Magic in Felarya

I recently brought up a topic about Elementals in the forms, wanting to know what weakness and strengths they have. However, this brought up the topic of magic itself, leading to an inconclusive answer.

So, I would like to ask the community to take this poll about ELEMENTAL MAGIC. As in, not all magic in general, but those that use Water, Fire, and such. I will explain what they each mean.

Circle based means that magic should work with one type having at most weakness and strength. Think of Chakra Nature in Naruto. This makes a sort of frame work that everyone can understand.

Unique based means that each magic type should be unique and should be not connected to other magic types, regardless of similarities. Think of Magic in Fairy Tail. Dragon Slaying Magic and God Saying Magic are very similar to each other but different. This is simple to implement, but hard to really make sense of. Take Dance Magic or Hair Magic from the same show.

Tree based is that the core elements, such as Fire and Earth, are the trunk of a tree. Each branch of the tree is a higher level of a skill. Think of a skill branch in video games, where the more experience one has in an element, they can 'level it up' to a different technique, like Fire 2: Speed or Air 2: Cutter. Also take Archive and  it's advanced form Super Archive from Fairy Tale. This would take the most work out of all of them to implement.

You may notice that each choice has a second part, it being Combine or Don't Combine. This means that the elements can be fused into more powerful magic types. For Tree based, you would need at least two or more certain skills to make a new one. For example, Dark 5:Necromancy and Water 1:Basic could be combined into Blood 1:Basic.

Please take this into consideration as you make your vote!

http://felarya.com/wiki/index.php?title=Magic

All you need to know.

Shady Knight wrote:

http://felarya.com/wiki/index.php?title=Magic

All you need to know.

I'm talking about elemental magics in general. It seems to be lacking in description

That's cause elemental magic is a type of magic.  These are methods spells are cast.  Ergo, elemental magic falls in the same subset of rules these types of spellcastings are subject to.

I've fallen into that same trap years ago.  Elemental magic, or any other type of magic, like say dimensional magic, don't have to be subjected to a strict set of rules they must follow unless they form the core of your magic system.  In the case of Felarya, I've shown you how the magic system works.  It's specifically designed that way so as to be flexible.  If your character casts elemental magic via the circle system or whatever, that's fine, that's how your character rolls.  But if another writer doesn't like it, then they shouldn't be forced to do this specific this and that to more or less achieve the same result, otherwise you're just stifling their creativity unnecessarily.  Not to mention, it would undermine the whole "melting pot" aspect of the setting if every single form of elemental magic had to obey the exact same set of rules. Wouldn't it add more variety if multiple fire mages all approached their craft in a vastly different fashion?

To answer your question, I think it'd be closest to Unique, Don't Combine (we've got elements such as telekinesis, portals, lewdness, the weather, necromancy and shrinking). However, Combine is meaningless when you put it in Unique: if each element behaves by its own rules, then their combination will also behave by its own rules, being thus indistinguishable from a new type entirely its own.

We're not playing by a strict set of rules here. If you look at the wiki, you'll notice there's a lot of creatures and characters with special powers, and most of them seem to behave by their own rules, with little attention to the exact means. The people behind those characters simply picked what looked cool at the moment, and there was no elaboration on the interaction of their powers with each other.


But for what it's worth, I'd considered making a few self-contained traditions, small group of wizards whose magic is already mostly mapped out- if only to help aspiring people get a sense of the setting (and because I like making stuff). These traditions, while not intended to be considered the end-all be-all of the setting, could set enough of an example for most people to have a rough idea of what kind of mage the setting is supposed to aim for. Obviously, though, I never got anywhere with this.

Stabs wrote:

Combine is meaningless when you put it in Unique: if each element behaves by its own rules, then their combination will also behave by its own rules, being thus indistinguishable from a new type entirely its own.

Well, the object of Unique, Combine is like Sodium and Chlorine becoming Salt. It's not toxic, and it doesn't explode.

Although Unique is a nice way to put things down, the magic page says nothing on Elementals. Where to the core elements fit into all this?

Even then, if salt was magic, it would not be unconceivable to have salt magic without mastering Na and Cl first. Therefore, as it behaves under its own rules, pointing out that it comes from combining those two seems arbitrary and even forced unless you can explain electronegativity and electron shells.


That depends on your definition of fitting. But the short answer is that they don't really fit, because elementals are elementals and spells are spells.

Elementals might be magical in a way, but that doesn't mean they really use magic. If they had any magic simply by virtue of being an elemental (which seems like a case-by-case basis), that'd be listed as innate under the current divisions. If you mean magic related to elementals, you can find it in thaumaturgy, I guess- the ones that summon and bind. Magic related to the elements, on the other hand, can be classified anywhere.


All of them appear, under your classification, unique and noncombining, as there is nothing on circles and no evidence of trees.

Stabs wrote:

But the short answer is that they don't really fit, because elementals are elementals and spells are spells.

I was using that as an example. Under Unique Combo a spell can be completely different from the parents
But you are saying that Elemental don't have to be based on anything magical that's fine, but if they can only exist on magic infused worlds...it becomes confusing to stay the least.

And of course there is the Lava elemental that's Fire/Earth. If you say that that magic is Unique Non-Combo how would one explain that?

ac2 wrote:

I was using that as an example. Under Unique Combo a spell can be completely different from the parents
But you are saying that Elemental don't have to be based on anything magical that's fine, but if they can only exist on magic infused worlds...it becomes confusing to stay the least.

They are spirits that animate matter through magic, but what they make their bodies of is regular element, not elemental magic. Except the magic elementals, of course.

ac2 wrote:

And of course there is the Lava elemental that's Fire/Earth. If you say that that magic is Unique Non-Combo how would one explain that?

As an artifact from when lava elementals were made. Felarya as a setting is strongly influenced by works of art with elemental magic, but nowhere in the lava elementals' entry does it say that they're made by mixing fire and earth. They happen when an elemental spirit animates lava instead of either fire or earth.

Stabs wrote:

but nowhere in the lava elementals' entry does it say that they're made by mixing fire and earth. They happen when an elemental spirit animates lava instead of either fire or earth.

But it does say that they have the powers of both fire and earth, and I quote from the wiki page

"Lava elementals are particularly powerful as they have the offensive power of a fire elemental combined with the regenerative powers of an earth elemental."

Not really. Think about it for a moment. All it means is that they're destructive as fire is, and as long as they're submerged in lava, they can easily heal their wounds, much like the idea that earth elementals can easily regenerate so long as they remain in their own elements. It has nothing to do with being a fusion of a fire and earth elemental. You're looking at it the completely wrong way.

Shady Knight wrote:

 It has nothing to do with being a fusion of a fire and earth elemental.  You're looking at it the completely wrong way.

Kinda hard to look at it differently when you been accustomed to a fusion based system. The Lava Elemental page doesn't state that they are or are not a fusion, so I just went with what I thought was right.

lava is different then fire anyhow, It's melted earth vs a natural thermal force. (which is probably why it's combined of the two for fictions sake).

Lockheed X-17 wrote:

Bluehorizon wrote:

lava is different then fire anyhow, It's melted earth vs a natural thermal force. (which is probably why it's combined of the two for fictions sake).

It is actually pure geological activity beneath the crust of the planet, heating it with pressure and with the surrounding lava and then bringing it back up with the help of vents like volcanoes and then sinking down, restating the process again. Fire is a chemical reaction that produces energy, some of which is visible light. Anyways, it is just an elaboration...

Actually magic can just be a branch of physics unknown to man. And then they call it magic... and it is not a fusion of fire and earth. It is more like a fusion of pressure and earth, at least that is how I understand it.

Interesting, never though of it that way. Well this helps, at least I dont have to map Elemental hybrids. (Though a fire lightning one would be cool...Energy! I would call it that.)X3d

AC~DC wrote:

Interesting, never though of it that way. Well this helps, at least I dont have to map Elemental hybrids. (Though a fire lightning one would be cool...Energy! I would call it that.)X3d

Somebody is obviously a Fairy Tail fan!


Now on to this magic business. I believe that magic in Felarya must be varied and somewhat less explainable than in other genres. Because for one thing Felarya connects to multiple different worlds which allows more than a set number of magic systems. In short if you quantify it you limit the worldscape's access and alienate players who want their own things. ^^; That being said I did vote for second middle one...Um...branched? No wait Unique Method 2It seemed to make a little bit of sense but I don't think one should ever say what can and cannot happen in Felarya because part of the appeal of the non-fetishy side is in fact the unlimited creativity.

jedi-explorer wrote:

Somebody is obviously a Fairy Tail fan!


Now on to this magic business. I believe that magic in Felarya must be varied and somewhat less explainable than in other genres. Because for one thing Felarya connects to multiple different worlds which allows more than a set number of magic systems. In short if you quantify it you limit the worldscape's access and alienate players who want their own things. ^^; That being said I did vote for second middle one...Um...branched? It seemed to make a little bit of sense but I don't think one should ever say what can and cannot happen in Felarya because part of the appeal of the non-fetishy side is in fact the unlimited creativity.

Hey how did you know? Btw still waiting for your reply to my message XD

The second middle one is based on Fairy Tale Maker Magic. (From the Grand Magic Games Arc), and the branched one is the on apply called "Tree". Though unless you are a Skyrim guy or what ever, i dont think you would like it XP

Ilceren wrote:

Honestly, I don't see why anyone would single out elemental magic from general Magic and make specific rules for it. It's part of a whole. It would be akin to singling out potion-making from Alchemy, or fluid dynamics from Physics. Sure, they may be a bit specific and instantly recognizable, while also having instant real-world (so to say) applications, but it's still part of a whole. What rules the physical interactions of fluids also rules the rest of interactions in Physics, the same way as what rules the ele-magical interactions on potion-making rules the rest of interactions in Alchemy. The same would go for the present case.

I believe generalizing is the key. And since Felarya is meant to accept any type of magic from any world (although it doesn't mean it keeps the exact same characteristics than in its original world), I believe the key is generalization. More specifically in Magic's case, metamagic, the exploitation of Magic itself by its root rules and components; (magical) energy. I started working on an article on it long time ago, but as with everything I start, it lies unfinished and gathering dust somewhere in my hard drive.

So, going back to the poll, I'd say none of the options would be correct; it'd be up to the caster's system of belief.

But if we do that, wont it get confusing? It would be like having all three at the same time, or more like theories. Sooner or later mages have to take at least on theory as correct. Then again having the three set in theory could set up different schools of belief...hmmm...

I was using the elements as a base for other magics, though it doesn't have to be.

Um, no it won't. Tell me, why should a Fireball spell be vastly different from a Lightning Bolt? And more importantly, why should it matter? Honestly, coming up with a whole bunch of different rules for all the different types of spells a wizard can cast is just going to overcomplicate everything, not to mention, coming up with the rules themselves and writing it all down would just be a pain in the ass, which I'd wager nobody would even bother reading when they can just come up with their own sets of rules and come with their own flavors to stand out.

Like Ilceren said, generalization is the key here.

Shady Knight wrote:

Tell me, why should a Fireball spell be vastly different from a Lightning Bolt?  And more importantly, why should it matter?  Honestly, coming up with a whole bunch of different rules for all the different types of spells a wizard can cast is just going to overcomplicate everything, not to mention, coming up with the rules themselves and writing it all down would just be a pain in the ass, which I'd wager nobody would even bother reading when they can just come up with their own sets of rules and come with their own flavors to stand out.

Like Ilceren said, generalization is the key here.

Water puts out fire, lightning electrocutes water...honestly that's common sense. I'm not saying that there are rules for every single spell, but say you had a Fire Resistance armor. Surly it decreases damage from Fire. I'm sure that this has come up in some topics. Is there one against Air? Earth? If so, there IS some sort of elemental work at play. Of course we could take away the elemental for a second and focus on general magic. Sure we don't need to make rules for it, heck, it could be it's own branch. (It could be a fifth, Aether if in correct.) But then we have no need for Fire resisting, Ice resting...and so on

But coming up with rules...it doesn't have to be complicated!
Just name the magic, what it does, what it cant do....simple summary!

ac2 wrote:

Water puts out fire, lightning electrocutes water...honestly that's common sense.

Some fires explode when water is poured on them: hot oil fires, into which water sinks even as it flashes into steam, alkaline fires, which actually start because of water, and then there's electric fires, which it does absolutely nothing to. Pure enough water actually stops electricity under a certain voltage, too.

ac2 wrote:

I'm not saying that there are rules for every single spell, but say you had a Fire Resistance armor. Surly it decreases damage from Fire. I'm sure that this has come up in some topics. Is there one against Air? Earth? If so, there IS some sort of elemental work at play. Of course we could take away the elemental for a second and focus on general magic. Sure we don't need to make rules for it, heck, it could be it's own branch. (It could be a fifth, Aether if in correct.) But then we have no need for Fire resisting, Ice resting...and so on

Objects of protection against X do not necessarily correlate with X being an element. A ring of protection against falling does not imply falling is an element, and a rock of protection against traps doesn't mean traps are an element.

ac2 wrote:

But coming up with rules...it doesn't have to be complicated!
Just name the magic, what it does, what it cant do....simple summary!

I've tried coming up with guidelines, and no matter how simple, they simply don't take: Felarya's pretty much anything goes, though "excesses" are frowned upon. Everyone comes up with their own magic, which better serves the needs of their story and characters.

You for one seem like you're going to aim for something related to the elements, and there's nothing wrong with that. But asking someone else to do the same as you doesn't necessarily have to work out well.

I'm going to agree with Ilce, Shady, and Stabs here; I don't think there really is such a group as "elemental" magic, or at least not the kind of cut-and-dried group you're making it out to be. I'm of the opinion that, despite magic existing, physics and atomic theory still (generally) apply, not Greek theories on basic elements. There's not actually such a thing as armor of fire resistance; you could add heat resistance to your armor, which (assuming you do it right and it carries over to the wearer) will give you protection against the heat from a fireball. Depending on the type of fireball, of course, you might still have to deal with concussive force or perhaps even flaming liquid of some sort. That armor would also let you walk through a volcanic area without issue (and perhaps even on lava; that stuff's dense), but a lava elemental could always just decide to squish you. On a broader basis, for any given magic effect, there are multiple ways to go about it. To one school of magic, the difference between a fireball and iceball is simply the direction of heat transfer, while to another, they would be completely different. And, as the wiki points out, there are several different types of magic; how certain spell effects behave under ritual magic might be completely different than a primal spell for the same basic effect.

Stabs wrote:

ac2 wrote:

Water puts out fire, lightning electrocutes water...honestly that's common sense.

Objects of protection against X do not necessarily correlate with X being an element. A ring of protection against falling does not imply falling is an element, and a rock of protection against traps doesn't mean traps are an element.

ac2 wrote:

But coming up with rules...it doesn't have to be complicated!
Just name the magic, what it does, what it cant do....simple summary!

I've tried coming up with guidelines, and no matter how simple, they simply don't take: Felarya's pretty much anything goes, though "excesses" are frowned upon. Everyone comes up with their own magic, which better serves the needs of their story and characters.

You for one seem like you're going to aim for something related to the elements, and there's nothing wrong with that. But asking someone else to do the same as you doesn't necessarily have to work out well.

Well...I am. Elementals are amazing, and I am currently working on something about them

There isn't an elemental system. The use of elements is just differentiation of school. These elements we tend to list by default in particular are simply the expounding of classical thought prior to scientific empiricism developing the states of matter and falls back into collegiate / "Structured Magic". That is to say the magic is defined and learned in some 'school' type environs and founded upon the 'basic' building blocks as they were understood; this falls under Felarya's "Rule Based" category. Additionally, "Primordial Magic" as Felarya defines it falls into this category - it's just the "Area" school ( with a little overlap into "Inherent Magic" ).

Felarya touches on other, alternative magic systems but doesn't innately explore them. For example, "Wild Magic" ( usually called [wild] talents in other systems / universes ) defined by Felarya actually falls under "Improvisational Magic" systems. Felarya's "Alchemy" ( classic alchemy actually falls back into the school system; it was based on the Grecian ideas after all ) and "Artifact" magic systems are two sides of the same coin; both involve the use of items as magic and potentially overlap in many ways; I'd personally probably list them as "Inherent Magic" and "Psionics" as Felarya defines them / Felaryan soil definitely belongs to "Inherent Magic".

Felarya's "Necromancy" and "Thaumaturgy" magic are both just parts of "Ritual" magic ( I don't particularly like how some systems split "Spirits / Shamanism" out of "Ritual" magic so I still combine them myself - you're making deals the only difference is with what and by what medium ); the only reason "Necromancy" in Felarya gets its own category is to boost the import of the soil - life is more important, death is more final - by mentioning that anything 'unlifed' doesn't work ( unless it comes to Felarya, which we're supposed to believe is a disadvantage somehow... 'cause necromancers are an asocial and unintelligent lot and couldn't possibly strike a deal with a dimensional mage / chimera and a rogue psychopomp to give the Correctors a run for their money in the 'percentage of destruction of Felarya gameshow', I guess ).

Fairy shapeshifting magic is the talents as magic trope taken to an extreme - or perhaps one could say it's a very limited form of "Syntactic Magic" ( in this case a combination of verb / noun: Transform and Body ), which is honestly my favourite type of magic due to how broad it is and the myriad of ways you can accomplish the same tasks but it is also the easiest one to abuse. It is extremely difficult to limit the range of "Syntactic Magic" in any serious way, and I dare say that Felaryan fairies couldn't possibly do a better job at proving said point. Every rule book that includes "Syntactic Magic" I have read also includes a GM note section to help potential GMs figure out how to incorporate it assuming they even want to try.



tl;dr I agree with most others; generalisation of magic systems is nearly always the better route - particularly in scenarios where technology is also involved ( I mean seriously why would you use a complicated weapon that requires parts and maintenance when you could accomplish the same effect with a wind burst or otherwise similar air displacement spell and a pointy, heavy object? I for one am not of the impression that any 'decent' magus of their universe's system would be impressed by a firearm for very long unless nobody ever survived said gunman for counterpoint development. The only real reason I can come up with is because the person with the gun can't use magic for w/e reason but then you gotta walk that horrid line between hard and soft scifi... ) - and honestly Felarya already falls short of generalising it's magic systems in quite a few ways by limiting the systems prematurely with 'unique' style points and catering to people's ideas of their own mixed-definition systems that warble along unused much like the rest of the universe. Hardline rules for magic systems is best left for GMs / gaming / RPing where you need a consistency factor. Felarya's adaptation methodology for the allowance of external idea invasion is fairly prohibitive to development of cohesive systems.