Randy Ellefson's Blog, page 8

When Spells Are Not Needed

Let’s decide spells are not needed. Mortals can do magic without them. All those safeguards we just discussed will be absent. There’s no recipe, path, or guideline to follow. There’s no “if I do this, I will get this result.” We may will something to be and have unconscious thoughts intrude and also be willed into reality. Or maybe we weren’t thinking of one aspect of our intention and it’s omitted as a result. We may be able to fix these mistakes at once, but it might also be too late, such as willing an arrow fired at us to veer to one side, causing it to strike our best friend and kills him instantly. If we’re not powerful enough to bring someone back or reverse time and opt for a redo, we’re out of luck.

This willpower business is inherently more dangerous and uncontrolled – and one reason to reserve it for gods. The odds of a mortal wizard doing something wrong but still achieving an accidental result are probably far higher. And this might be why optional spells still exist, to achieve and control a specific result (within a defined range of possibilities). Spells would therefore place limits on magic, not make magic possible.

Given this, does it make sense to cast a spell and have it go wrong but still do something? If we wanted that to happen, we wouldn’t be using the spell. It should be a pass/fail scenario – either we do it right and it works (within parameters) or we do it wrong and nothing happens. This is a viable option to consider for our world.

But there can be more to this. Willpower wizards can clearly draw energy without help from a spell. This suggests that the point of spells is to control the energy’s release, which they can also do, but that this will aid them in doing so. There might also be issues with controlling the drawing of energy (such as taking too much or from poor sources), and therefore spells do (italics) include this. And authors of spells can include or omit safety features or be better or worse at inventing them, as we discussed in the previous section.

So where does that leave us? Whether using spells or not, we can have magic go wrong and still produce a result, even when the whole point of spells is to do it right. But we should generally opt for a pass/fail scenario if spells aren’t required. If spells are likely to be of little help, then many people wouldn’t bother with them. Perhaps they’re viewed like training wheels on bikes and few people use them after a certain experience level.

The post When Spells Are Not Needed appeared first on The Art of World Building.

Spells Are Needed

Let’s say spells are needed to perform magic. The spells would harness magical energy, but if the spell is performed wrong, we have two options: nothing happens, or magic still happens but in unintended ways. Both are plausible. Failure can mean that the energy wasn’t harnessed at all, which seems the safest poor result. Failure can also mean the energy was harnessed but discharged improperly, resulting in an alternate outcome, whether that’s a deadly explosion or a minor variation in the intended result. It’s up to us to decide which we want.

Comic results are sometimes desired, particularly in children’s books like Harry Potter. But we can also show the dangers of magic with perilous failure. Imagine how few people would want to do this if it’s so dangerous. By contrast, if nothing happens, an attempt is less fraught with worry. We might badly need the spell to succeed and feel pressure for that reason, but if we can’t do it right, we and others aren’t dead or worse. Decide how dangerous magic should be in the setting. It’s easy to imagine wizards who are a nervous wreck when doing something powerful if disaster could result. This can also cause strong restrictions by governments and others. It also ramps up the apprehension people feel when someone tries a spell. If you’re a wizard and about to do something, I might run for my life even if you’re my friend and I trust you. All of this can be significant reason for training facilities. But if nothing happens when failure occurs, everyone would be far more casual about it. What do they have to lose?

We can also invent solutions per situation or spell type (or even magic type). What if I’m a spell author and I know how to make my spell recipes safely dissipate energy when done wrong? But another guy had no idea and his spells are therefore more dangerous? My spell recipes are more desired. Why would anyone use the other guy’s spells? Because those are the only ones they’ve found.

Breaking a spell down into parts helps with this. Maybe the energy must be harnessed first, then manipulated before being expended. Can a wizard sense the harnessing? If so and it’s not working, he might stop right there. This failure will not expel energy and therefore nothing will happen. But if the energy is harnessed, and then the expulsion part of the spell is where failure occurs, an accidental result seems more plausible. For this reason, maybe some wizards craft their spells in reverse: the part to control the energy comes first, followed by the gathering of energy. This way, if failure happens during the first part, the harnessing also fails and nothing happens. Regardless of the order, some spell authors might’ve put in a failsafe that causes energy to be quietly released back to where it came from or safely dispersed elsewhere.

It seems plausible that all of these options would exist in the same world. We can have individual spell creators with a reputation for one thing or another. There can be entire schools of magic that only teach one kind of spell, whereas rogue wizards are willing to do the more dangerous spells. Perhaps the latter are only created by rogue authors trying to achieve an end result that sanctioned places, like a school of wizardry, forbid. Or maybe truly powerful spells require so much of the wizard’s energy to perform that some spell authors dispensed with the safeguards because it made the spell that much more taxing or complicated. Short cuts happen in all parts of life, even when unwise.

The post Spells Are Needed appeared first on The Art of World Building.

Are Spells Needed?

It may seem obvious that spells are needed to perform magic, but that depends on our definition of “spell” and “magic.” Magic is considered powers that don’t exist on Earth. But in our fictional world, magic is real, so does this definition fail? On that world, yes, but our audience is on Earth, so it still holds. But any physical changes that can be done without manually manipulating something, or using tech, can be considered magic. As for spells, this typically means words, gestures, physical materials, or some combination of these, to perform said magic. If all of this seems obvious, there’s a reason the distinction is being made.

Gods are considered real in fantasy worlds especially. And gods make things happen that don’t occur in the real world of Earth. Does that mean they’re doing magic? Unless we have a pressing reason for using a different word, yes. Perhaps gods and mortals are tapping into the same well of supernatural power, but one difference is that people are weakened by this and gods either aren’t, or to a lesser degree, but we can safely say gods (usually all of them) are capable of magic.

But are gods using spells? Or are they doing magic by force of will? I’m inclined to say it’s will power for several reasons. One is that we should distinguish between gods and mortals. It seems clear that gods can innately do magic (will power), but mortals must struggle to learn and master it, even if they have the talent from birth. Gods may have imposed limits, via spells, on what mortals can do. We can find other ways to impose limits, but it still raises the point: either beings can do magic by force of will or they need spells.

We’ve seen depictions of gods making gestures or speaking words to achieve their result, which suggests they’re using a spell, but perhaps they’re just controlling the force better this way. In visual media, people are typically shown doing these as visual/audible cues as to who is causing something to happen. This is sometimes omitted when it’s already been established who in the scene has the ability, such as Darth Vader in Star Wars, or when ambiguity is desired (either by characters or storytellers). Since will power is innate, gods may not need spells. Non-gods are typically portrayed as needing to learn how magic works; they study various things like the language of magic (an innate skill for gods), and then read spell books to learn how each spell is done. Then they practice. What little power they start with grows with that practice. We assume gods aren’t doing any of this because we show them as strong. Whether gods are using spells or not is semantics, except that if we have a choice between gods and mortals using willpower, the least sensible option is gods needing spells and mortals using willpower, because the latter suggests fewer restrictions and more power, both of which apply to gods.

What about mortals? Can they do magic via will power or are spells the only way? We may want to have both in our setting and use a name for each, like wizard vs. sorcerer.

The post Are Spells Needed? appeared first on The Art of World Building.

What Do You Call Wizards?

The words for magic users can be generic or imply meanings. The phrase “magic user” is a catchall that includes everything: wizards, mages, sorcerers, magicians, necromancers, witches/warlocks, and more. Many of these are virtual synonyms that carry no specific meaning unless we decide to differentiate them.

“Magician” sometimes implies a trickster or a charlatan. If we have true magic users and charlatans, “magician” might be for the latter and seen as an insult. On Earth, a magician is an “illusionist,” who appears to be doing magic. Such people can exist on a world with actual magic, so it’s likely there’s a word for them, and real wizards hate being considered one. This adds a dynamic. If we use “magician” for real magic users, we need another term, such as “trickster,” or “illusionist,” for these other guys.

“Mage” is familiar to fantasy audiences as a synonym for magician, but some haven’t heard this term. A simple reference will educate them, like this example: “Kier was a mage, or magician, of great renown.” This is slightly better than, “Kier was a mage, or wizard,” because the first ties “mage” and “magician” together better than “mage” and “wizard.” The word itself is archaic and fell out of usage until fantasy games like as Dungeons & Dragons revived it.

If we’ve invented types of magic for our setting, each needs a name. The inhabitants will have named them even if we try to skirt this issue. We can append other words to it, such as “high magic” and “low magic,” or create new words altogether, like my “valendry” from Llurien. We can also use the words in this section to refer to different practitioners.

The post What Do You Call Wizards? appeared first on The Art of World Building.

Social Aspects of Magic

Whether magic is rare or not, there may be laws that vary by location about its usage. We can create an entire area of law, crime, and punishments. These often originate from problems that have already occurred, so think about wizards doing bad things, especially in public, and how society has tried to deter this. We can invent some history and infamous incidents and characters (including victims), after whom a law may be named.

How can they inhibit wizards? The purposeful use of anti-magic zones is one way, in sensitive areas like a courthouse, or a device that can be placed on someone to cut them off from magic. Maybe they’ve figured out how to permanently remove the ability. Perhaps they can only limit access, such as making someone weaker so that only minor spells can be done. If they don’t have a supernatural way to inhibit, they could just drug someone so that they’re too weak to do it and regularly administer this. We can invent plants that have this effect once properly prepared. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

The more common magic usage is, the more social customs will arise from it. Casting a spell on our date without their permission is probably frowned on! But is casting a spell on ourselves prior to it okay? That likely depends on the result. If it’s considered dishonest, like making us appear 100 lbs. lighter, this is probably bad, but if we only changed our hair color, maybe not. It depends on whether we’re up front about these things. To create these, think about how life would be and what you’d want to do if you had magic and how others would react to you doing it.

There’s always a power disparity between wizards and muggles, to use a Harry Potter term. Do people consider it rude for a wizard to use magic with non-magical people? How concerned are people about this? Imagine being one of the few who can’t do magic and how intimidating that might be, and how we might try to hide it or compensate. What if we’re the lone person who’s unaffected by magic? What sort of bullying is done due to magic or via it? Be prepared to think about these elements if magic is prevalent.

Some communities might reject magic while others take advantage of it. Religious beliefs or conservative values (that resist change) can affect this. So can fear and significant historical acts. It’s an oversight to not have such places, or even zealots who denounce wizards or are on a crusade to capture, kill, or render them magicless. By contrast, some will worship the powerful or seek to be an apprentice, resulting in fierce competition. Sorcerers might be viewed like athletes are here. Give serious thought to what social elements are impacted.

The post Social Aspects of Magic appeared first on The Art of World Building.

What is the Cost of Magic?

Everything requires energy, and magic is expending it, or at least redirecting it elsewhere. We can say the same amount of energy exists before as after, and we’ve repurposed it, but this is a philosophical subject. We care more about the cost to the practitioner here. Those who suffer few or no effects of performing magic are almost gods, but mortals aren’t so lucky. Adding a cost to wizardry is an easy way to limit their powers.

The obvious and default answer, which no one will feel is a cliché, is that it’s physically draining to perform wizardry. Everything else is, so why wouldn’t it be? We also can decide that using it is like alcohol, which is a depressant but, in the short term, acts as a stimulant instead; people can feel energized during a magical battle but “crash” when it’s over, needing a deep sleep if they expended a lot of energy; use an analogy of your choice with different side effects to invent something original. We can decide that magic ages the practitioner prematurely, or reduces their ability to have children due to exposure to the energy, as does radiation. An old idea is that a spell needs to be memorized and, once cast, the wizard forgets it and must relearn it; what if casting it affects the mind in other ways? Maybe the spell isn’t the only thing they forget. Or perhaps magic makes them have nightmares or slowly go crazy. Just be sure to invent a price.

The post What is the Cost of Magic? appeared first on The Art of World Building.

Where Does Magic Originate?

Even a physicist might say that magic must come from somewhere. There’s a fine distinction between the origins of magic and its sources.

Origins

The origins of magic in our world is the answer to the question, “Where does magic come from?” And the answer can be the universe (nature) or the gods (or a being with god-like abilities). There aren’t many more options, though we can get more specific than the “nature” option, such as saying it’s radiation, or a lifeforce, or some other energy. We don’t need to explain it to an audience. Magic is accepted. Its origins are a philosophical question and therefore ignored if we choose to, whereas the source of a wizard’s power is a practical matter to which we should pay some attention.

Sources

To perform magic, a wizard must draw power from a source regardless of the origins of that source’s existence. Inventing sources is an easy way to create multiple types of magic, one per source, if desired. What follows an inexhaustive list of possible sources:

The planetElementsGravityMagneticsThe solar systemThe sunThe moon(s)Ring system (like Saturn)CometsOther realitiesOther planes (like the Astral plane)Parallel dimensionsBeingsGod(s)Demons/angels, etc.AliensPlants, animals, humanoids, etc.Souls (possibly from the living) or “lifeforce”The “force” from Star Wars

The latter option is an implied one in many stories, though only Star Wars (italics) calls it that. The energy just exists all around us and those with the talent can sense and manipulate it. A large source, such as the universe, has an advantage. When a wizard draws energy from a source, it seems reasonable that the source is temporarily drained. An analogy would be blood drawn from us. It replenishes in time, but of course someone can take it all, killing us. A truly powerful source like the sun or the universe is unlikely to be noticeably drained.

But if magic draws energy from living beings, it seems clear we could kill them by taking too much at once, or too often. Wizards could draw from multiple sources to mitigate this. We should determine the source of our magic and within what radius from the wizard that source must be. This is irrelevant with some sources that permeate everything or are seemingly always the same distance; while a planet gets farther or nearer to the sun, this is imperceptible to the naked eye, but what if wizards are always weaker in winter because their source, the sun, is dimmer? But then perhaps it doesn’t matter that the radiation and other elements the sun expels in our direction change distance. It’s up to us to decide. But we’re always looking for ways to limit what sorcerers can do and this is one way.

If a wizard draws from the living, it’s an obvious way to kill people, intentionally or not. But perhaps only some species can be so drained. Either way, imagine this person leaving a trail of corpses or people who’ve suddenly got a type of “sickness” with symptoms indicating a wizard used them as a source, likely in violation of the law. Consequences make for conflict, which makes for story. If we don’t have a need of this source being impacted, then we can decide the source is everywhere, in which case, we can also avoid mentioning it at all.

The post Where Does Magic Originate? appeared first on The Art of World Building.

Determine Magic Prevalence

Just like with technology, we need to determine how common magic and the ability to control it is. Rarity makes it more special, valuable, and feared, while it being common tends to get it taken for granted. We don’t need to explain the prevalence unless it has changed in the setting, such as hardly anyone having the ability and suddenly almost everyone does. We can just state it’s one way or another, but how do we decide what we want? By understanding the impact on setting and stories.

The more common magic is, the more it affects life (and stories), just like Earth technologies today. Do we want it everywhere? Magic will dominate. If we skip thinking this through, we risk a mistake: magic can resolve plot problems when we didn’t want it to. Let’s say we plot a story where the characters need to get somewhere in two days by horse, and along the way, someone joins their group, and they acquire both important information and an item. Then we decide magic is pervasive and there are magic gates they can use to traverse this distance in ten seconds. Now it doesn’t make sense that they’ll go by horse, which they don’t learn the information and don’t have the item or companion. Now we must fix our plot. Avoid this by working out the magic prevalence first.

If magic is rare, we get the usual fantasy setting of a few people being able to do it. Most life happens without magic, which is used by individuals mostly for their own benefit. If magic is common, it’s likely been commercialized so that society benefits from it. Just as we have engineers who work for a settlement/government, we might have wizards whose jobs involve using magic for the benefit of all. We must decide the degree of this. An easy way is to think about modern technology and its advantages, and then determine a magical equivalent. It helps to divide life into categories, such as farming, manufacturing, government, communications, and daily life. What can they do with it?

Magic items are a primary result of this. Think of appliances in your life and whether something comparable exists, but don’t do a one-for-one switch where the only difference is whether there’s a plug for electricity or not. A magic toaster likely works and looks differently than an electric one. We’re not just replacing the energy source, but reimagining how the end result can be achieved via an item with the same purpose. Combining purposes is one way to achieve this. We may have a toaster, microwave, stove top, bread maker, panini press, and oven in our house, plus a grill out back. Do they just have one thing and the spells are the difference?

Instead of items, we can have wizards who use their skills “in real time.” An example would be that there are no magic gateways to travel between locations, but there are wizards who excel at transporting others and they work for the government doing this, stationed at specific locations, just like a train depot, for example. They’d likely have insurance via their employer for accidents. Do they have an 8-hour workday? Imagine the fatigue. They may work in teams for that reason. We could have different spell types for this, each named, with some being preferred and more expensive. We can do this exercise with any aspect of modern Earth life.

The post Determine Magic Prevalence appeared first on The Art of World Building.

What is Elemental Magic?

Using the elements is one way to organize our magic. In addition to the four elements of water, air, earth, and fire, people sometimes decide that spirit is a fifth. We can also invent other elements, especially on non-Earth like worlds. Whatever we decide, this is a convenient way to divide spells because many spells will only use a given element. If we want our wizard to be able to do something with fire but he is a water wizard, this restriction is built in. We can also have rare individuals who are able to do one or all of them. But we don’t need to decide that people can only do one element. Perhaps everyone can do all four but there’s a “high” and “low” magic that distinguishes them. Or some are just better suited to one and, while they can do all, struggle with some.

We can decide that practitioners need the element to manipulate and cannot conjure it from “thin air.” For example, in a desert, a water wizard would have nothing to work with. Or we can decide they’re able to sense and draw it from wherever it is within a given range; while there may appear to be no water in a desert, it’s still there somewhere. Water and fire are the only two that might be unavailable, generally, but even water is usually around. It’s fire that’s less naturally occurring, putting such wizards at a disadvantage.

ElementPossible UsesAirThe ability to fly, manipulate weather, suffocate others, breathe underwater, cause fogFireStarting/extinguishing fires, fireball spells, wall of flamesEarthCausing earthquakes/sinkholes, softening or hardening of earth (to create mud or stone), creating or commanding stone golemsWaterDehydrating someone, hydrating them, creating drinking water, parting the sea, walking on water, causing rain, and possibly controlling sea lifeSpiritControl, communicate, or summon/banish ghosts

The post What is Elemental Magic? appeared first on The Art of World Building.

What is Psionics?

Psionics is the ability to communicate or perceive beyond the five physical senses. This fits our definition of magic. While fictional, these are considered innate talents people are either born with or develop. They’re usually depicted as natural, meaning they don’t require spells, but we’ve also seen them portrayed as needing an external element. The crystal ball is the most famous of these. We can add anything we desire to make these unique in our setting, while also making them easier or harder to accomplish. Multiple subtypes exist and are briefly summarized next. Any combination of these can exist in the setting. We can treat all of them like magic, meaning we decide their prevalence, training needed, the distance restrictions, and other elements discussed in this chapter.

AbilityDescriptionClairvoyanceThis is the ability to see events or people beyond the range of normal sight. This can be broken down into precognition (the future), retrocognition (the past), and remote viewing (the present). It can also imply clairaudience (hearing) or be mutually exclusive, meaning some people only have one talent. A theme of this chapter is imposing limits, so don’t be afraid to restrict them.EmpathyAn “empath” can read or sense another person’s emotions and may even be able to control or influence them.Mind controlOne person impacts another’s mind, including removing, suppressing, or replacing memories, or causing the victim to sense phantom pain.PsychometryThe talent for gaining foresight by touching objects.TelekinesisTelekinesis is the ability to move objects with the mind.TelepathyReading another person’s thoughts or communicating directly with their mind.

The post What is Psionics? appeared first on The Art of World Building.