let me put it this way.
In a prose novel or a film, you can use ways to portray how firing lightning is something of an otherworldy experience and such. With vidya, it's harder to do that without things like MP or some sort of point buy system.
I think gaming by-and-large seems to lack something of a spiritual or ethereal element, something that I think is imperative to magic.
Hmmm...what if magic was used by disconnecting yourself from the world, and as such, you start with 0 MP, and when you cast a spell, it adds however many, and you lose them over time?
And the more you have, the higher the probability of really weird stuff happening.
Personally, I kind of like it like this.
^But then it's not magic.
I think that Shadow of the Colossus managed to do that through the power of minimalistic gameplay and beautifully amazing aesthetics.
The problem is that you can't make magic minimalistic in a game, simply because a game needs a degree of variety. The only way I guess you could pull that off is if you keep magic away from the player until a certain point. And even then, when you gain it, it loses a lot of its mystery, unless you gain it and yet do not control it as much as you'd want to.
Why can't magic be magic if it's well-understood and reliable?
^^Yeah, I think it's that it comes down to a question of numbers. The Dia spell costs so much MP or whatever.
^ Because then it's a branch of science.
Why can't it be a science?
Because it's just another branch of science that happens to be called 'magic', I think his point is. It lacks mystery when it's defined and well-understood, and mystery is kind of key to magic.
What does that make Doctor Fate then?
don't say god
go-
dammit
hehe, fitting.
I get his point. I just don't see why magic can't be treated as a science. It's not like any of the real sciences are any less alien, really.