What's your favorite type of magic? Or, more specifically, which of these types do you think is the best/most interesting?
>Elemental magic (Could include just base 4, or could include some extra like wood, metal, or flesh)
>Supra-Elemental (Like elemental, but includes many/all aspects of reality including abstract stuff like the mind or fate; such as in Mage or Ars Magica.)
>Arcane Magic (Magic is organized by school/type but is based on arcane energy instead of elements most of the time)
>Occultist Magic (Magic is mostly about weaving fate; direct damage spells either don't exist or cause wounds/disease/drain life force, etc.)
>Psionic/Semi-Scientific (Magic is the basic psionic powers, such as telekinesis or mind reading)
>Willpower (similar to Psionic but more based just on an abstract form of wishing/willing things to change or be done. Uncommon and seen more in literary works)
>Spirit Based (Magic is based on supernatural ghosts/spirits/gods and humans can only ask/command these things to do magic for them. Could still be combined with other options)
>Craft Based (Magic mostly exists in the form of magic items and/or just doing things "really well", similar to Tolkien)
>Low/Fairytale Magic (Magic only exists as innate abilities of certain creatures, in the form of potions, etc.)
>No Magic(?)
>Other?
What's your favorite type of magic? Or, more specifically...
Other urls found in this thread:
>Leyline Magic, magic depends on the currents of usually unseen streams
>Rituatlistic Magic, magic isn't zappy laser hands. It has a real emphasis on reagents, incantations, timing, etc.
>Hacked Magic, magic isn't about giving and taking energy or commanding forces, it's about truly incomprehensible exploits in the universe where impossibly low order effects are manipulated to affect things that appear wholly unrelated.
>Love
>Component Magic, the Build a Bear workshop of magic, put your spells together piece by piece
More fun ones
>Elemental magic (Could include just base 4, or could include some extra like wood, metal, or flesh)
>Supra-Elemental (Like elemental, but includes many/all aspects of reality including abstract stuff like the mind or fate; such as in Mage or Ars Magica.)
Mix of these two, aka "elemental as the elements were originally understood by the people who came up with them": Elemental magic, according to a classical element system (so basically either the Greek 4 plus or minus Aether/Quintessence/Void/whatever you want to call it, or the Wu Xing -- either's good), and including in each element not only the obvious physical manifestations but also the abstract/conceptual associations. For instance, fire isn't just burning shit, it's also light, technology, knowledge, purgation, passion (especially aggressive passions), initiation of change, etc.
Spirit-based is also cool, either in combination with elements or as its own thing. Especially when there's some element of cost/risk involved, like conduct requirements or paying a price of some kind.
Also: Music magic. Where the magic is basically just taking the power of music to move people's emotions and cranking it up to legendary proportions. The top performers make music so sublimely moving that even inanimate objects respond -- cause earthquakes by playing a tune so catchy the earth dances, play a lullaby to calm a raging storm, play a fierce and angry song to stoke a small flame into an inferno, etc.
Ritualistic/Hacked magic, heavy in symbolism.
By which I mean Unknown Armies.
Dance Magic
Metamagic. The only anti-magic that makes any sense without being annoying.
Why should fucking not!paladins have access to it when wizards by all means understand how magic works and counter it accordingly.
In short: Anti-magic belongs to spellcasters
Low/Fairytale magic. I also like super grim blood/sacrificial magic.
>Why should fucking not!paladins have access to it when wizards by all means understand how magic works and counter it accordingly.
Because they are academics, they don't have the finesse or innate talent for magic required to modify it on the fly. A wizard may be a technically perfect musician but that doesn't mean he's any good at a Jam Session.
Not really a "type" of magic, but for all of the types you listed, my favorite way of casting them is through ritualistic means; typically ones requiring incantations that can be cast in various shorthand forms which make the casting process much quicker but at a cost to power.
Metamagic and Antimagic are shit. Your opinion is shit mate.
Not only is your assumption wrong; the reason paladins have antimagic is because they are heroic figures that can stand against evil magic because of their goodness and force of will and it has nothing to do with the understanding of magic itself; but secondly the thought of "anti-magic belongs to the spellcasters" only further exacerbates the problems with spellcasters being the unique users of magic in fantasy. Creating a setting where magic is the only real counter to magic, and magic being enough of a problem that this needs to be addressed, only makes casters more important, even without getting into a balance discussion.
More importantly; the idea that magic should only be countered by magic and that "antimagic" or "metamagic" existing is complete shit and spits on the face of almost all folklore and myth. You counter evil spells and dark wizards with superstitious rituals, magical talismans, and prayer to spirits/gods to protect you; not with your own magician. From a flavor standpoint it is 100% better to have your character counter the magician's evil spell by wearing a rope tied into a knot around his shield, to confuse the spell. Or by carrying around a polished bit of glass, which you pull out and look through to counter a magician's illusions and glamors.
To hell with your pseudo-scientific "magical" bullshit. It's divorced from almost all the mysticism and myth that makes magic great. It's bad and you should feel bad.
But guys who are mostly martial and rote certain magical effects should?
(Not OP)
...
>Superstition and Mythology as a primary influence on meta/anti magic
>No fun
>Autistic science based D&D magic where only MAGIC users can create MAGIC items and cast ANTIMAGIC FIELDS because they're the only people allowed to use any kind of supernatural power
>Isn't no Fun
I much prefer when magic is done this way. If true love's kiss can undo a curse, I don't see why anti-magic should be caster-restricted.
>>Supra-Elemental (Like elemental, but includes many/all aspects of reality including abstract stuff like the mind or fate; such as in Mage or Ars Magica.)
This one. Space is the shit.
keke
fighterfag detected
Nah mate. Only wizards should have anti-magic.
You remind me of the babe.
What babe?
objectively wrong
Metamagic is a Sorcerer thing in 5e, you know, the guys who are to magic like most people are to their own hands?
Paladins are divinely blessed knights. Why shouldn't the arcane be beatable by the divine?
objectively true
Care to support your argument?
Except that in the entire history of the world, ever since primitive societies existed, antimagic was somethign common people had access to. Charms, amulets, wards, gestures, and other atropopaisim has always been the provenence of the common person.
If magic truly exists, the power to resist magic wioll have developed along side it since the creation of society. It's even worse if anyone can learn magic, because then antimagic is just another form of magical learning, dedicated to disrupting magic.
If magic is a science- then there's practically no reason for wizards not to study anti-magic
If it isn't a science- will, pretty much everyone in this thread summed up my feelings well.
>If magic is a science- then there's practically no reason for wizards not to study anti-magic
Well, there is nothing saying that wizards have to understand ALL magic. There may be different styles of magic, some of which are easier to work with from an academic basis and others from a different basis.
Completely agree. People who say otherwise just want magic to be a club for them to live their power fantasies.
Are you sure you're not just insecure over magic lol
Elemental: Lightning to be exact, I'm a shockfag
Psionic: I want to crumple and fling a fool
Craft Based: I enjoy the idea of being the smith, the builder. Whose achievements are the tools of legend
Why would you make a setting where some magic can be studied and other magic cannot studied?
>If magic is a science- then there's practically no reason for wizards not to study anti-magic
By that logic there is no reason for any spellcaster to ever have limitation on what sorts of magic they can do.
My gripe with anti magic is that a lot of people portray is as an instant win against casters, which is absolutely bogus. As for mages having anti magic, yeah, it makes sense. mages fight other mages. They need defenses of their own.
Why would I be insecure over something that doesn't exist?
Not really. Some spell-schools can be universal.
Wizards fight other wizards. The idea that anti magic is exclusive to non spellcasters is hilarious.
Because you are going for different themes with it? For example the Old Kingdom series has 2 major sorts of magic. Charter Magic and Free Magic(With necromancy as a subset of Free Magic Sorcery). Free Magic is not something you can study, it's just something you can invoke and try to channel in vaguely the right direction, hence the name. Charter magic is structured and ordered and can be studied and researched. Order vs Chaos is a serious theme of the books, so it makes sense for some magic to be able to be studied and others not.
Even then, Charter Magic is closer to an art than a science most of the time because there is so many runes that not even the greatest mage in the setting could hope to memorise more than a tiny fragment of them but people's innate connection to the runes allows them to feel out the ones that are close to what they are looking for even if they don't know it.
Not everyone subscribes to your idea of what magic should or should not be, user.
Because its more fun that way, it allows for more types of spellcasters, a setting in which all magic is nonsensical and/or mysterious cant have scholarly wizards.
That's fine but the question is 'Why would you write a setting where some magic can be studied and other magic cannot be studied?'. I answered: Because it fits the themes of the story you are trying to tell with the setting.
Honestly, I'm getting kinda tired of 'Academic Magic is the Highest Form of magic and therefore better than the others'. I rather liked how 4e handled it, where Wizardly magic? It's not all upsides, it's a style with serious issues compared to others (It's rigid structure means that it can be unwieldy and not as easy to invoke as people with a more natural connection to it) and it's own advantages (Since it's a learned skill, you can be very versatile with it, if not on the fly versatile). A Sorcerer, a Swordmage or a Warlock? Were just as much masters of the arcane arts as any wizard of similar power.
I’m fond of the weird Hyborian Age Robert E. Howard occult/supernatural horror stuff, where it’s potent but strange, dangerous, and truly unnatural. I also like it when real magic is hard to do or not necessarily usable in a D&D “in a fight; time to cast spells” way and when trickery and dressed-up science substitutes here and there.
Magic was a bit more interesting in literary fiction before D&D. Not because D&D magic is bad mind you (that’s entirely subjective), but D&D is just such a heavy influence on later generic fantasy especially in video games (which are ultimately by far the widest consumed fantasy media today) that D&D magic often influences how magic ends up “looking” in nearly everything magic even shows up in.
>Honestly, I'm getting kinda tired of 'Academic Magic is the Highest Form of magic and therefore better than the others'.
I always considered it the most powerful in potential. The hardest to grasp. Very few will ever achieve godlike status. Science is endless, but difficult.
Though this is just me, and certainly how they treat it in D&D.
>If magic is a science- then there's practically no reason for wizards not to study anti-magic
Well, the way I like to put it in my settings that tend towards a more scientific view of magic is that generic anti-magic is something impossible to achieve but something that wizards strive towards. Kinda like alchemists wanting the Philosopher's Stone or the Alkahest.
I pretty much always limit anti-magic to being useful against a specific variant of a specific spell, not against all spells in general and usually not even against a class of spells. Sometimes I'll allow wizards to simply brute force their way through to cancel spells, at the cost of spending vastly more energy than the original spell would have used.
This means that in practice, most practically minded wizards will forgo studying anti-magic extensively, usually only learning the basic principles.
Does your group actually give a shit about what “stories” and “themes” and the like you are working with in your fantasy setting?
Because I have some pretty veteran RPer’s on my group and mostly they just want to go on cool adventures and have fun, not analyze “themes”. They’ll do all kinds of shit too; investigations, dungencrawling, hex crawling, exploration, etc. They just don’t really care about “deeper messages” or whatever.
But that doesn't make sense. It would make sense for all casters to have access to the exact same magic, just different tools and interactions with that same magic.
>a setting in which all magic is nonsensical and/or mysterious cant have scholarly wizards.
>What is Conan
I prefer the "each path is its own challenge" approach, a wizard might think a warlock is just a whore that sucks devil dick to get power or that a sorcerer is just a living unstable wand, but thats just a reductionist view of the complexity that actually goes down beyond the scope of his academic grasp.
Why does it make sense for it to be impossible to study magic enough to get to necromancy?
ritualistic and divine interventions are the only types of magic
Not him, but what sense would it make based on your vast experience with sorcery? Magic is nonsensical in fiction and has no “standard” because pretty much by definition there’s no real rules to it anywhere.
Hell, if you want to use real-life logic then most examples of “magic” we have in religion and dubious historical reactors is either divinations (so basically looking at a random chosen medium and guessing about shit) or works like Biblical miracles and stuff just happens.
>Does your group actually give a shit about what “stories” and “themes” and the like you are working with in your fantasy setting?
Yeah? I mean, my current campaign has the strong underlying theme of cultural history and concerns about losing national identity in the face of a larger international community. Mind you, it mostly involves people shooting a lot of lasers at each other and trying to stop black ops groups trying to start a war but it has themes.
Things don't really need a 'Deeper message' to have a theme. I mean, Balder's Gate had a theme about parents and being defined by their legacy but it doesn't mean it wasn't a game mostly about adventuring.
Academic IS the strongest magic in most fictional settings. Fucking low IQ brainlets can't compare.
The kind that lets me make swords out of thin air. Also runes, runes are neat.
>But that doesn't make sense.
It doesn't need to make sense to you, its internally consistent.
>It would make sense for all casters to have access to the exact same magic, just different tools and interactions with that same magic.
Why?, no, Im not just going to let wizards do the same shit a cleric does because he studied hard, you want to grow stigmata?, you better start praying.
>Why does it make sense for it to be impossible to study magic enough to get to necromancy?
Because Necromancy in that setting isn't part of the Charter. All magic originally comes from Free Magic but someone (Some amazingly powerful spirits) managed to make a small amount of order out of chaos and that was the Charter.
Magic isn't just 'Magic' in most settings. It has a source or themes or some idea of what it is other than just 'Magic'. Even D&D has that, with arcane spellcasters drawing from the Weave in Forgotten realms and there is supernatural stuff that isn't part of the Weave and therefore a wizard couldn't do that.
You'd love D&D4e Swordmages then. That was like their two main themes, runes and swords (They actually did a lot more with runes than wizards did because a rune is a solid, inviolate and self contained symbol of power. Wizards instead work with long, complex spells but that's not really something that's a great idea when you are in a complex melee)
The setting is called the Hyborian Age.
That said, you are both right and wrong; we don’t really know what it takes to do magic in Conan because there’s actually no protagonists who are sorcerers.
What we know about it from the fiction is this;
>It’s not fast or easy to do.
Only more powerful sorcerers seem to be able to actively defend themselves with magic, and even then a solid sword thrust can kill them and they aren’t really that much better defended.
>It’s unnatural, a forbidden form of knowledge
Lovecraft and Howard seemed to agree; sorcerey was always weird, unnatural, and vaguely terrifying.
>Human sacrifice makes it work better
Or maybe sorcerers just think it does because
>It makes you fucking crazy
Or at least leads to obsessive behaviors and other scary shit like that.
Hell, Narbondus the Red Priest is a “wizard” who actually turns out to basically just be a scientist and an alchemist who uses mummery to appear more powerful then he actually is and sort of seems to look down on true magic.
>I don't care about how magic works in a setting
Why are you on Veeky Forums?
Fair enough.
Our adventures follow story patterns as well, as I said. I just wasn’t sure if you were using your games to deliver a message or something or not.
Sounds like you've never heard of Mage the Ascension.
Nah. It's just when I make a setting I try to think a bit about the themes (Is nature vs science a theme? Or is it one about not being sure who you can trust etc?) that will affect the storytelling.
Given the context of the thread I wasn't filing divine magic as magic. Most of the discussion has been revolving around wizards and the arcane so that's what my comment was referring to.
Don’t be obstinate.
Magic works in a setting however it’s supposed to work; the only time internal consistency is required is when the setting uses internally consistent magic, rules wise or setting-wise.
Magic has no consistent “rules” across fantasy settings because unlike things like gravity or rudimentary physics it doesn’t actually exist and has no basis in reality.
Arguing about the “most correct” version of something that doesn’t exist in real life is stupid as hell because they’re all equally completely fictional and thus are all purely subjective.
But wouldn't people within the Charter be able to reach necromancy through study?
Yes I do, I just dont like it, mages in WoD are basically gods.
Yeah, but the point stands. Magic is mysterious and there are scholarly magic users.
Biggest power trip spreg I've seen in quite a while.
Most fun magic = science magic. To be able to shit fireball you have to study as hard as it is to learn to be good swordfighter.
Antimagic = subdiscipline of magic - how to make other wizards fail or how to craft devices that make people less prone to magic
Mambojumbo misticism magic is another form of religion nonsense that lets GM does what he wants and ruin players experiance.
And I am questioning the internal consistency of the setting.
It makes no sense for there to be magic that can be studied and magic that cannot be studied.
I don't think it makes sense for antimagic to be as complicated as magic unless you want the entire setting to revolve around magic.
It was just an example, why couldnt there be a difference between wizard magic and warlock magic too?, I see no real limitation other than laziness, it all boils down to how much divisions you want to make.
>Magic should be able to do anything only MAGIC can counter MAGIC and ANTIMAGIC can be researched just by people that use MAGIC
>No, magic should be based on actual mythology and folklore where it is less powerful, home remedies and spiritual cures to the evil eye and such are a method of-
>WOW POWER TRIP SPERG! OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE A SHIT DM
>WHY CAN'T YOU LET MY WIZARD WIN! HE'S THE SMART EXPERT CHARACTER HE CAN USE HIS BRAIN TO MAKE MAGIC DO ANYTHING REEE
>YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU'RE A FUCKING SPERG
>I'M UNIRONICALLY SAYING YOU WANT TO RUIN YOUR PLAYER'S EXPERIENCE WITH THE WHOLE GAME BECAUSE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT IDEA OF WHAT MAGIC SHOULD BE THEN ME
I just try to make a fun adventure and don’t go into themes in particular. I’m sure they pop out to some degree, but it’s not even remotely deliberate on my part.
You could make an argument that our current one is about the self-destructive nature of unrestrained greed I guess, but I wasn’t shooting for that at all, I just like complex double-crosses and stories where everyone’s murdering each other over a valuable thing.
I’m mostly debating the scholarly part.
Not that it’s impossible mind you, but the most powerful magic users in the Conan stories are not shown to be particularly better educated or more intelligent then anyone else, or even in most cases any smarter then Conan himself is. In fact, the most powerful magic users are priests of some sort or are outright inhuman beings masquerading as human. One of those two most potent sorcerers actually seemed completely powerless without his magical gewgaw of power.
The one guy who actually talked about studying shit was just a scientist pretending to be magical, while we don’t really know enough about the rest to determine if learning sorcery is that different from learning any other skill.
That said, given Howard and Lovecraft’s correspondence I am willing to believe that sorcery might be able to be studied as a field of knowledge, albeit one that is extremely harrowing and dangerous to learn more of and craps all over basic physics.
.
You are just on the other extreme of the "autism over bullshit" spectrum.
No? Because necromancy isn't part of the Charter. The Charter has limits and so does free magic, neither encompasses everything.
Based on what? That’s my query.
Why exactly does it make no sense?
Well there is no difference. They are two names for the same thing.
If you are referring to how D&D structures them they both have access to the exact same spells. The difference between the two are minor traits of how they use those exact same spells. Neither one is locked out of magic that the other has (outside of their specific studies)
Please stop arguing with this retard. I've seen him in another thread arguing something similar with daily limits for casters. "Oh casters could just study a way around it xd". I have no idea if he's "trolling" or if he's literally some kind of aspie. He's going to respond to both your posts with "but they can study it so why can't they learn it" and go around in circles over and over without ever even acknowledging your viewpoints.
Don't even bother to reply.
>I just try to make a fun adventure and don’t go into themes in particular. I’m sure they pop out to some degree, but it’s not even remotely deliberate on my part.
Yeah, that's fine. I mean, a lot of great movies have been made that way. I seriously doubt that National Lampoon's Action was intending for it to have an underlying theme of the disappointment Reagan era middle class people felt about the american dream.
I just come to fantasy via sci-fi (In particular, old Dr Who and Star Trek), which often worked quite hard on themes so they are something I naturally fall back into examining.
But user, I'm super smart. If I study aviation hard enough I'll be able to jump off the roof and fly right? Study can beat any fundamental rule!
I remember the story with the silver tower and the elephant guy involved the wizard within doing research into other worlds.
And the one where the evil queen had the green star ring, the wizard there was in an advisory role and that implies a layer of research and knowledge.
Also in the story where he gets jumped by the giant worm for stealing its magic bowl, he listens in on school people talking about other worlds (and at least in the comic it depicted them using magic, not sure if the written stories say specifically)
>If you are referring to how D&D structures
No, Im not necessarily talking about D&D, and it really doesnt matters because you can easily do a spell list yourself and just not give the same spells to two different classes, D&D is not a setting its a system.
Well yeah but the concept is sound
>One of those two most potent sorcerers actually seemed completely powerless without his magical gewgaw of power.
A lot of the magic in the Hyborian Age seems EXTREMELY reliant on having some kind of demonic or otherworldly patron or something to either teach you spells or draw power from or something. Lots of summoning demons from the Outer Dark and shit like that.
Because people's ideas of magic has to conform with your own and no other, right?
By why can't people in the charter research how to do necromancy?
That's the guy he's talking about.
No one in this thread but you is suggesting that retard, you can have you science magic setting if you want to, no one is taking that away from you.
I despise when magic is "Shoot x Element/Kill things with this flavor".
Gimme arcane mysticism, portals and polymorphing and charms and whimsical stuff. Why does magic have to be essentially a sword with pretty effects? Why does magic give a shit that people fight all the time?
>Humans are capable of accessing magic.
>There are humans who can access magic without research.
>There are humans who can access magic with research
Why would research humans be able to access different types of magic than non research humans?
Because the spirits that power necromancy aren't part of the Charter. It really doesn't get any simpler than 'this organized magic doesn't include or allowed for the magic that isn't part of it".
I read the three lines that explain it and it makes perfect sense to me. Are you stupid, or just being argumentative because you don't like someone else's setting?
>I remember the story with the silver tower and the elephant guy involved the wizard within doing research into other worlds.
It’s a jeweled tower, and you are thinking of Tower of the Elephant. In addition the sorcerer was not really researching other worlds or anything like that, and was apparently entirely dependent upon Yag-Kosha for his power. Basically he had a pact with an alien-thing for power that he kept in bondage. He didn’t even need to summon Yag-Kosha because his race got to earth on it’s own and was trapped here eons beforehand.
>And the one where the evil queen had the green star ring, the wizard there was in an advisory role and that implies a layer of research and knowledge.
I honestly don’t know that one. It doesn’t sound like one of Howard’s works, he only had the one female sorcerer in the entirety of his work.
>Also in the story where he gets jumped by the giant worm for stealing its magic bowl he listens in on school people talking about other worlds (and at least in the comic it depicted them using magic, not sure if the written stories say specifically)
That’s one of the comics.
Those guys weren’t Wizards, they were philosophers which is why Conan was dismissive of their words at first.
The magic again seems regulated to weird otherworldly demons doing shit.
In D&D spell limits are just a natural part of casting. The mortal body or consciousness or whatever can only contain so many spells with there being a higher limit.
On a side note, there technically are ways around that limit through magical items that replenish spell slots so yeah, you can study ways around it and that makes sense.
I'm not the guy, R tard
Because of how magic works.
Because that's not part of the Charter. That's like saying 'If I keep trying to do the impossible thing, eventually it will succeed'.
I have a quote that applies here: youtube.com
Oddly enough, the setting does have a group who do necromancy and charter stuff...but they are two separate things even for that group. They use charter magic to do what necromancy can't and necromancy to do what charter magic can't. It's not that they studied charter magic so hard that they broke through into necromancy.
Oh okay. See that makes sense. Magic comes from spirits so they determine who gets what kind of magic. So it's not really about study or not study but rather about what spirits you are homies with.
Not that user, but you seem to know a bit about Conan shit so I wanted to ask; why, if Howard and Lovecraft followed a lot of the same ideas of a cold, empty cosmos filled with terrible horrors that disregard humanity as important, do Conan and Howard’s protagonists react so differently do them?
No sense in arguing with a person that comes up with their own version of what I said, changes it then argues with it. Basically you are arguing with yourself - have fun with it
I think it was called Road of Kings. And the sorcerer was a dude. He summoned his otherworldly patron and it dragged him away.
No, that's not how the setting works at all. Charter magic is about study, Free Magic (Including necromancy) is about the willpower to force raw chaos to conform to what you want briefly). You can't study hard enough to make charter magic do the impossible however. That's like saying 'If I keep practising swinging this sword, I will eventually be able to cut a hole in space itself to use as a portal'. Sure, in some settings that may be possible but it's not something inherent to 'Practising swords'