Magic that is... you know... mystical!

After reading this article, I've noticed that many fantasy novels today treat magic as just another form of science (often to a truly torturous degree), which causes it to lose much of what makes magic so interesting: it's magic. Magic is supposed to be mysterious! Fairy tales are entertaining because they're whimsical and strange, not because they're textbooks.

I'm not saying that magic should be used as a one-size-fits-all Deus ex Machina, but as this article on pre-scientific magic systems lays out, it shouldn't be something that you could reasonably expect to find universities for in the story itself.

edited 25th Jun '12 6:12:38 PM by Zenoseiya

The trouble is that some authors treat magic as plot Spackle. See Magic A is Magic A for when "magic" is used to try and fix plot holes.

But tropes are not bad and neither is magic. If you can have a Blue-and-Orange Morality why not a blue and orange logic? As long as it's consistent, I don't see why magic can't be mystical. If there are breaks with logic, just avoid a Mary Sue or gaping plot holes and all should be good.

Why?

Hm, I disagree. Magic isn't really supposed to be anything, other than being by definition some kind of force outside of our own physical world. It can be as restricted and semi-scientific or as broad and mysterious (though the restricted version is certainly still mysterious, I think) as you like — and honestly, I think it's the most interesting when it's limited by rules (the Mistborn series is awesome in that respect). Regardless of the level of sciencey-ness applied to it, though, I think there are always going to be universities and other whole areas of society dedicated to its study — people are people, after all. Even if the magic is totally illogical and impossible to understand, we'll try our damndest to figure it out.

I personally prefer magic-as-a-science because I prefer science fiction to fantasy in terms of presentation style, really. And you can always make science mysterious.

After all, we ourselves here in reality don't know everything about how the world works. Just because they have magic doesn't mean they fully comprehend everything it could be used for.

I don't have a preference one way or another, it's just that complex plots tends toward magic with rules. That doesn't have to be that way but a lot of authors probably find it easier to keep a consistent level of power and abilities regarding magic and thus make it easier to fit into a complex political plot.

Hmmm... I am not sure if I should agree. I feel like OP struck some familiar chord in me; magic that is too structured sounds... hmm... a bit too D&D-tastic, that's how I'd describe it. However, as been said above, it's essentially personal preference. One will want magic scientific, the other mysterious and mystical.

And then, nobody is saying we can't have both.

To me magic is bending laws of physics to your will. One could say, if magic is commonplace and scientifically categorised, doesn't that just change the laws of physics of that world to that magic? No, it doesn't I say - because a normal person still can't throw a giant across the continent. But if they have divine blood or arcane enchantment on them, they can - a simple few words that violated a physical law.

I like magic when it's "scientific". When it's categorised and you know what you can expect from them. Sure it's not mystical or mysterious, but to me that's not what it's supposed to be. You like it differently? Sure, fine, take and read those works that deal with it like you want them to. Not everything is for everyone, and it's fine to have different tastes.

So I guess you don't like the Brothers Grimm or the Arabian Nights? That's the quintessential magic right there.

I'm not saying magic shouldn't have consistency (if it didn't, it wouldn't be useable), but "familiarity breeds contempt."

As the second article I linked explains, "scientific" magic tends to work according to the following principles:

1. Magic is a known system and thus non-mysterious
2. Magic is a force separate from Nature
3. Magic happens as spells from deliberate users
4. Magic obeys conservation of (magical) energy
5. Magic works regardless of morality, ethics, or other intangibles

These don't really make sense outside of context, so I'd recommend reading that article for a better explanation.

EDIT: An example of an RPG that goes against #2 would be Nephilim, which posits that aethers from the Sun reflected off the planets is responsible for the magnetic fields of Earth, which in turn power tectonic plate movement and the weather, which are all inherently magical. There is no distinction between magic and science because the laws of physics are magic.

edited 26th Jun '12 8:12:34 AM by Zenoseiya

The author of the second article clearly has an agenda about his "mystical magic". One should not paint the other system as so clearly inferior. Then (s)he goes against what the article says in his/her final sentence, but the meaning seems clear from the whole text: "magic not mystical is magic bad". Like I said, people have different tastes. It's okay to like the less scientific magic. All I'm saying is it's too often giving a bad author a free hand to mess something up, so I prefer the more "scientific" magic.

Some Grimm stuff is nice. It makes sense how it's dealt with in their stories, but that's not where my preference generally lies.

PS. I think my system goes against #2 and #5. Arcane force is completely natural, through leylines that subconsciously cause people to establish cities on their crossings, and morality and personal will of the user can influence the magic done, but either it's different kind of magic (i.e. psionic or divine) or it's part of an actual rule.

edited 26th Jun '12 8:35:32 AM by Kalontas

The problem with treating magic as magic is that it tends to leave plot holes. Why didn't we solve all our problems with a magic spell? What's the limitation on magic? Why are these spells so limited?

By the time you get around to answering all these questions you have either a headache not worth bothering with or another branch of science.

Now, don't jump so quickly to the conclusion and assume one option is inherently superior. It's a can of worms of its own — let's say your world has D&D-style magic system: if a mediocre wizard or cleric can fill his spell slots with Cure Disease and cure four or five sufferers after each eight hours of rest, epidemics should belong to the past. And so you find yourself limited to Dungeon Punk or Magitek.

My solution to this problem of "scientific" magic? He can cast cure disease, but not only limited times, diseases are also of different "magnitudes". So your average cold or even flu can be cured by an average cleric. But curing someone of the Spanish Flu of 1918, or AIDS, would require probably some kind of church Patriarch. And he has limited uses as well, so if there's a 1,000 people down with it... you're hell out of luck.

Magic can be mystical without having to be unbound by rules. ...right? If the problem is that magic is understood readily and treated like a branch of science, then removing that inner understanding could go a long way. It would make more sense in a less stable or more nuclear society that there wouldn't be much effort put into education or study, so there would be more of a reliance on magic that just works. Essentially, it would be a black box not just to the audience but to the characters themselves, who only know what to put in and what to get out.

Or, as another option, maybe they don't even know what they'll get out until they try it. A civilization on the edge iin the ruins of an older magic-using society might have a number of magical devices available to them that they don't really understand, but use because so far, they haven't blown anyone up. The magic still has laws it obeys, but they don't know the laws, or really anything about the magic, just that it doesn't obey 'natural' laws.

By all means, magic should have consistent rules and limitations on its use. Otherwise it would become a Deus ex Machina. "Breaking Out of Scientific Magic Systems" assumes that the magic system being used has consistent rules and limitations, but provides ways to make said system more in line with superstition and folklore.

EDIT: For example, Tolkien's use of magic is more in line with folklore. It doesn't solve all problems, being low-key magic, but plenty of people use it without making a big deal. Beornings can turn into bears, Bard could speak with animals, etc.

EDIT: There is an implication in Lord Of The Rings that its possible to study magic, but it's treated as something extremely esoteric and all knowledge either comes from old tomes salvaged from Numenor or the tutelage of Maiar like Sauron or Saruman. Even the elves are only capable of very simple magic on their own, most notably their ability to craft impressive weapons and armor.

edited 26th Jun '12 10:24:37 AM by Zenoseiya

The last edit kind of ties with one of the points. The creation of a magical weapon as it being forged by a skillful/knowledgeable smith, rather than having an enchantment spell cast on it by a random wizard. Then, I guess one can find a legend or a couple that follow the second way.

EDIT: "limitations" is the key. Even if there are no consistent rules, there has to be a limit on magic's usefulness.

edited 26th Jun '12 10:37:47 AM by lordGacek

I like the idea that if you want magic to be mysterious, then make the viewpoint character/s unable to grasp it. Gandalf did get away with a ton of crazy shit in those books, after all, and the hobbits don't question it because the other characters don't. It's just a natural part of Middle-Earth.

Look at mythology and folklore. One theme that crops up is that by taking, say, a lock of hair from somebody you could turn in into a weapon against them. There's an Egyptian myth about how the Goddess Isis became the most powerful magician. One day as Ra was walking across the land, a drop of saliva fell from his mouth. As soon as he had left, Isis scooped up the earth where it had fallen and molded it into a snake. The next day as Ra was walking, the snake jumped out and bit him. All the gods tried to cure him of the poison, but failed because it was partly derived from his own power. Finally Isis offered to save him but only if he told her his true name.

Sympathetic Magic, lesser part affects the whole.

Kill someone by killing their shadow, burning a lock of hair, sticking a pin in a doll, etc..

I think Brandon Sanderson said it best:

Sanderson's First Law of Magics: An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic.

You can have magic be as mysterious and unknown as you want, but if you then use the mysterious and unknown magic to resolve the plot, you've got yourself a Deus ex Machina. If the characters are going to use magic to resolve whatever conflict they're in, then the reader needs to be able to understand what they need to do to make that happen, what their chances of success are, and why they didn't do this earlier.

. . . Why not have both? Domhain Sceal does.

I like magic in my stories to be unpredictable, frightening and alien because it raises the stakes of using it and adds to the overall tension of the story by making the reader immediately anxious or anticipatory when it comes into play. This comes a lot from my background in reading—and to a lesser extent, writing—weird fiction, particularly the more mystical end of the genre as defined by writers like Arthur Machen. In such stories, magic is something that inherently violates what we think we know about nature, yet at the same time is fundamentally more "natural" than what we see of the world, truer to what lies beneath the surface of reality.

This doesn't stop the magicians in my main work from trying to codify it, however. It just makes such things even more interesting.

edited 1st Jul '12 5:38:11 AM by JHM

What if you're dealing with freeform magic? Because in that case, the character is literally limited only by his imagination (and skill level, to prevent Deus ex Machina).

edited 2nd Jul '12 11:17:43 AM by Zenoseiya

Even those have a structure.

At least when I read it. There's particular styles many of them follow, even if they don't need to.

and That's a perfect mix IMHO. Give your characters magical skills with certain levels (that they can raise over the course of time). Have the effects they can perform with that magic be limited by that skill level, but otherwise freeform. That's exactly what I'm doing in my system.