A decent definition of fantasy is that it takes place in a setting where magic exists. This can take many forms, from magical-realist dream-logic to alternative metaphysics to a detailed system of magical rules. Magic is thus what makes a fantasy world distinct, and I'd argue that it's best when it makes a fantasy world more distinct and more fantastic. This does not mean 'weirder and more full of magic,' it means that magic, well-employed, makes a fantasy setting more itself.
What follows are my own ideas about magic in fantasy settings, in RPG's and otherwise. They are not universal laws, just some general ideas that I've found produce pleasing results.
First of all, magic should either be mysterious and rare, or it should be well explained. It should not be both ubiquitous and unexplained.
Tolkien never explains exactly -how- Gandalf does what he does, but never quite explains -what- Gandalf does either. Gandalf's magic is both hard to understand and hard to see, and thus mysterious. This is evocative -- it hints at more than it shows.
Conversely Ursula K LeGuin explains exactly how the magic of Earthsea works. Everything has a true name, and magic is the use of true names as a source of power. This is a simple idea of what magic is that has a lot of philosophical implications for the characters within the books and for the meaning of the work to its readers. Moreover, magic is not just tacked on to the world, but is an integral part of it. Magic suffuses the books -- Ged turns into a bird, brings light to lightless places and repairs the boundary between life and death. But these are actions that are consistent and which make sense in the world. Because magic itself is so interesting in LeGuin's world, a reader can handle a lot of it.
The opposite the above approaches is to include a lot of magic but never bother with the metaphysics. This is what you get in some DnD settings and in Harry Potter. Some people like this (obviously) but it always falls flat for me. Magic that is just -there- is neither intellectually interesting nor evocative and mysterious. It is mundane, hum-drum, and dull.
Secondly, and relatedly, magic should generally do magical things. It should not replace mundane activities, but do things that are weird and wonderful. Exceptions to this are settings that are consciously 'magical-technological', like the Exalted RPG setting or Discworld -- settings that, for humor or just to be different, use magic as a replacement for technology. With that exception in mind, I think it's more satisfying when wizards stick to the things they do in fairy tales, or similarly strange things. Examples include transforming themselves into animals or other-worldly creatures, making deals with demons and faeries, ascending to heaven or descending to hell, talking to the dead and putting curses on people. These are all things that add something different, something fantastic to the wizard's world, and moreover don't risk mucking up the setting (thematically or logically) by adding magic that is just a stand in for modern technology. Good world-building does not include 'a wizard did it' as an explanation for anachronism, unless you're trying to be funny.
In general, a wizard should not be an artillery piece, a telephone, or an airplane, a merely utilitarian object that allows the author to simply turn a pseudo-medieval (or pseudo-ancient) setting into something like the modern world. Wizards -can- have these powers (and in games it may be useful if they have some access to these abilities) but that isn't their main job in a narrative. Their main job is to make the world -other-.
No comments:
Post a Comment