No magic?

[Beazulbob]

Re: No magic?

 

Ironically, I'm starting a game that begins with "no magic". The idea being that magic does exist, but it hasn't successfully reared up its ugly head (yet). Later in the campaign, magic will be acknowledged, but until then, no PC magic. Also, as mentioned, magic shouldn't be allowed as a blank special effect, it should be a defined type with a specific range of powers and definitions. Even then, it will have a wide range of effects. For what it's worth, I do not allow cosmic powers either - define them and you can have them.

[Folded]

Re: No magic?

 

This is exaclty why I asked first: "What do you mean by magic?"

 

You make good points, and I am going to answer the above question in terms of how I interpret the word magic.

 

Magic has rules of some kind. If you want 'it happens because I decide it does', I call that Cosmic or Divine or Wish-fulfillment powers. Magic obeys some kind of rules. They may be bizarre, counter-intuitive, or arbitrary, but they're there. The ability to make use of magic involves the acquisition of specialized knowledge, and, in some cases, an alteration to the person involved.

 

Sometimes, what is called magic is an example of Clarke's Law. Sometimes it is scientifically explainable, but the people involved do not have scientific terminology. I am thinking here of things like zombi rituals in voodoo, which are based on the chemical action of a particular toxin, rather than supernatural ability.

 

But other times, magic is an access into powers that do not conform to the observable laws of physics. The process can be thought of as re-organizing reality in accordance with the individual's will through the application of a specific set of rules that are defined (at least by the world-creator). A given tradition of magic is a means by which those rules can be applied. If multiple traditions exist, it is necessary to determine whether or not they are variations on a single set of techniques, or whether they represent different actual powers with different rules. In the first case, it is primarily a matter of style and personal understanding. The abilities can, more or less, be directly compared. In the second case, some rules about how the two kinds of power interact is necessary (even if it is to define this as 'randomly').

 

So, in some universes, there are 'Words of Power', which, when spoken correctly, cause effects to happen. True Names are often a part of these systems (the Earthsea trilogy works this way). In others, complex rituals and material components are necessary. In still others, you pay some price and receive some power in return. In other traditions, your power is defined by your origin (Dragon, Demon, Angel, Son of Zeus, etc).

 

That is how I interpret the word Magic.

[Alverant]

Re: No magic?

 

I don't see any more logic in saying "He is from Krypton' date=' a planet with a Red sun. So he has superpowers under a Yellow sun."[/quote']Well for one thing, you don't learn how to be an alien the way you learn how to use magic. Magic is an external force that's manipulated. Aliens have innate powers.

[Alverant]

Re: No magic?

 

Without magic you lose an easy MacGuffin. "It's maaaagic." is all that's needed to justify something. Technology needs a bit more explanation. So if your players are in a bind you can't as quickly magic them out of it. Also you're losing a potential character development tool with "visiting Uncle Ben in Heaven"/"rescuing Uncle Ben from Hell" story arcs as well as other existential plots.

 

Apart from that, it's no big loss. I'd love to be part of a magic-free campaign. Unfortunately one of the other players in my group loves magic.

[kahuna's bro]

Re: No magic?

 

inthe tv series legend of the drago the charactershad magic powers fro the signs of the chinese zodiac but they were still suject to scientific principles

btw what is clarkes law?

[Alverant]

Re: No magic?

 

btw what is clarkes law?

Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (For example if you showed a flatscreen TV to someone from 1500 years ago, they would say it was magic.)

[kahuna's bro]

Re: No magic?

 

Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (For example if you showed a flatscreen TV to someone from 1500 years ago' date=' they would say it was magic.)[/quote']

simular to thetheory of ancient astronaughts tec being mistaken for the power of the gods i see

[Bloodstone]

Re: No magic?

 

Without magic you lose an easy MacGuffin. "It's maaaagic." is all that's needed to justify something. Technology needs a bit more explanation.

 

I don't find that to necessarily be true. Many people don't bother to explain the mechanics of super technology, innate powers or magic.

 

Lets be honest, no one can tell me exactly how Iron Man's force fields or Professor X's telepathy really work.

 

People can come up with pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo, but that's all it is. By the same token, the magic guy can come up with rules that govern spellcasting or whatnot just as easily.

 

Or we can hand wave it all away with "It's a comic book world. It just works!" type logic and many people are fine with that.

[Alverant]

Re: No magic?

 

I don't find that to necessarily be true. Many people don't bother to explain the mechanics of super technology, innate powers or magic.

 

Lets be honest, no one can tell me exactly how Iron Man's force fields or Professor X's telepathy really work.

Except you tend to see more of Iron Man's tech actually being tech and not crystals or arcane artifacts. We see him working on it with a screwdriver and fancy tech-looking tools instead of chanting to extra-dimensional lords or whatnot. A lot of it comes down to what they admit it is. Iron man says his powers are technology. Dr.Strange says his powers are magic. Generally speaking we put limits on what tech can do. Everything else is magic. Some of it comes down to terms; ie "teleported" vs "summoned". Supertech has technobabble, magic has mumbo jumbo.

[phoenix240]

Re: No magic?

 

And its all just as made up and "phoney". An actual scientist or engineer can point out a dozen ways Iron Man's armor or Star Trek tech shouldn't work in the real world or "might as well be magic". It just comes down to what you (general you) will buy into more easily. Its all just different coats of paint on the fantastic. Neither is more "realistic".

[Clonus]

Re: No magic?

 

Except you tend to see more of Iron Man's tech actually being tech and not crystals or arcane artifacts. We see him working on it with a screwdriver and fancy tech-looking tools instead of chanting to extra-dimensional lords or whatnot. A lot of it comes down to what they admit it is. Iron man says his powers are technology. Dr.Strange says his powers are magic. Generally speaking we put limits on what tech can do.

 

More accurately we put limits on the props we can can use with tech.

[Christopher]

Re: No magic?

 

Well for one thing' date=' you don't learn how to be an alien the way you learn how to use magic. Magic is an external force that's manipulated. Aliens have innate powers.[/quote']

Who says that? Why can't there be aliens/extradimensionals/gifted mortals that wield magic "naturally"? With no more difficulty to master, than Superman had to master his powers?

 

inthe tv series legend of the drago the charactershad magic powers fro the signs of the chinese zodiac but they were still suject to scientific principles

btw what is clarkes law?

 

Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. (For example if you showed a flatscreen TV to someone from 1500 years ago' date=' they would say it was magic.)[/quote']

Goes easier. Just take something like Electricty. These people are still 300+ Years removed from controlled use of it. Even most people of his time might never have heard of Voltaire.

 

 

Overall I think we tend to apply more "inherent" Limitations to Gadgetry/Technology, simply because we asume "it has to be an item" (Focus). But how about inate technology powers? say, somebody who has all his "tech" in his body and can create seemingly magic effects "on thought"? The Techmagicians from Babylon 5 had such powers.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: No magic?

 

It does seem a little odd to try to ban magic on functional grounds in a system based on reasoning from effect. You have an 8d6 ranged attack. That's what it is, and that's what it does. Now you define a special effect, which can be magic, or technology, or "extra-dimensional powers," or "psionics," or what have you. The nature of the defining special effect will govern power interactions. Thus a Dispel Magic power will work on a (magical) ranged attack, while a Suppress Technology will work on the technological power. If it happens that you think that Suppress Technology is overly broad compared with Dispel Magic, you can modify the point value of the limitation.

 

This is exactly what is so awesome about the Hero System, and what makes it ideal for running a supers campaign. Now, it might be that the GM for his own reasons wants to ban certain special effects. Or almost all special effects. Or have all of the supers* in the world originate with a single bad batch of coffee** served in a Toronto, Ontario diner in 1958.*** That's the GM's choice. But it's worldbuilding.**** It doesn't, or shouldn't, go to the system.

 

My facetious footnotes may seem to suggest that a GM who works too hard on reinventing the wheel in a supers campaign needs to maybe let it go a bit. I, of course, do not endorse my footnote-composing alternate personality. He emerges as a result of Evil Drug Treatments by the government that turned me into a super-secret agent so that I could fight the brown peoples in the name of Capitalism. That alternate personality? He's crazy. Except when he wants to take over the world and get rid of all the sheeple. Then he's teh awesome.

 

And he has way more sex than me.

 

 

*Which the GM will call "hypsters." He will be totally oblivious to players' amusement at this, and insist that a sexy woman with pheromone powers is the most original concept ever.

**But it will turn out to be a government plot to create supers! More eyerolling.

***The most powerful hypster will be called Boring Man. He will work at a bank in his secret identity.

****And then the PCs will go all Authority, and take over the world with their superior powers! By this point, the players are all fiddling with their phones.

[Clonus]

Re: No magic?

 

Who says that? Why can't there be aliens/extradimensionals/gifted mortals that wield magic "naturally"? With no more difficulty to master' date=' than Superman had to master his powers?s.[/quote']

 

Thor, Dracula, The Spectre, Alan Scott, Moon Knight, Sailor Moon, Gargoyle, Captain Britain...

[Bloodstone]

Re: No magic?

 

Or Gwen Tennyson...

[Clonus]

Re: No magic?

 

Or Gwen Tennyson...

 

Oh what she does isn't magic. It's just an alien superpower that you learn out of a book in the form of spells.

[phoenix240]

Re: No magic?

 

Or Gwen Tennyson...

 

That's not magic! She manipulate Mana (a natural psychic energy force) drawn from the environment with ritualistic somatic and vocal focus techniques! Nothing like Magic!

 

(Yes, I've had this argument...)