Magic: terms and conditions (discussion)

[SiuiS]

This is about magic as a concept and art and science. It's a discussion begun elsewhere that spun to new life.

There's a lot I want to say on it to clarify my position, but it's late and I'm exhausted. So this OP will eventually be filled with the data from prior discussion, and I will then refer to it for my own explanations later. For now, I just need to clear this out of the other thread!

Not game specific. We are using D&D terms on occasion but that is as much for reference as for technical accuracy. We've also used the magic of ponies and how it is rated, so not a D&D specific thing.

Note: some explanations or questions may veer at religion. please respond to these by saying you cannot go into detail. Please refrain from asking these questions. Please refrain from purposefully asking questions so that the only way someone can defend a point is by breaking forum rules. Thank you.


*






Also, if Bleakbane made a thousand physically and magically identical copies of himself that was each an extension of his will, then wouldn't that make him incredibly vulnerable to thamaturgy based attacks? I mean, a perfect duplicate that's mentally linked to the original has to be like a billion times a better focus than a vial of fresh blood.


You don't seem to be using the word Thaumaturgy in the IRL Earth definition. :smallconfused:


Thuamaturgy is magic.

Specifically it's ritual magic.

Preforming ritual magic on someone requires them to either be present, or for some sort of sympathetic focus to be included as a ritual component.

Blood works best, but hair works in a pinch.

Think like a voodoo doll. put a little bit of focus in the doll, poke a needle in the doll, the real person feels like they got stuck

Having a magically created duplicate who have a hive mind with the original has to be as good as using the original in the spell.

Even if one can't get a Bleakclone, the fact that there's be dozens of millions of Bleakclones means that Bleakbane would be shedding millions of times more metal flakes that could be collected and used as foci.

Making dozens of permanent clones as a hivemind would give you significantly more actions, but would also make you incredibly vulnerable.



Outside of I guess some RPG systems, that's not what thaumaturgy really means.

It really just means roughly White Magic, or Divine Miracle Magic, or Orthodox Magic, or by Dee's definition Mathematical/ Mechanical Magic. It's actually the least "sympathetic" of all magics. A Thaumaturge is more likely to use numbers, mechanical concepts, and complex esoteric conceptual systems attributed to higher forces such as divinity. Bush magic like voodoo dolls would be beneath them.

As for catching a Bleakbane for your ritual... Each Bleakbane is still a Bleakbane. So your solution to "Easier way to defeat Bleakbane", is to first defeat Bleakbane in order to capture him or take a piece of him, and then use a ritual to defeat Bleakbane? :smalltongue:


Definitions change over time.

Thumaturgy, literally "Wonder Working" is greek in origin,and orignially refered to the miracles preformed by saints and magicians.

eventually it came to be assosiated with all forms of magic.

In modern times it can be used interchangably eith magic in genral, with Arithmancy, and with ritual magics of any kind

Thuamaturgy as a term for ritual magic is the term for said magics I'm most familiar with, so that's the term I use I'm just using the term I'm most familiar with.

I'd also like to point out that at no point did I imply that I was going to use such a ritual on Bleakbane(I don't even know how to use that kind of magic, and I'm actually incapable of learning any anti undead magics.)

I was merely pointing out that if he followed this plan, creating a few million other bleakbanes and sending them out into the world, connected back to himself with a hive mind, then it becomes several millions of times more likely that somebody could get a piece of him to use in a ritual.


Theurgy is ritual magic that draws on an outside force. Traditionally it's meant to invoke the presence of one or more deities, but it's very difucult to discuss without bringing religion into the discussion, so I'mma just link ya to the wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theurgy) page and then say no more.


I think in the minds of our IRL ancestors, the reason you perform a ritual for magical purposes is precisely because you're trying to invoke some supernatural power to your aid. Otherwise why ritual?


That's because they're trying to be politically correct by saying "God is cool with it."
I think the difference is that the thaumaturge understands the principles guiding the higher planes (this includes romantic XXXpunk science that Da Vinci personifies), and so works his powers without needing (direct) supernatural aid or shamanistic sympathetic connections (such as hair sample etc).


I'd like to know ehre your Math based/No Sympathetic components required version of Thuamaturgy comes from.

Every source I've seen has had it as ritual based rule magic, or a synonym for arcane magic in general.



Wikipedia? For me? That's cute~



There's an actual answer to that.



That's not quite right. The relationship between a willworker and that which is worked is complex, symbolic and at times obtuse and obfuscatory.



Wikipedia.

The thing is, when they say math they don't mean "addition/numbers". They've got more of a feel for expression of principle. Math is a language, the language. It is the purest expression of concept possible when done correctly. How would that not be magical? "Give me a lever of sufficient length and a place to anchor it, and I will move the earth". Divine the principle, put it into practice, and cut out the middle man. That's magic.

What else is Wikipedia but a repository that cuts out the distance, time, and difficulty to learn something? Magic. Magic, addled by idiots and negligent children who think penis jokes have value, but magic nonetheless.


Yes, Rater202, I've been reading about magic and various esoterica via Wikipedia. If I'm gonna write about Dark Magical Girls I gotta do my research. I'm trying to stay far far away from gamified magical concepts whenever possible. Hence when you classify something as "Arcane Magic" that means nothing to me, because it's not a historical classification.

Care to specify? I mean it's gotta be one of two broad categories:

1. I have miracle pow0rz because God likes me and has either given me some power to use as I please (granted he's watching to make sure I use it for His purposes), or He pays attention to me and grants me a miracle when I ask for one.
2. I have miracle pow0rz because I know magic. But it's magic that God is cool with (especially since I use it in His name).


I vote for My little pony LXXXI: the great and powerful lixie.



Nope. It's definitely religious discussion at that point. I can say that your view of "must be one of these two" is too simplistic, too enochian and too linear though.

Remember, deals with fairies and demons work because they are ontologically incapable of reneging. If you weedle a promise out of such a one, they are physically, psychically and literally incapable of not following through – that requires Rules which just don't jive with what you know of science at a basic level. It requires explanation to get, and that explanation between nonsense and oh, okay is religious.



This is not FiMfiction. This is not a discussion space that allows these tangents in detail. The prevailing ruling is "if in doubt, don't".

Mechanics of magic can be nonreligious. FiM "magic" is a much more direct system of creatures who possess an ability to interface with energy and cause direct if seemingly opaque changes. Magic as a historical belief is discussing a belief, not a scientific fact of the setting.

FiM magic isn't theurgic or thaumaturgic. By principle, it's directly psychic.


Well can we talk about it by framing it as a Crystal Dragon discussion?
If we can discuss setting minutiae in books and cartoons, then it's pretty much the same thing. It's a discussion of "game mechanics" once you remove the players.


See, I accept that for fairies and demons, but gods do not fall under that limitation. When gods keep promises to mortals, it's only because they got a reputation to maintain, amongst mortals and amongst the pantheon. Meta-speaking, they are able to transcend that ontological limitation because they possess more personhood than the average fairy, which is more of an anthropomorphisation of concept.

Gods may be bound to Fate, when Fate is a universal power even greater than them, being of an impersonal conceptual tier. However, making a deal with a human is seldom about the grand hand of Fate moving the gears of a pantheon-spanning prophecy.


I don't know if you'll respond to the above, but at least you can respond to this.

I would disagree with that, simply because it's canon fact that grimoires and spell formulae exist, and not just in the form of nursery rhymes. There is implication of complex systems written in the grimoires, considering Twilight was running thru relativity in order to study the time spell, and they teach magic in an institutionalized academic setting. The only ones we get to hear out loud are the nursery rhymes because hey it's a cartoon.

I would say FiM complex magic is thaumaturgic, while their most basic magic (telekinesis etc) is psychic or so simple (everypony can add 1 to 1) it might as well be psychic. Though ofc the ponies' highest tier of magic (friendship) is psychic, it's in a class by itself as it is unique amongst all other magic ponies use, something available as a practical effect only to the Bearers. I mean we don't see pegasi feeling friendly in order to manipulate weather, or earth ponies feeling friendly in order to grow trees.


You're both wrong.

Thuamaturgic is a learned skill, essentially.

Pony Magic-Earth Pony strength and Cultivation, Pegasus flight and weather control, even a Unicorns Spell-casting and TK, are inherant Magic.

Think a Dragon's fire breath.

They can do it because of what they are.

Limiting the discussion to Unicorn Spell casting,compare it to Harry Potter. You need to learn the spells out of a book, but if you don't have the right blood/a horn on your head, then no amount of learning is going to teach you how to do it.

Or, to compare back to D&D, thuamaturgy would be a Wizard, while Unicorns would be Sorcerers.

Though there is over lap, because there are rules one must follow when casting.


Based on your explanation below, then do you mean like secret scrolls of lost killer techniques in wuxia stories?


I have no idea what "standard magic psionics transparency rule" means, but I've also always thought of the separation between "magic" and "psionics" as BS thought up by RPG manuals, for much the same reason you had described.

However, I don't subscribe to "psions" (yes, basically unsuperstitious magic-users such as ponies) simply willing an action into being. Because that necessarily leads to "inherent ability" via blood, genetics, etc. I do not subscribe to the Harry Potter route that certain ppl can never use magic even if they understood it. AFAIC then, a "psion" causes an action into being by puzzling out the esoteric "math" in his mind, and being able to achieve a certain wakeful meditative state while doing so.

Therefore, just like wuxia protagonists training to become stronger, anyone can become a "psion type" magic-user. Ofc YMMV on your maximum potential still, based on talent. But just because there are olympic runners doesn't mean nobody else knows how to run.

And I base the above opinion not on my personal preferences, but on research into historical magic. Historically, anybody can learn thaumaturgic magic (as long as you got the mental and psychological aptitude for it).


No idea what you mean here by true naming and shadow casting. Are you talking about gamified terms?
No idea what that above triangle is. Is it a gamified term? The only triad of "supernatural power that isn't psychic" that I know if is Hermeticism's alchemy/ astrology/ theurgy.

Post saved. :smallbiggrin:


Yet try as she might, Applejack is never going to lift an apple with her mind unless she sprouts a horn first.

Inherant Magic is how ponies work, so if you want to stay on topic, then you hafta follow the show's rules.

also, "Real Historical" talk of magic beyond what we've already done is a bit to close to religion for this forum

True Naming is a D&D magic system, seperate from Arcane Magic and Diivine magic, based entirly on the idea that everything has a true name, and that knowing how a true name works and what a being or objects true name is gives you power over that person/object

Such things are fictional, but are derived from folkloric stories of a Fey or Demon being compleeled by it's Name to serve, or by a which using her knowledge of a persons name to curse them.

Ergo, drawn from folkloric depictions of magic.

Shadow Casting is essentially drawing on the plane of shadows to make illusions real. It's from the Same book as Trunaming, and it is yet an other system of Magic, thoough I'm unsure of the literary or folkloric stories which it draws from, and how it draws from Thuamaturgy

The Same book also introduced the Binder, which plays up on the "Faustian Pact" trope quite a bit more and in different ways than the Warlock does


Oh, I meant Learnable Magic only in regards to humans. My story is based in the Equestria Girls setting.
In that respect, Human Magic-Users follow the old sci-fi/ gamey trope of Jack Of All Trades humans. They're able to learn all sorts of magic without limitations, but do not have the highest potential in any one category unlike say ponies.


Oh ok so it is roughly the same as the folklore version.
I wonder why it's separated from Divine Magic, seeing as how it must be the primary tool of the setting's creation deity. True Naming is like the entire catalog of passwords, and the deity is the Admin.


Sounds like it draws from Kabbalistic concepts, in that manipulation of the higher planes/ conceptual planes of existence allows the practitioner to affect the "prime material plane" (I'm not completely AD&D illiterate). It's definitely an example of "Rules Magic", which is what I think of when I hear "Thaumaturgy".

Thanks for the explain!

[Thrudd]

Feel free to delete this if it is unwanted or inappropriate.


rough draft - Technology/science of "Magic"

Psychic Quantum Pattern Manipulation (QPM) – The discovery that certain specific patterns of light and sound, with proper energy applied via thought/visualization, harmonize with quantum dimensions underpinning time and space. Harmonizing and modifying quantum states allows manipulation of time and space across all known universes.

Specialized training is required to condition the mind to hold and release these patterns in a controlled way. In fact, all beings are always manipulating reality around them in subtle ways, naturally controlled by the laws of psychic inertia. Discovery of the pattern harmony of quantum reality opened the door on magic technology and at-will reshaping of localized time-space. The only limits on the degree of re-shaping were the physical limitations of the human brain, which even with genetic enhancements and long-term training can only store and release a finite amount of energy.

Almost anything imaginable could be accomplished with the correct quantum pattern harmonization. A population of genetically modified humans in tandem with artificial intelligence worked exclusively to identify patterns and create psychic “programs” useful to society that could be taught and replicated en-masse. Activating such programs could be accomplished by anyone with the proper mental training, requiring the ability to create “partitions” in the mind upon which the quantum patterns could be recorded and released. The means of physically recording these programs for archive also required specialized training in mental discipline, using the same type of psychic pattern energy as that required to activate the programs. A new class of people arose, devoted to these tasks from the time of their birth.

However, not all people had the natural mental talent for pattern recognition required to recognize and manipulate the psychic patterns efficiently. The desire to make quantum manipulation possible for more of the population led to the discovery of alternative methods of storing and activating codified programs. It was found that many who were weaker in pattern recognition abilities had intuitive strengths and were more receptive to environmental psychic signals. Such people could be educated in the mental discipline of mind-partitioning, but had difficulty visualizing the quantum patterns. The solution was found when it was discovered that the quantum manipulation programs could be stored and shared in an automated manner by a new type of computer technology which could replicate the mental activity of visualizing and holding the quantum patterns, creating essentially a psychic network dedicated to sharing quantum manipulation programs. An intuitive with the proper mental training could fine tune their perception in order to essentially download programs from the quantum psychic server, to the limit of their mental ability to store them. This allowed another significant portion of the human population access to the reality-shaping technology. It was found that most intuitives were able to synchronize with only one “psychic server” at a time, and generally found it easiest to remain connected to the same server rather than breaking the connection and re-training themselves for a different server. This was due to the manner in which such connections were made, generally it required investment of energy from the emotional regions of the brain. The stronger the emotional investment, the easier and more efficient was the connection to the server, with faster and more downloads available.

Repercussions of the mastery of psychic quantum pattern manipulation on human society were enormous, the full extent of which are unknown. Due to the nature of reality shifts potentially caused by the use of this phenomenon, an unknown and perhaps unknowable number of alternate universes may have come into existence and/or been destroyed. The greatest long-term impact on society certainly came from the achievement of human post-physical ascension, which was achieved for the first time as a direct result of exploration into quantum pattern harmonization.

This potential for universe threatening repercussions was not unforeseen. Soon after the creation of the quantum pattern servers, it was agreed that all quantum pattern manipulation would be regulated by AI’s that could predict the potential for universe/reality disruption caused by any given manipulation, and ensure only those programs which were safe for universal timeline cohesion were available. The use of quantum pattern manipulation outside of approved programs found in archives and servers was dealt with harshly, as this was seen as a possible threat to all known existence. However, by the time these regulations were put in place, there were already a number of genetically modified psychics with mental capacities rivaling that of the AI’s from the first generation of QPM experiments. These people were the first to ascend to post-human status, removing themselves from the concerns of matter-bound life. What consequences their activities may have held for this universe or any other are unknown.

- Entry found under the heading: "magic", search term: "spells" in the holographic record hall of Dzosh

[MLai]

Even though I try to stay away from AD&D ideas when crafting the magic in my setting, I am curious on what the Wizards VS Sorcerors dichotomy is. How are they different? What is the in-setting explanation for the difference (is it basically Harry-Potter-like inherited difference)? And do they cast different spells or the same spells?

And while I basically agree with Siuis' ideas of Psions in her previous post, is that what exists in AD&D? I'm guessing probably not.

[Yora]

What is the question?

[MLai]

What is the question?
STORY SO FAR...

IIRC, basically a rambling discussion on All Things Magic started when a discussion on Science Vs Magic erupted over multiple unrelated threads. Then I commented on magic from a real world perspective, because I'm currently reading about European and Middle Eastern esotericism in Wikipedia as research for a fanfic/ fancomic.

I'm mainly interested in magic as how it's depicted in history, hence Siuis' caution about being careful not to trip a ban. It's a bit frustrating because what's the point of discussing gamified magic rules if you can't compare it to its root inspiration? I'd feel like 10 million other hack writers if I use AD&D as my setting foundation rather than real history which is 100x more interesting.

I probably should just migrate to another forum, but paradoxically this forum has some dwellers who has good knowledge and ideas regarding the subject (of historical magical concepts). Siuis' insights are exactly how I picture my protag would internally monologue, so I've been saving a lot of her quips.

[elliott20]

snip

you would be surprised how much of this shows up in Battle Angel Alita: Last Order. The idea is that through a combination of technology and mental training, martial artists, especially those with cyborg bodies, are capable of manipulating time and space to that goes beyond what is possible by all natural standards. It's how characters can survive a supersonic punch, or create an attack so powerful that it bends time and space itself.

[MLai]

you would be surprised how much of this shows up in Battle Angel Alita: Last Order. The idea is that through a combination of technology and mental training, martial artists, especially those with cyborg bodies, are capable of manipulating time and space to that goes beyond what is possible by all natural standards. It's how characters can survive a supersonic punch, or create an attack so powerful that it bends time and space itself.
Oh my lord, has BAA:LO gotten to that point nowadays? I'm simultaneously regretful and glad that I discontinued following it when I did. :smalltongue:

Next thing you know Alita will punch out Galactus. :smallsigh:

[elliott20]

Oh my lord, has BAA:LO gotten to that point nowadays? I'm simultaneously regretful and glad that I discontinued following it when I did. :smalltongue:

Next thing you know Alita will punch out Galactus. :smallsigh:

... I liked it.... :smallfrown:

but no, she hasn't been able to become god... yet. However, when you're a living embodiment of all the best technology humanity has to offer, surrounded by nano-tech machines, fighting people who can generate anti-warship beams, and so on, it does get kind of crazy.

[Thrudd]

you would be surprised how much of this shows up in Battle Angel Alita: Last Order. The idea is that through a combination of technology and mental training, martial artists, especially those with cyborg bodies, are capable of manipulating time and space to that goes beyond what is possible by all natural standards. It's how characters can survive a supersonic punch, or create an attack so powerful that it bends time and space itself.

Cool. I've heard of that show, but never watched much anime.

I wrote that up as an explanation for how D&D (Basic/AD&D) magic works, assuming a "Dying Earth"-like scenario where magic is really the technology of an all-but-forgotten ancient advanced civilization. This is why there are only specific spells available, nobody living now (that the PC's know of) understands how magic really works, the remaining spells are recorded in books or handed out by "gods". The only thing that remains is the ancient tradition of mental and emotional training preserved in orders like that of the clerics, druids, and wizards, teaching them how to prepare their minds to receive and activate the spells.

Presumably, someday some characters will delve into a dungeon that turns out to be an ancient holographic library. If they figure out how to use it and look for magic spells, this record will come up on a screen, perhaps with some 3d video like an encyclopedia entry, and be read to them by a pleasant female voice in a neutral tone.

[MLai]

Battle Angel Alita: Last Order is not anime, only manga. I'm not sure if it has ended. According to Wiki it ended after 15 volumes? If that's the case, then I should hunt it down to complete my partial collection.


I wrote that up as an explanation for how D&D (Basic/AD&D) magic works, assuming a "Dying Earth"-like scenario where magic is really the technology of an all-but-forgotten ancient advanced civilization. This is why there are only specific spells available, nobody living now (that the PC's know of) understands how magic really works, the remaining spells are recorded in books or handed out by "gods". The only thing that remains is the ancient tradition of mental and emotional training preserved in orders like that of the clerics, druids, and wizards, teaching them how to prepare their minds to receive and activate the spells.
You don't need a Dying Earth setting or even a Shadowrun setting to use that cyberpunkish interpretation of magic. You could easily transpose it on contemporary Earth as your explanation for how functional magic works beneath all the mysticism.

[Thrudd]

Battle Angel Alita: Last Order is not anime, only manga. I'm not sure if it has ended. According to Wiki it ended after 15 volumes? If that's the case, then I should hunt it down to complete my partial collection.


You don't need a Dying Earth setting or even a Shadowrun setting to use that cyberpunkish interpretation of magic. You could easily transpose it on contemporary Earth as your explanation for how functional magic works beneath all the mysticism.

Definitely. I was just explaining how I intended to use it and the rationale behind it: to explain why there are codified spells that are memorized by rote, why magic users, clerics and druids accessed it in different yet similar ways, as well as a possible hint at what the "gods" actually are and how they "grant" spells to their followers.
It leaves open the possibility for psion-style uses as well, as descendants of those genetically modified to be able to internalize the process.

[Jeff the Green]

I think we may have terms confused. Thaumaturgy usually refers to a deity's power channeled through a human wonderworker (which is what 'thaumaturgist' means). D&D wizards use hermetic magic (ritual magic usually based on the Principles of Similarity and Contagion per The Golden Bough). There's also evocation and invocation (calling on spirits to do your bidding), shamanism (inviting spirits to possess you to work magic), divination (finding truths in unrelated signs and omens), name magic (such as true naming in D&D or compelling otherworldly beings by their names; actually one of the more common ones in folklore), and a sort of catch-all "inner power" kind of magic that I'm not certain has a name, but includes things like ESP and yogic magic.

These aren't mutually exclusive. The Dresden Files portrays magic as both hermetic and innate (at least until the short story from Thomas's POV), but also includes naming and evocation (which is different from what the books call evocation) and one of the types of werewolves (lycanthropes, I think) practice shamanism.

[MLai]

I don't know if it applies to what you're saying below, but basically where real history of magic VS a RPG system conflicts, for me the real history takes precedence. That's the best way to have a nomenclature on which all agree.


I think we may have terms confused. Thaumaturgy usually refers to a deity's power channeled through a human wonderworker (which is what 'thaumaturgist' means). D&D wizards use hermetic magic (ritual magic usually based on the Principles of Similarity and Contagion per The Golden Bough). There's also evocation and invocation (calling on spirits to do your bidding), shamanism (inviting spirits to possess you to work magic), divination (finding truths in unrelated signs and omens), name magic (such as true naming in D&D or compelling otherworldly beings by their names; actually one of the more common ones in folklore), and a sort of catch-all "inner power" kind of magic that I'm not certain has a name, but includes things like ESP and yogic magic.

These aren't mutually exclusive. The Dresden Files portrays magic as both hermetic and innate (at least until the short story from Thomas's POV), but also includes naming and evocation (which is different from what the books call evocation) and one of the types of werewolves (lycanthropes, I think) practice shamanism.
Theurgy would be channelling the divine through you to work magic. Thaumaturgy, I believe based on readings of lots of Wiki, is more like "white rules magic". You are working with higher divine principles, originally revealed to you by your patron deity via visions etc... but you don't actively need his direct intervention every time you want to work some magic.

I think the "inner power" magic is Psionism? Basically psychic powers ala Akira, right? I agree with Siuis that this artificial gamified separation of magic vs psionics is kinda dumb. I independently agree with Siuis that psionics is magic, practiced in a distilled form. Maybe the difference is that it's just plain harder to do for humans, because the typical human mind likes to think in animistic connections i.e. "magical thinking". And since magic is guided by the human will, using such guided mental pathways helps more ppl become magic-users. It should take a special savant mind to be a "Psion."

Nothing wrong with evocation in a setting where spiritual beings exist, however. I also independently agree with Siuis that spirits have unique ontology from humans, making them susceptible to "obligations" and "promises". She also thinks that gods share the same ontology. When I disagreed because I feel gods have more independence of will, she tells me my thinking is too linear and Enochian. I don't know how thinking Enochian is supposed to be bad, though, considering that Merkabah/ Hekhalot mysticism is ancient and complex.

[Jeff the Green]

Theurgy would be channelling the divine through you to work magic. Thaumaturgy, I believe based on readings of lots of Wiki, is more like "white rules magic". You are working with higher divine principles, originally revealed to you by your patron deity via visions etc... but you don't actively need his direct intervention every time you want to work some magic.

Theurgy is actually an extension of evocation or invocation, calling the deity or its attention to you. Thaumaturgy is using the deity's power. Granted, if you go by the etymology you wouldn't guess it, but that's how they've been used historically.


I think the "inner power" magic is Psionism? Basically psychic powers ala Akira, right? I agree with Siuis that this artificial gamified separation of magic vs psionics is kinda dumb. I independently agree with Siuis that psionics is magic, practiced in a distilled form. Maybe the difference is that it's just plain harder to do for humans, because the typical human mind likes to think in animistic connections i.e. "magical thinking". And since magic is guided by the human will, using such guided mental pathways helps more ppl become magic-users. It should take a special savant mind to be a "Psion."

Mostly (though I think it'd be 'psionics' rather than 'psionism'). I'd expand it a bit further to any case where magic is innate to the user or drawn from the user. Psionics is specifically mind magic, but it's in the same group as if its drawn from the soul, moral purity/corruption, or something biological. If, for example, incarnum were drawn from your soul rather than other souls, I don't think there'd be as much of a distinction between it and psionics as between thaumaturgy and hermetic magic. Similarly, I don't think there's a meaningful difference between a monk's and a psychic warrior's powers; one comes from careful cultivation of personal Ki, one comes from careful cultivation of personal mental strength.


Nothing wrong with evocation in a setting where spiritual beings exist, however. I also independently agree with Siuis that spirits have unique ontology from humans, making them susceptible to "obligations" and "promises". She also thinks that gods share the same ontology. When I disagreed because I feel gods have more independence of will, she tells me my thinking is too linear and Enochian. I don't know how thinking Enochian is supposed to be bad, though, considering that Merkabah/ Hekhalot mysticism is ancient and complex.

Without delving into real-life religion, I think you can have a range of things gods could be. They could be omnipotent, omnicient beings; they could be merely powerful spirits; or they could be anything in between. There's nothing inherent in the current understanding of the word 'god' or 'deity' that would exclude one view or the other.

[SiuiS]

OP as updated as I care to make it. Somewhat tedious, that.


Even though I try to stay away from AD&D ideas when crafting the magic in my setting, I am curious on what the Wizards VS Sorcerors dichotomy is. How are they different? What is the in-setting explanation for the difference (is it basically Harry-Potter-like inherited difference)? And do they cast different spells or the same spells?

And while I basically agree with Siuis' ideas of Psions in her previous post, is that what exists in AD&D? I'm guessing probably not.

AD&D actually differentiates psychic powers and magic powers very well. This was later lost; late 2e had a promulgation of magical spells that could only be cast by a suitably powerful psychic, and also split psychics off into their own class rather than having psychism be a possible trait. 3e fully integrated the two and thereby made the distinction meaningless.

AD&D very flatly said the idea of a psychic item instead of a magic item was ludicrous; the item would have to have its own mind and be a trained psychic. You can however exert psychic powers to enchant an item because it's identical to using magic to enchant an item – you imbue manifestations in the item.

I would like to go on record right now saying that the distinction between RL and RPG terms is, for this discussion, moot. An rpg term is just a specific trope. A buzzword which encapsulates an understanding. It's not any less accurate because it is a game term because the game term specifically models RL understanding (or misunderstanding).


What is the question?

Pedantry. Theurgy, Thaumaturgy and their diffeences and distinctions. I noted that common RPG use of magic is actively neither; this included psychic powers into an otherwise clear-as-mud discourse.


I think we may have terms confused.

These aren't mutually exclusive.

These statements conflict. If they aren't mutually exclusive, then we aren't confusing terms, we are just quibbling boundaries where they exist.

You're right though. Much of this is after-the-fact and as accurate as all this sword/short sword/long sword nonsense we get from historians who didn't know beans and were keen to catalogue.




More when I have mental faculty.

[Jeff the Green]

These statements conflict. If they aren't mutually exclusive, then we aren't confusing terms, we are just quibbling boundaries where they exist.

No they don't. To say wizards (in any depiction I've seen) use thaumaturgy or that thaumaturgy is ritual magic is flat up wrong; ritual magic is hermetic, not thaumaturgic. On the other hand, one can combine thaumaturgy and hermeticism by, say, channeling the power of one's god through ritual prayer and sacrifice.

[MLai]

Theurgy is actually an extension of evocation or invocation, calling the deity or its attention to you. Thaumaturgy is using the deity's power. Granted, if you go by the etymology you wouldn't guess it, but that's how they've been used historically.
That doesn't conflict with what I said. Basically Thaumaturgy allows you to work miracles usually reserved for your deity and his supernatural agents. However, you already got his passive permission, he doesn't have to actively participate on-site and hold your hand with every little miracle you perform.


Without delving into real-life religion, I think you can have a range of things gods could be. They could be omnipotent, omnicient beings; they could be merely powerful spirits; or they could be anything in between. There's nothing inherent in the current understanding of the word 'god' or 'deity' that would exclude one view or the other.
When you put it that way, then yes true.


No they don't. To say wizards (in any depiction I've seen) use thaumaturgy or that thaumaturgy is ritual magic is flat up wrong; ritual magic is hermetic, not thaumaturgic. On the other hand, one can combine thaumaturgy and hermeticism by, say, channeling the power of one's god through ritual prayer and sacrifice.
Hermeticism, as in Hermes Trismegistus, is a syncretic tradition that includes thaumaturgy, amongst other disciplines such as alchemy. Hermetic wizards can be kind of seen as mixed martial artists... not the greatest analogy since MMAs try to throw out the chaff and simplify, while Wizards gradually add their own chaff on top even if they did throw some stuff out in the beginning.

My point is, Hermetic (as in Hermes Trismegistus) wizards use thaumaturgy in addition to other stuff.


I would like to go on record right now saying that the distinction between RL and RPG terms is, for this discussion, moot. An rpg term is just a specific trope. A buzzword which encapsulates an understanding. It's not any less accurate because it is a game term because the game term specifically models RL understanding (or misunderstanding).
There is a big distinction, because one is a part of world history that spans millennia of development and cultural osmosis. The other is a system created for a game of dice-rolling, with the purpose of being entertaining and turning a profit, and had a few decades of development amongst a niche subculture. It's like asking me whether I want to make a sports manga about chess, or about tic-tac-toe.

Note, I'm not favoring one over the other because one is "real" and the other is "not". I'm saying one has had 2000+ years of world history. It's a study of a facet of humanity.


Pedantry. Theurgy, Thaumaturgy and their diffeences and distinctions. I noted that common RPG use of magic is actively neither; this included psychic powers into an otherwise clear-as-mud discourse.
Trying to understand everyone's common nomenclature is not pedantry, for obvious reasons. :smallannoyed:
You can't even begin a discussion if you're not speaking the same language.
RPG terms are examined upon introduction to see if it's faithful enough to its root. If yes, then it can contribute to the discussion rather than muddle it.

[Jeff the Green]

That doesn't conflict with what I said. Basically Thaumaturgy allows you to work miracles usually reserved for your deity and his supernatural agents. However, you already got his passive permission, he doesn't have to actively participate on-site and hold your hand with every little miracle you perform.

...that's what I meant. The key thing is that the power comes from your deity, not yourself.


Hermeticism, as in Hermes Trismegistus, is a syncretic tradition that includes thaumaturgy, amongst other disciplines such as alchemy. Hermetic wizards can be kind of seen as mixed martial artists... not the greatest analogy since MMAs try to throw out the chaff and simplify, while Wizards gradually add their own chaff on top even if they did throw some stuff out in the beginning.

My point is, Hermetic (as in Hermes Trismegistus) wizards use thaumaturgy in addition to other stuff.

While Hermes Trismegistus and hermeticism incorporate theurgy and alchemy, what is commonly understood as hermetic magic is merely ritual magic. It doesn't matter what the ritual does—it might evoke, invoke, thaumaturge, or it might have its own effects—but ritual is both necessary and sufficient to call magic hermetic.

Edit:
Actually, in order to avoid etymology-based confusion, perhaps a better term would be frazerian magic (after the author of The Golden Bough). While it doesn't necessarily have to invoke the Laws of Similarity and Contagion, it typically does.

[MLai]

While Hermes Trismegistus and hermeticism incorporate theurgy and alchemy, what is commonly understood as hermetic magic is merely ritual magic. It doesn't matter what the ritual does—it might evoke, invoke, thaumaturge, or it might have its own effects—but ritual is both necessary and sufficient to call magic hermetic.
Edit:
Actually, in order to avoid etymology-based confusion, perhaps a better term would be frazerian magic (after the author of The Golden Bough). While it doesn't necessarily have to invoke the Laws of Similarity and Contagion, it typically does.
(1) Okay.
(2) Why would you call it after a comparative anthropology text???

[Jeff the Green]

(2) Why would you call it after a comparative anthropology text???

Because most of the idea of ritual magic as a singular idea held by all or nearly all human societies originated in The Golden Bough. That's where the Laws of Similarity and Contagion come from. Most of the book is, well, let's be charitable and just call it "Victorian in sensibilities", but those at least seem to be pretty darn solid when it comes to real-world magic and in any case influenced a lot of fiction.

'Hermetic magic' might be better than introducing a new term, though. 'Frazerian magic' was just a suggestion if you or others didn't like using 'hermetic magic' to refer to it.

[Yora]

I have to say my favorite approach to magic and the casting of spells is the Force. Passive Force-use is basically being able to sense and read auras emanating from living things through a background energy field. Active Force-use is the controlled projection of the same energy, which travel through the background field and manipulate brain activity or convert into kinetic energy. In a way, it's similar to sound. We can cause vibrations in our body to create pressure waves travelling through air, and we can also sense these pressure waves when they reach our bodies causing parts of it to vibrate. The Force simply is another transmiting medium that is both affected by brain activity, and can affect brain activity.

It's not explained how a pulse of an energy that freely passes through matter can transform into kinetic force, but as magic systems go that's a rather minor question mark.

[Jeff the Green]

I have to say my favorite approach to magic and the casting of spells is the Force. Passive Force-use is basically being able to sense and read auras emanating from living things through a background energy field. Active Force-use is the controlled projection of the same energy, which travel through the background field and manipulate brain activity or convert into kinetic energy. In a way, it's similar to sound. We can cause vibrations in our body to create pressure waves travelling through air, and we can also sense these pressure waves when they reach our bodies causing parts of it to vibrate. The Force simply is another transmiting medium that is both affected by brain activity, and can affect brain activity.

It's not explained how a pulse of an energy that freely passes through matter can transform into kinetic force, but as magic systems go that's a rather minor question mark.

You could solve this by only using force in the proper physics definition and call the Force something else, like Aether. Now you're just sending waves through the Aether to affect objects at a distance instead of through air. And different frequencies do different things, much in the way visible light can pass through water but microwaves (mostly) can't.

[Yora]

But how does a pulse through the aether affect some matter but ignores other? Jedi can use telekinesis on distant objects without affecting the air inbetween. And all forms of telepathy definitly work through solid material of significant thickness. Jedi can sense the presence of others through solid walls.

But as I said, this is really a minor technicallity that for most intents and purposes can be handwaved without creating inconsistencies or disconnects in the story.

[Jeff the Green]

But how does a pulse through the aether affect some matter but ignores other? Jedi can use telekinesis on distant objects without affecting the air inbetween. And all forms of telepathy definitly work through solid material of significant thickness. Jedi can sense the presence of others through solid walls.

Sorry, I just edited an answer in as you posted. Different effects are different frequencies. So if you don't want your force to affect air, you use the frequency that passes through it mostly unhindered.

[veti]

There is a big distinction, because one is a part of world history that spans millennia of development and cultural osmosis. The other is a system created for a game of dice-rolling, with the purpose of being entertaining and turning a profit, and had a few decades of development amongst a niche subculture. It's like asking me whether I want to make a sports manga about chess, or about tic-tac-toe.

However, that "real-world" millennial-spanning stuff you're talking about - is anything but a well documented, consistent, coherent system. Words like "thaumaturgy" meant quite different things to different people at different times. Even the Hermetic Texts themselves exist in many different variations, and some of the people who commented on and contributed to the tradition - didn't have access to any of them.

RPG terms, on the other hand, are explicitly defined and well known to pretty much everyone here. If, for instance, you start talking about the distinction between illusion and phantasm in D&D 3.x, most readers here will know what you're talking about, without having to go into pages of explanation.

I think it's important to keep sight of one really important differentiator, which is that in the real world, magic doesn't work. So all the ideas about whether it worked because of divine favour, or because of an accurately performed ritual, or because of some impersonal mathematical rules built into the fabric of the universe - were essentially telling you more about the philosophy and imagination of the individual writer than anything else. The next writer didn't have to accommodate those ideas, because there was no objective reality to check the theories against. The measure of a theory was purely intellectual - how elegant and self-contained is it, how consistent is it with other philosophical statements that we demand must be true.

Of course that's subject to the qualifier that sometimes, whether by trickery or blind luck, it did seem to work. Other times, records were falsified to make it look as if it had worked. (For instance, when James VI of Scotland was almost drowned, his prosecutors "found" evidence that various local witches had called up the storm.)

[Jeff the Green]

However, that "real-world" millennial-spanning stuff you're talking about - is anything but a well documented, consistent, coherent system. Words like "thaumaturgy" meant quite different things to different people at different times. Even the Hermetic Texts themselves exist in many different variations, and some of the people who commented on and contributed to the tradition - didn't have access to any of them.

RPG terms, on the other hand, are explicitly defined and well known to pretty much everyone here. If, for instance, you start talking about the distinction between illusion and phantasm in D&D 3.x, most readers here will know what you're talking about, without having to go into pages of explanation.

I think it's important to keep sight of one really important differentiator, which is that in the real world, magic doesn't work. So all the ideas about whether it worked because of divine favour, or because of an accurately performed ritual, or because of some impersonal mathematical rules built into the fabric of the universe - were essentially telling you more about the philosophy and imagination of the individual writer than anything else. The next writer didn't have to accommodate those ideas, because there was no objective reality to check the theories against. The measure of a theory was purely intellectual - how elegant and self-contained is it, how consistent is it with other philosophical statements that we demand must be true.

Of course that's subject to the qualifier that sometimes, whether by trickery or blind luck, it did seem to work. Other times, records were falsified to make it look as if it had worked. (For instance, when James VI of Scotland was almost drowned, his prosecutors "found" evidence that various local witches had called up the storm.)

When used in an anthropological or folkloristic sense, though, the word do have more precise meanings. And more importantly, they're rarely entirely unrelated. In D&D, thaumaturgy is summoning and calling outsiders with divine magic. In the Dresden Files, it's magic using the Laws of Similarity and Contagion. At least if we use the real-life definitions we know that thaumaturgy is usually used to refer to power given to a human by a deity to work miracles even if there are some outliers and even if it's not super precise.

[Fiery Diamond]

Given that in different fictional settings magic is different things and uses different terminology, I fail to see why it is necessary, or even important, to have agreed-upon terms and definitions for a discussion of magic that spans more than a single setting. Having pages of discussion about validity of definitions and quibbling about which ones to use and why is actually far more time-consuming and less efficient than simply explaining what you're talking about each time you bring up a different concept in conversation. For example, the first time you bring up a certain type of magic that has a specific name in a specific work of fiction, you reference the work and the name (something like "Dresden's thaumaturgy") and briefly describe what that means. Then whenever "Dresden's thaumaturgy" gets brought up again, everyone knows what you're talking about. This is both far more efficient and far more useful than quibbling about what the correct definition to use for "thaumaturgy" is for the sake of the discussion. It also makes bringing up a specific type of magic from a specific setting easier, since you don't need to be a (expletive) scholar first to figure out what category that type of magic might or might not fall under.

Because really, the real world "magic" is no more interesting than the plethora of fictional setting "magic" that exists. History & "real people believed this!" do not make things more interesting to me. Put another way, "Stop trying to force realism on fantasy discussion unless you're an actual scholar having an actual academic discussion."

[Frozen_Feet]

What people think of as "magic" actually is fairly important to portraying magic in fiction, because magic that's not in line with magical thinking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking) often doesn't feel like magic. You see this attitude crop up on these boards all the time.

"Magic shouldn't be explained!"

"Magic shouldn't be rational!"

"The mystery goes away if magic has rules!"

Etc.

As with real life magic tricks, it's not what's being done that's magic, but how it appears. The illusion is in people seeing an action and a result, but not the causal link between them. As with jokes, explaining it kills it.

Now, strict and well-thought rules of magic can be interesting, but usually for different reasons and to different people. For example, Death Note manga has detailed and logical rules for the titular object, and exploring them is at the core of the series' main mystery. But I don't think those rules are very appealing to people who don't enjoy analytical thinking.

I've actually held a lecture on RPGs and mythological concepts, and posited the hypothesis that the reason for why D&D became so big, and why fantasy is the biggest genre of RPGs, is because D&D and fantasy draw from a wide and deep pool of existing human mythology and magical concepts. Those concepts appealed to great masses in the past, so why not now? The corollary to this hypothesis is that fantasy that strides too far off the treaden path will fail to be as popular. Originality has no appeal, if the attempt to be original loses the elements that trigger human interest in the first place. I find Pascal Boyer's Religion Explained to be a good book for exploring and explaining what kinds of elements do appeal to humans.

[Jeff the Green]

Except that not everybody's read the Dresden Files, played D&D, or read The Golden Bough (gods know, it's dense enough to turn most people away; I'm still picking through it after a year of having it on my Kindle). If we agree on a set of terms to start out with, even if it's just for the purpose of the discussion, we don't have that problem.

[MLai]

I don't think it's realistic to think of this as some sort of forum project to create an unanimous glossary. I like the discussion just to know where all these terms that I see in games actually come from, and what they entail, etc. I learned some facts, but also internalized some very elegant opinions on the facts that I couldn't get from just reading Wiki.


Because really, the real world "magic" is no more interesting than the plethora of fictional setting "magic" that exists. History & "real people believed this!" do not make things more interesting to me.
I disagree with this.

This is like saying "I love high fantasy elves, but I have no interest in LotR I don't care that's where my beloved elves first came from." Or "I love this remake, but I have no interest in the original."

I mean sure, you could hold that opinion. But you can see why it's not a valid opinion for everyone, so why sound imperative?

[Fiery Diamond]

Except that not everybody's read the Dresden Files, played D&D, or read The Golden Bough (gods know, it's dense enough to turn most people away; I'm still picking through it after a year of having it on my Kindle). If we agree on a set of terms to start out with, even if it's just for the purpose of the discussion, we don't have that problem.

Assuming this is in response to me...

The first sentence is true. That's why when it's first brought up, it is explained. Having fifteen billion and one particular setting specific categories that are explained when first mentioned and then used as comparison points when discussing something that is "original" is much more useful than having a small set of terms that people are arguing over. Trying to make a discussion somehow academic in a setting like this, which isn't, actually runs even more afoul of the "people aren't familiar with it" problem than using and explaining things from works of fiction. My point is that if you take it as it comes for specifics and explain the specifics when they're first mentioned, discussion of something other than the terms themselves and how we should define them can take place. This whole quibbling bit will not result in "agree[ing] on a set of terms to start out with," because I don't have faith in people in general enough to believe an agreement will be reached with any kind of alacrity.

If it's "just for the purpose of the discussion," we're better of inventing terms and assigning meanings then trying to use actual ones and arguing about what their real meaning should be, since at least that way we don't have people worrying about "correctness" of our assigned definitions. If, for the purposes of discussion, some people have more authority to make decisions about definitions than others by virtue of having extra knowledge, in a setting that is supposed to be informal, you're already running afoul of some social concerns. Arbitrary assignation is much fairer than having several people with different knowledge backgrounds arguing with each other over who should be considered right while others without any such backgrounds are voiceless in the matter.



I don't think it's realistic to think of this as some sort of forum project to create an unanimous glossary. I like the discussion just to know where all these terms that I see in games actually come from, and what they entail, etc. I learned some facts, but also internalized some very elegant opinions on the facts that I couldn't get from just reading Wiki.


I disagree with this.

This is like saying "I love high fantasy elves, but I have no interest in LotR I don't care that's where my beloved elves first came from." Or "I love this remake, but I have no interest in the original."

I mean sure, you could hold that opinion. But you can see why it's not a valid opinion for everyone, so why sound imperative?

On the other hand, all I saw were opinions, with varying basis in varying literature and history, being argued back and forth. Nothing elegant about that.

Furthermore, regarding what I've put in bold: Absolutely perfect example. Sure, there are people who care about the research Tolkien did, and about all the various specifics of his elves. Sure, that was the original source for later high fantasy elves. That doesn't make an "appeal to Tolkien," so to speak, have any validity whatsoever in a discussion about high fantasy elves. Yes, you can talk about Tolkien's elves. Yes, you can care about it. Yes, without it later high fantasy elves wouldn't exist. No, that doesn't mean anything, at all. His elves are not any kind of standard, or base, or "correct" way, or anything of the sort, and in a discussion of high fantasy elves, the fact that they originally came from Tolkien DOES NOT MATTER ONE JOT unless the sole point of the discussion is how they came about and possibly a literary analysis of how other elves relate to Tolkein's. Tolkein's elves are just one of many, and have no more weight than any other.

I feel exactly the same way about "real world historical magic" compared to fictional magic in literature and gaming.

[MLai]

His elves are not any kind of standard, or base, or "correct" way, or anything of the sort, and in a discussion of high fantasy elves, the fact that they originally came from Tolkien DOES NOT MATTER ONE JOT unless the sole point of the discussion is how they came about and possibly a literary analysis of how other elves relate to Tolkein's. Tolkein's elves are just one of many, and have no more weight than any other..
That seems to say it all AFAIC.

Ofc if a particular game system makes a particularly elegant meta-comment regarding magic, it's worth mentioning here. For example I'm currently reading thru the Unknown Armies manual. Only a few pages in, but I think I'm liking how they do magic (some of it).

[veti]

That seems to say it all AFAIC.

I agree with you, as far as "real-world 'magic' is an interesting subject". On one level, and if I had time (which I emphatically don't), and if forum rules permitted (which I suspect they don't), I'd enjoy nothing more than an in-depth discussion about Agrippa, Ficino, Mirandola, Kramer, Dee, Faust, Mather, right down the line to Crowley and those sad sacks who provide fodder for Dan Brown's depraved fantasies.

On the other hand, I really don't see that such a discussion would tell us very much about "magic". It would be couched in terms of history, psychology, politics and sociology. And I don't think it would tell us anything that would be of value to roleplaying games, except possibly those set in modern times and focusing on dodgy cults, and frankly it would probably be too longwinded and abstract to be of much use even to them.

From the perspective of understanding a particular system of magic, it makes more sense to talk about that system in the context of the fictional setting where it actually works. Then the number of works that anyone has to read is limited, and there's much greater chance of reaching some consensus, not just about terminology, but also about rules and mechanisms by which it works. Which, in that context, becomes meaningful because it does work...

[Thrudd]

Imagine a fictional setting where the beliefs of many of our ancestors are true. Basically animistic: sentient or semi-sentient spirits are responsible for the functioning of all nature. There is a hierarchy, or multiple hierarchies, of different orders of spirits, from the least sort of elementals up to deities, and perhaps even a supreme deity.
Terms will be used in a manner as close to their latin or greek origins as possible.

Almost any sort of magic involves intercession of or interaction with spirits in some way. The only exception may be that some forms of divination may be based on observational formulas of semi-scientific nature, such as astrology or the interpreting of omens in natural phenomena that are not entirely reliant on divine inspiration.

Basic terms and divisions of magic use:

Incantation/Enchantment (incantare): The actual spell, words spoken or sung intended to charm someone or something. An incantation always has the purpose of calling a spirit or deity to some purpose.

Three terms describing basic categories of interaction with spirits, the meanings of which have come to overlap somewhat in later times, but their root meanings reveal the differences:

Invocation (invocare): to call upon, implore, petition for aid. Asking spirit/deity for assistance or power, opening oneself to allow the spirit/deity in

Evocation(evocare): to call out, rouse, summon. Summoning spirits to come out from wherever they are.

Conjuration(coniurare): swearing together, conspire. Binding oneself to or constraining a spirit by an oath.

An incantation may request or charm a spirit to one or more of these ends. One may invoke a spirit to give them strength or inspiration. An evocation might call the spirit of a departed ancestor to appear. A conjuration may bind a spirit to serve you until a task is completed. There is some overlap, especially between evocation and conjuration. An elemental spirit may need to be evoked from its stone or tree before it can be conjured to serve the magic user. An incantation can perform more than one task, such as summoning and then binding the spirit, or summoning it and then petitioning its assistance or inviting it to possess the magic user.

Other terms describe some possible goals of invoking, evoking, and conjuring spirits:

Theurgy: divine work. Invoking or Evoking a deity, uniting with divinity.

Divination (divinare)*: power of foreseeing, prediction. To be inspired by deity

*-mancy (manteia):divination by means of, to prophecy by
(anything ending with –mancy refers to a form of divination. Necromancy means divination by speaking to the dead )

Augury: Interpreting omens

Thaumaturgy: wonder working, miracle working. (which really describes almost any use of magic)

People who practice magic may go by different titles pretty much interchangeably –

Wizard – a wise person, philosopher, sage. One with magical power, who knows the future
Sorcerer (sortiarius) – teller of fortunes by casting lots, one who influences fate or fortune
Witch (wicce) – female who practices magic
Magician/Mage/Magus/Magi (magush) – practitioner of astrology, alchemy and magic.
Special exception for -
Warlock (waerloga)- oath breaker, traitor, liar, enemy. One in league with the devil/evil forces

There is a hierarchy of spirits, lower order spirits act according to the will and direction of the higher order, normally performing duties related to the natural functioning of the world. Deities are the highest order and can command all other spirits. Calling on higher order spirits requires less understanding of the details of the working of nature and spiritual interactions, but requires more faith and willingness to surrender one’s will to that of the deity. Successfully calling and manipulating lower order spirits directly requires knowledge of their names, natures, and limitations, and poses more risk of hostility and backlash.

Religious orders mostly teach Theurgy. You learn prayers/incantations which invoke or evoke the deity and its higher order servants. Invocation is probably more commonly used than evocation or conjuration, as union with and service to the divine is the goal.

Non-religious sects and individuals may still call on deities or higher order spirits, but also use their own force of will to enchant lower spirits. Evocation and conjuration are as common or more common than invocation, as the elemental and lower order spirits must usually be called out from their habitats to perform tasks that are sometimes beyond their normal roles in nature.

[Fiery Diamond]

On the other hand, I really don't see that such a discussion would tell us very much about "magic". It would be couched in terms of history, psychology, politics and sociology. And I don't think it would tell us anything that would be of value to roleplaying games, except possibly those set in modern times and focusing on dodgy cults, and frankly it would probably be too longwinded and abstract to be of much use even to them.

From the perspective of understanding a particular system of magic, it makes more sense to talk about that system in the context of the fictional setting where it actually works. Then the number of works that anyone has to read is limited, and there's much greater chance of reaching some consensus, not just about terminology, but also about rules and mechanisms by which it works. Which, in that context, becomes meaningful because it does work...

Thank you! I'm glad someone understood what I was trying to say.


Imagine a fictional setting where the beliefs of many of our ancestors are true. Basically animistic: sentient or semi-sentient spirits are responsible for the functioning of all nature. There is a hierarchy, or multiple hierarchies, of different orders of spirits, from the least sort of elementals up to deities, and perhaps even a supreme deity.
Terms will be used in a manner as close to their latin or greek origins as possible.

Almost any sort of magic involves intercession of or interaction with spirits in some way. The only exception may be that some forms of divination may be based on observational formulas of semi-scientific nature, such as astrology or the interpreting of omens in natural phenomena that are not entirely reliant on divine inspiration.

Basic terms and divisions of magic use:

Incantation/Enchantment (incantare): The actual spell, words spoken or sung intended to charm someone or something. An incantation always has the purpose of calling a spirit or deity to some purpose.

Three terms describing basic categories of interaction with spirits, the meanings of which have come to overlap somewhat in later times, but their root meanings reveal the differences:

Invocation (invocare): to call upon, implore, petition for aid. Asking spirit/deity for assistance or power, opening oneself to allow the spirit/deity in

Evocation(evocare): to call out, rouse, summon. Summoning spirits to come out from wherever they are.

Conjuration(coniurare): swearing together, conspire. Binding oneself to or constraining a spirit by an oath.

An incantation may request or charm a spirit to one or more of these ends. One may invoke a spirit to give them strength or inspiration. An evocation might call the spirit of a departed ancestor to appear. A conjuration may bind a spirit to serve you until a task is completed. There is some overlap, especially between evocation and conjuration. An elemental spirit may need to be evoked from its stone or tree before it can be conjured to serve the magic user. An incantation can perform more than one task, such as summoning and then binding the spirit, or summoning it and then petitioning its assistance or inviting it to possess the magic user.

Other terms describe some possible goals of invoking, evoking, and conjuring spirits:

Theurgy: divine work. Invoking or Evoking a deity, uniting with divinity.

Divination (divinare)*: power of foreseeing, prediction. To be inspired by deity

*-mancy (manteia):divination by means of, to prophecy by
(anything ending with –mancy refers to a form of divination. Necromancy means divination by speaking to the dead )

Augury: Interpreting omens

Thaumaturgy: wonder working, miracle working. (which really describes almost any use of magic)

People who practice magic may go by different titles pretty much interchangeably –

Wizard – a wise person, philosopher, sage. One with magical power, who knows the future
Sorcerer (sortiarius) – teller of fortunes by casting lots, one who influences fate or fortune
Witch (wicce) – female who practices magic
Magician/Mage/Magus/Magi (magush) – practitioner of astrology, alchemy and magic.
Special exception for -
Warlock (waerloga)- oath breaker, traitor, liar, enemy. One in league with the devil/evil forces

There is a hierarchy of spirits, lower order spirits act according to the will and direction of the higher order, normally performing duties related to the natural functioning of the world. Deities are the highest order and can command all other spirits. Calling on higher order spirits requires less understanding of the details of the working of nature and spiritual interactions, but requires more faith and willingness to surrender one’s will to that of the deity. Successfully calling and manipulating lower order spirits directly requires knowledge of their names, natures, and limitations, and poses more risk of hostility and backlash.

Religious orders mostly teach Theurgy. You learn prayers/incantations which invoke or evoke the deity and its higher order servants. Invocation is probably more commonly used than evocation or conjuration, as union with and service to the divine is the goal.

Non-religious sects and individuals may still call on deities or higher order spirits, but also use their own force of will to enchant lower spirits. Evocation and conjuration are as common or more common than invocation, as the elemental and lower order spirits must usually be called out from their habitats to perform tasks that are sometimes beyond their normal roles in nature.

And thank you as well! This uses the model I was suggesting and applies it to concepts originating in history without tying itself to history in the same arguing about correctness sense people were before by positing a fictional setting based on some historical beliefs (wow that sentence was tangled). And I actually found this quite interesting (and informative!), unlike the previous discussion.

I think that would be a really cool setting. Much more flavorful than pulp fantasy, for sure.

Question about augury: would you think this would typically be one of the more observational semi-scientific practices or more spirit-related?

On a somewhat but not really related note, what kind of practice would reading signs about present but distant events (whether farsight directly or some kind of symbolic event that is read, such as an astrological sign that appears not prior to the event it notes but at the same moment) or about past events (kind of a backwards divination, so to speak) be?

Also, I just had a thought about the religious orders and Theurgy. Theurgy is invoking (usually) and evoking (more rarely, and probably more with the higher-order servants of the deity rather than the deity itself). But you mentioned conjuration as well near the end. So, I was thinking- someone who conjured a deity (in the sense of "binding oneself to") would basically have to be someone who was becoming an avatar of that deity, right? That could be a really cool and unexpected plot point in a story with this setting.

[MLai]

And thank you as well! This uses the model I was suggesting and applies it to concepts originating in history without tying itself to history in the same arguing about correctness sense people were before by positing a fictional setting based on some historical beliefs (wow that sentence was tangled). And I actually found this quite interesting (and informative!), unlike the previous discussion.
I don't know what sort of distinction you're trying to make, as his glossary is word for word what the original historical definitions were, before they became interchangeable or confused in modern entertainment usage.

There's no "arguing" about his post because it's correct.

[Thrudd]

Thank you! I'm glad someone understood what I was trying to say.



And thank you as well! This uses the model I was suggesting and applies it to concepts originating in history without tying itself to history in the same arguing about correctness sense people were before by positing a fictional setting based on some historical beliefs (wow that sentence was tangled). And I actually found this quite interesting (and informative!), unlike the previous discussion.

I think that would be a really cool setting. Much more flavorful than pulp fantasy, for sure.

Question about augury: would you think this would typically be one of the more observational semi-scientific practices or more spirit-related?

On a somewhat but not really related note, what kind of practice would reading signs about present but distant events (whether farsight directly or some kind of symbolic event that is read, such as an astrological sign that appears not prior to the event it notes but at the same moment) or about past events (kind of a backwards divination, so to speak) be?

Also, I just had a thought about the religious orders and Theurgy. Theurgy is invoking (usually) and evoking (more rarely, and probably more with the higher-order servants of the deity rather than the deity itself). But you mentioned conjuration as well near the end. So, I was thinking- someone who conjured a deity (in the sense of "binding oneself to") would basically have to be someone who was becoming an avatar of that deity, right? That could be a really cool and unexpected plot point in a story with this setting.

Augury could be non-spiritual interpretation based on past observational correlations, but I think a spirit could also be invoked in a ritual to interpret the omens (such as an oracle might do, when people come to her to explain why there is a comet in the sky, she goes into a trance and the deity explains it using her body), or evoked to provide the omen in the first place (like a shaman asking for a sign to reveal information about the tribe's upcoming harvest, and an eagle swoops down and grabs a snake in front of him).

I think divination covers all types of uncovering of hidden information, past, present, or future. The future-telling is just what gets the most attention from the lay-people and therefore what the magic users become famous for. So finding out information about what is going on in a distant place is also covered, as well as revealing the past. I would think the most common use of necromancy would be to learn what the departed person knew or had witnessed in life, rather than telling the future.

Yeah, I guess swearing an oath binding one to a deity would be like becoming its avatar, though I think that could be more likely accomplished by invocation/possession. Mostly, I would think deities and higher-order spirits would either be impossible to bind in this way, or it would be extremely dangerous, as usually the contract involves some kind of threat or promise to the spirit being conjured, and implies a negotiation between somewhat equal parties (or the conjurer being the superior party).

A deity or powerful spirit, while it may be possible to bind one that way with the proper knowledge, would certainly be resentful and attempt to punish one for having the arrogance to treat with them on such terms. The avatar of a deity would more likely be an empty vessel for their divine will and power.

This is why it is dangerous to conjure powerful demons or devils, you likely will need to promise them your soul or someone else's soul, or you will incur their wrath and probably face retribution of some form. You might evoke them, and try to negotiate with them in a non-binding manner (someone would need to be very charismatic and/or clever) to help you out in some way. Or invoke them and let them "ride" you for a while, gaining some power (though doing so regularly will probably result in tarnishing your own soul and becoming like them).