3.5 Magical Theory: Exactly how many types of magic are there?

[rgrekejin]

So, let me explain what I'm talking about here - I'm going to be DMing a new 3.5 campaign starting in a few weeks, and I'm trying to decide on some fluff text for the campaign. When I refer to types of magic, I'm not talking about schools of magic, but rather distinct magical power sources within 3.5. Everyone knows the Big Two - Arcane and Divine magic. But there are a ton of other sourcebooks out there that include their own rulesets for magic that is neither explicitly arcane or divine. Specifically, I'm thinking of -

1. Incarum (Magic of Incarnum)
2. Pact Magic (Tome of Magic)
3. Shadow Magic (Tome of Magic)
4. Truename Magic (Tome of Magic)
5. Sword Magic (Tome of Battle)
6. Psionics, depending on how you read them.

I could have possibly forgotten some more, but that's the list, as I recall it (I'm using all the normal official Wizards D&D books, but none from Forgotten Realms/Eberron/Dragonlance/Oriental Adventures/etc.)

From an in-game standpoint, I've decided that each of these different forms of magic exist, but that they're obscure, and generally not know outside of academic circles. They are, essentially, experimental magic. My question is - which of these should ACTUALLY be new sources of magic, and which are simply an odd way of using older magic.

Sword Magic can obviously be explained away as just a novel way of channeling arcane or divine energy, as could psionics, depending on what approach you take to them. Shadow magic is strange, but arcane casters already tap in to the plane of shadow for a number of their regular spells. Perhaps shadow magic is just a strange and highly specialized version of evocation with delusions of grandeur practiced by casters whose mothers never hugged them enough? Truename magic is similar enough to the Power Word line of spells that you could argue that it, too, is just an elaborate extension of an existing school of arcane magic.

Pact Magic and Incarnum magic are the sticking points. Pact Magic is clearly not arcane, and although you are drawing power from other beings, the beings in question clearly aren't gods or demons, or anything that even really resembles them anymore. I think it would have to be valid as a third class of magic.

I really don't know the rules or the fluff around Incarnum magic (I never found it that interesting), but it seems sufficiently different to warrant being a new class as well. What do you guys think? How do you imagine the obscure magic classes relate to the others? I'm not really looking for any rules-based analysis here, just some ideas on fluff.

[Arbane]

There's also whatever it is monks do, which might be a subset of 'sword magic'.

[Urpriest]

Sword Magic isn't magic.

Of the others, I would strongly encourage you to not include this sort of detail in your setting. You will either become disappointed when it never comes up in your campaigns, or your players will become disappointed when the campaign focuses too much on details you invented and not enough on their own deeds. D&D isn't the sort of gamesystem that lets this sort of thing form a relevant part of an interesting campaign.

[Knaight]

Regarding each of these:

1. Incarum (Magic of Incarnum) - This is probably going to have to be new. It basically involves binding things to the self, which is notably different from either arcane or divine magic.

2. Pact Magic (Tome of Magic) - Pact magic will have to be separate, but probably can be attached to Incarnum. Both are merely different, highly related fields from the same source.

3. Shadow Magic (Tome of Magic) - I see absolutely no reason this can't be normal magic, if accessed oddly.

4. Truename Magic (Tome of Magic) - Truename magic behaves oddly enough that it probably needs to be its own source. With that said, it could be a third facet of the Incarnum/Pact system.

5. Sword Magic (Tome of Battle) - Most of this isn't even magic, what little is magic fits under divine or natural arcane magic (similar to the sorcerer) just fine.

6. Psionics, (Expanded Psionics Handbook) - If you ignore transparency, this can be arcane magic. As of now, arcane magic needs materials, needs gestures, and needs words, with getting away from any of that making things far more difficult. Psionics needs none of that, and as such could easily represent accessing arcane magic better. Arcane magic could really just be a framework imposed to allow limited access to psionics, which is now finally being accessed properly.

[XionUnborn01]

Incarnum could easily be the most ancient of the magics. It's basically raw spirit/soul energy that just kind of exists in certain places in the universe.

Incarnum is like crude oil before a refinery, except instead of oil...it's souls.

[ericgrau]

I'd do arcane, divine and psionic with sub-branches of these. Shadow and truename are probably subsets of arcane. Shadow magic draws material from the plane of shadow to form a shadow spell, except the wizard adds color to the grey material before the spell is complete. It would become relevant if the PCs travel to a plane that has no connection with the plane of shadow. Other illusions without solid material would still be possible, but not illusion [shadow] spells. Truenaming OTOH would nearly always be available as long as words are part of reality.

I'll agree that most of the time all of this doesn't seem vary relevant, unless you want to start messing with types of magic on purpose. But then players who rely on that kind of magic might get annoyed. At least give a warning ahead of time.

[rgrekejin]

Just to be clear, this isn't going to be a real big issue for the PCs. It's going to be plot-relevant probably one time at the most. It's more of a mix of me wanting to know how the system works internally so I can keep my own story straight, and idle curiosity about how other players view alternate magic sources.

[Quietus]

Just to be clear, this isn't going to be a real big issue for the PCs. It's going to be plot-relevant probably one time at the most. It's more of a mix of me wanting to know how the system works internally so I can keep my own story straight, and idle curiosity about how other players view alternate magic sources.

Well, one thing I suspect you'll find fairly often is that many people don't view 'sword magic' as actual magic at all, just feats of incredible skill.

[DeAnno]

The following is opinion, but I think you can fit pretty much everything into Divine/Arcane.

The Sublime Way is only magic when the maneuver or stance is explicitly listed as a Supernatural ability. If you want to call an Su Arcane or Divine, Shadow Hand and Desert Wind would be Arcane, while Devoted Spirit would be Divine (I don't think there are any Su outside those). This could be simplified into Swordmages being Arcane casters and Crusaders Divine, but if they use none of the Supernatural abilities this is arguable. Warblades are neither and are basically just Fighters in flavor.

Incarnum classes seem to mirror Divine classes pretty closely to me (Druid, Ranger <-> Totemist; Paladin <-> Soulborn; Incarnate <-> Cleric). Totemists revere nature, and Soulborns and Incarnates get their power from their Alignments, so I would call these more Divine than anything.

Binders make pacts with obscure dead things, which is similar to Warlock flavor, so I would call them Arcane if forced to choose. Truenaming is similar to Enchantment's Power Words as stated, and Shadowcasting is similar enough to Illusion's Shadow Evocation/Conjuration line to be Arcane as well.

Psionics is on shaky ground, but enough of the effects are similar that I would call it Arcane. It isn't like the Sor/Wiz list lacks Telekinesis and Telepathic spells.

Generally, Divine Power is given to one by various (extremely powerful) Aligned sources on the Outer Planes and +/- planes or Nature itself on the Material Plane. Arcane Power is rarely aligned, and tends to either come from yourself or be something you bargained for.

[classy one]

In my games, all magic is a boot leg version of altering/warping reality the only difference is hot it is done. Like a chemical reaction. You have some reactants, some catalysts and end with a product.

1) arcane: you use components and your own memory as a catalyst to force change on reality.
2) divine: your god has already paid for everything.
3) psionics: you make it happen with pure mind power and force of will.
4) Incarnum: you use your soul as both the reactants and catalyst.

I don't know enough about the others to really say. But you get the gist.

[sonofzeal]

Both Artificers and Dragonfire Adepts are suppose to be using something other than Arcane or Divine magic.

[The-Mage-King]

To go over each type of magic...



Divine magic

Preloaded schematics for manipulating reality provided by the source worshipped. If no source is worshipped, and the caster is dedicated to an ideal, they get a number from the ideals they worship, or just mooching off of other sources.




Arcane magic

Manipulating reality through a deeper understanding of it. They've figured out where each 'lever' is that they need to hit to get the right effect, but... They expend some personal energy to do so.



1. Incarum (Magic of Incarnum)

Manipulation of souls. In this case, drawing memories and abilities from them.


2. Pact Magic (Tome of Magic)

Manipulation of souls. In this case, calling up a forgotten entity and binding it to take on some of its powers.


3. Shadow Magic (Tome of Magic)

A form of arcane magic, with a slightly different reality being affected and/or used.


4. Truename Magic (Tome of Magic)

Scary protomagic thaht is poorly understood by most, but those who DO know enough about it are far more of a threat than normal.


5. Sword Magic (Tome of Battle)

NOT magic. No, seriously. ALL of it is NOT magic. Supernatural stuff? Bloody single mindedness bending reality. Non supernatural stuff? Being that good at fencing/whatever the martial art being used is called.

"I am GOING to light this sword on fire." and all that.



6. Psionics, depending on how you read them.

Using force of will to manipulate the fabric of reality. Similar to supernatural maneuvers in that it's a direct application of will into action. Sadly, limited similarly to arcane magic, due to drawing on the same type of internal reserve.






'course, this is just how I'd handle it in any campaign I'd run.

[Rhatahema]

When you throw together not only all the types of magic, but also all the different ways of casting it, things get pretty convoluted. For example, how is it that both the wizard and the sorcerer each came to arrive at arcane magic, even though their methods are completely at odds? Consider what role magic has in your cosmology and maybe build a timeline of sorts for sorting out the evolution of magic.

I think an important part of this is might be considering the division between spells/powers (wizards, clerics, psions, dragons), spell-like/psi-like abilities (warlocks, dragonfire adepts, devils), and supernatural abilities (pact magic).

I don't know a lot about pact magic, but I wouldn't really classify it as magic. Vestige binding is ritualistic, but all the abilities granted are supernatural. I don't see the need for it to have any more relation to the arcane/divine than a basilisk's gaze attack does.

Incarnum...ugh...Quasi-magic item magic doesn't really fit in with arcane, divine and psionic spells and powers. I agree about linking pact magic and incarnum though. Each soulmeld could be a gift bestowed by a particular vestige. Even more so, though, I like the idea of avoiding incarnum.

[ericgrau]

Just to be clear, this isn't going to be a real big issue for the PCs. It's going to be plot-relevant probably one time at the most. It's more of a mix of me wanting to know how the system works internally so I can keep my own story straight, and idle curiosity about how other players view alternate magic sources.

If it's for plot you can do almost anything. I'd take any suggestions you want and write something up. Try to keep it somewhat simple so your players can get the idea easily, especially if it's only going to come up once. Or come up with a simplified explanation even though you have a few more details in your notes that won't get used unless people ask.

[danzibr]

Incarnum could easily be the most ancient of the magics. It's basically raw spirit/soul energy that just kind of exists in certain places in the universe.

Incarnum is like crude oil before a refinery, except instead of oil...it's souls.
I like this.

Anyways, as far as different types of magic go, just because it's given the name "magic" I don't think it's necessarily a new type of magic. Like sword magic. But to answer your question... I'd say it depends on how you define magic. Psionics can certainly be seen as being magical, but it comes from the mind. Incarnum comes from souls. For that matter, you could just call arcane magic "magic" and then everything else just whatever it is. Like, instead of divine magic, say... divine power or something. I dunno.

[Roak Star]

If you read into the shadowcaster fluff, Shadow Magic is supposed to be... maybe not older, but a more fundamental or base form of magic. Arcane users just use a sort of reflection of the true source, the source being shadow. So, technically Arcane would be a sub-set of Shadow Magic, not the other way around.

[Urpriest]

Don't forget that if you're attributing different types of magic to different sources like this you also need a source for racial SLAs and SU abilities, since those are neither divine nor arcane.

[Rubik]

Don't forget other types of magical abilities.

Technically stock-standard Sp and Su abilities (especially racial ones) aren't arcane, divine, psionic, or any of those other classifications.

Even some Ex abilities are nearly magical, in that they break standard physics (even though they're not actually magical).

And then there's whatever the hell it is that monks do.

[edit] Swordsage'd.