D&D Magic Theory

[Pippa the Pixie]

What is D&D Magic Theory? It seems to be a question for many, and many people don't ''get it". And more so it's even a reason not to like D&D at all. For example:

Magic
I don't like D&D's magic. It is not a generic magic, spell preparation is not a very common feature of many representations of magic. Yet, it manages to be almost flavourless. Yes there are spell components and spells require gestures and words. But that's it, there is no real explanation, not even the briefest view of how this is supposed to work. No true names, no contact with spirits, just stand over there move your hands and things happen.

The question of D&D magic theory is editionless, because to get stuck on one edition: that way lies dragons. Worse, starting in 3E D&D has made a huge push to be a near pure mecahnical combat game. You don't ask about magic theory after 3E, you just rol a d20 in combat allready.

The above quote strikes me as odd because it says not even the briefest view of how magic works. And sure, D&D after 3E has very little fluff on anything. There is a tiny bit of magic theory, but most of it comes from 1E, 2E and BECMI D&D.

As you almost certainly already know, Vancian magic is named after the magic system found in Jack Vance’s Dying Earth novels. There’s no evidence, however, that Gygax and Arenson based their magic system directly off the books.

D&D came from wargames; and one of the big takes from this is: Spells were perceived as ammunition. You have to reload.

From 1E we get: each spell has a point at which it can be "paused". So that means that each spell is actually a ritual by default, and that the wizard actually casts 99% percent of each spell, repeating it for each copy of it they cast. They leave out the last few motions so that the spell can be finished, its effect taking place. The spell slots represent the wizard's inner power, their ability to take the mental stress of the arcane equivalent of an inert bomb, to keep their spell paused until they wish to cast it.

Spoiler: D&D Magic flavor

Show

Originally Posted by PHB 169
Before setting out on a dangerous journey with her companions, Mialee sits in her study and opens her spellbook. First she pages through it, selecting the spells that she thinks will be most useful on her adventure. When she has chosen the spells she wants (which could mean choosing the same spell more than once), she meditates on the pages that describe each one. The arcane symbols, which she has penned by hand, would be nonsense to anyone else, but they unlock power from her mind. As she concentrates, she all but finishes casting each spell that she prepares. Each spell now lacks only its final trigger. When she closes the book, her mind is full of spells, each of which she can complete at will in a brief time.
Quote Originally Posted by PHB 177, 179
Wizards, sorcerers, and bards cast arcane spells, which involve the direct manipulation of mystic energies. These manipulations require natural talent (in the case of sorcerers), long study (in the case of wizards), or both (in the case of bards). Compared to divine spells, arcane spells are more likely to produce dramatic results, such as flight, explosions, or transformations.

Clerics, druids, experienced paladins, and experienced rangers can cast divine spells. Unlike arcane spells, divine spells draw power from a divine source. Clerics gain spell power from deities or from divine forces. The divine force of nature powers druid and ranger spells. The divine forces of law and good power paladin spells. Divine spells tend to focus on healing and protection and are less flashy, destructive, and disruptive than arcane spells.

Quote Originally Posted by PHB 177
During the study period, she chooses which spells to prepare. The act of preparing a spell is actually the first step in casting it. A spell is designed in such a way that it has an interruption point near its end. This allows a wizard to cast most of the spell ahead of time and finish when it’s needed, even if she is under considerable pressure. Her spellbook serves as a guide to the mental exercises she must perform to create the spell’s effect. If a wizard already has spells prepared (from the previous day) that she has not cast, she can abandon some or all of them to make room for new spells.

To record an arcane spell in written form, a character uses complex notation that describes the magical forces involved in the spell. The notation constitutes a universal arcane language that wizards have discovered, not invented. The writer uses the same system no matter what her native language or culture. However, each character uses the system in her own way. Another person’s magical writing remains incomprehensible to even the most powerful wizard until she takes time to study and decipher it.

2E fluff gives us the most by far: magic is made by the 'friction' of each phylisopical plane (aka, the outer planes). You can tap it directly, arcane magic, by shaping the spell with components and will power. Or you can go the indrect faith route, and get the power from a being you worship, divine magic.


So just to be clear, I'm not talking about mechanics. I'm talking more about Magic Theory. Fluff. It does have all sorts of role playing applications in game play, but no mechancal ones.

[Psyren]

Uhh...Is there a question/discussion topic here? Yes, arcane and divine are different, but in practice the difference is basically academic. (And those academics may be what you're after here, but again, I'm not sure what if any question is being asked.)

[Millstone85]

Here is more recent magobabble.

Spoiler: 5e PHB p205, The Weave of Magic

Show

The worlds within the D&D multiverse are magical places. All existence is suffused with magical power, and potential energy lies untapped in every rock, stream, and living creature, and even in the air itself. Raw magic is the stuff of creation, the mute and mindless will of existence, permeating every bit of matter and present in every manifestation of energy throughout the multiverse.

Mortals can't directly shape this raw magic. Instead, they make use of a fabric of magic, a kind of interface between the will of a spellcaster and the stuff of raw magic. The spellcasters of the Forgotten Realms call it the Weave and recognize its essence as the goddess Mystra, but casters have varied ways of naming and visualizing this interface. By any name, without the Weave, raw magic is locked away and inaccessible; the most powerful archmage can't light a candle with magic in an area where the Weave has been torn. But surrounded by the Weave, a spellcaster can shape lightning to blast foes, transport hundreds of miles in the blink of an eye, or even reverse death itself.

All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding---learned or intuitive---of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power---gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath.

Whenever a magic effect is created, the threads of the Weave intertwine, twist, and fold to make the effect possible. When characters use divination spells such as detect magic or identify, they glimpse the Weave. A spell such as dispel magic smooths the Weave. Spells such as antimagic field rearrange the Weave so that magic fiows around, rather than through, the area affected by the spell. And in places where the Weave is damaged or torn, magic works in unpredictable ways---or not at all.

Edit: Very good magobabble. I love it.

[King of Nowhere]

Fluff tends to be different according to the table.
I treat magic as a sort of physics-altering radiation

[RedMage125]

I, for one, do not find that the old "casting all but the last bits" of a spell to be in conflict with 3e and up at all, and I've always used such. Well, perhaps 4e was an exception, but ALL magic worked differently there.

As far as Magical Theory, one of the things I use is that Bard magic is different from Sorcerer or Warlock magic drastically. Bards tap into the Echoes Of Creation, the lingering effects of the sounds of the world, and magic itself, being formed. Some Bards claim it was "sung" into existence, others perceive these echoes as the tones that the creation created, like the high-pitched ping of a drop of water striking a pond in a cave. At any rate, it is these echoes that Bards learn to tap in to, attune to, and replicate to a degree. The Seeker of the Song Prestige class in 3.5e was a great example of this, as they learn to more precisely replicate the actual forces and energies of that creation, instead of using those echoes to create distinct spell effects. These echoes are still dependent on "the Weave" (as Forgotten Realms terms it, in any other setting this would just be the flow of magic throughout the multiverse) in order to bring the effect into existence.

Other arcane casters also tap into the Weave. The best explanation for HOW they do it is to compare it to kids in school taking a test. Let's use a math test for the analogy. Wizards are the kids that studied the material and know to get the right answer by following the correct steps. Sorcerers just "know" the answers. They go by some instinct, natural knack for the material, and they can get the exact same answers as wizards, but cannot show their work, even for incredibly complex equations. Warlocks...they cheat. They made a shady deal in a back alley, and someone gave them the answers to the test. Some of the answers anyway.

Divine Magic uses the Weave to work, but the source for the knowledge of it, to include the proper incantations/hand movements, comes from an external source. For Clerics, this is easy. They either get it from an actual divine being of intelligence (a deity), or from the collective unconscious of all those who share similar beliefs (for deity-less Clerics, and the Clerics of quasi-agnostic settings like Eberron). Druids sometimes worship Nature Deities, and for them, their magic works like Clerics' does. Most druids, however, revere Nature as a force in and of itself. The same principle of the Collective Unconscious grants them the knowledge of their magic, too. This comes from other Druids, Fey, Primal Spirits, and even knowledge stored in the very bones of the earth, latent and waiting to be tapped. Rangers tap into this in the exact same manner.

Paladins also tap into the Collective Unconscious of Belief, for the actual knowledge of their spells, but the various editions of D&D have changed what a Paladin even is so much that it requires an edition-by-edition breakdown. Pre-3e paladins: Get their powers, to include their spells, from a devotion to righteousness. As we know that Good/Evil/Law/Chaos are observable, quantifiable, dispassionate cosmic forces in D&D, it is through alignment with the forces of Law and Good that the paladin receives her powers. The immunities, auras, and lay-on-hands powers are no different than the spells in that regard. If they ever strayed from alignment with the forces of Law and Good, to include even one act of intentionally committed evil, they lost the communion with those forces that granted them the powers. 3.x Paladins actually worked the same way, but COULD also get their powers and spells from a deity, much like a cleric. It is a common misconception that 3e Paladins got their powers from gods, I blame the 3.0 supplement Defenders of the Faith. 4e Paladins got their powers from the rituals that invested them as Paladins, same way Clerics worked in 4e. 5e Paladins, now that's a clincher, as they SEEM to be more in common with their pre-4e ancestors, but with no alignment restriction. From all appearances, it would seem that their Devotion to their Oath is what grants them their power. And the knowledge of spells likewise comes from a connection to that ephemeral Collective Unconscious shared by those with the same beliefs.

The Collective Unconscious Of Shared Belief is, by the way, why divine spellcasters of the same class all have the same spell lists. It's kind of based in Jungian principles and theories, but it perfectly explains how a Cleric can choose from ANY Cleric spell EVER when choosing his daily spell allotment.

[Max_Killjoy]

As you almost certainly already know, Vancian magic is named after the magic system found in Jack Vance’s Dying Earth novels. There’s no evidence, however, that Gygax and Arenson based their magic system directly off the books.

Depending on whether one believes Gygax on the matter...

http://www.dyingearth.com/files/GARY...CK%20VANCE.pdf

[Millstone85]

snip

This collective unconscious can be found on two levels.

First, all the inhabitants of a given world are connected by the portion of the Weave that surrounds that world. You may call it the World Wide Weave.

Then, on a cosmic scale, the Outer Planes are ideas so powerful they became places. Gods carve realms for themselves within those planes, but so can philosophies manifest as specific locations. For example, a 5e paladin could visit a monument adorned with statues and reliefs of all who swore their oath. Note that oaths have clear alignments (LG Devotion, NG Ancients...) even if paladins do not have to be an exact match.

[JeenLeen]

Here is more recent magobabble.

Spoiler: 5e PHB p205, The Weave of Magic

Show

The worlds within the D&D multiverse are magical places. All existence is suffused with magical power, and potential energy lies untapped in every rock, stream, and living creature, and even in the air itself. Raw magic is the stuff of creation, the mute and mindless will of existence, permeating every bit of matter and present in every manifestation of energy throughout the multiverse.

Mortals can't directly shape this raw magic. Instead, they make use of a fabric of magic, a kind of interface between the will of a spellcaster and the stuff of raw magic. The spellcasters of the Forgotten Realms call it the Weave and recognize its essence as the goddess Mystra, but casters have varied ways of naming and visualizing this interface. By any name, without the Weave, raw magic is locked away and inaccessible; the most powerful archmage can't light a candle with magic in an area where the Weave has been torn. But surrounded by the Weave, a spellcaster can shape lightning to blast foes, transport hundreds of miles in the blink of an eye, or even reverse death itself.

All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding---learned or intuitive---of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power---gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath.

Whenever a magic effect is created, the threads of the Weave intertwine, twist, and fold to make the effect possible. When characters use divination spells such as detect magic or identify, they glimpse the Weave. A spell such as dispel magic smooths the Weave. Spells such as antimagic field rearrange the Weave so that magic fiows around, rather than through, the area affected by the spell. And in places where the Weave is damaged or torn, magic works in unpredictable ways---or not at all.

I really like the flavor and metaphysics that 5th edition sets out. It's enough to have some relatively hard metaphysical basis to understand magic through, but it openly states that the understanding in a given setting (which translates well to table) could vary drastically. It's not even necessarily known to the PCs or NPCs about how divine and arcane magic are really the same, but really they are: just how you access it changes.

I know you say to avoid editions, but this metaphysics for 5th edition seems to set a standard for 5th edition that over editions (I'm guessing) do not have. Some settings in them might, but it is not a universal metaphysical statement for the game.

I'll also note that I like, and find reasonable, the Vancian idea of "prepping a spell" up to its final triggering event. But I'm fine with other justifications for the mechanics.

---

All that said, I'd agree that since those metaphysics are not necessarily known, their impact on the setting(s) is pretty minor. You could refluff without impacting anything, and it doesn't necessarily flavor the way magic happens for the PCs. So I get your argument. I think it's part of D&D being thematically and mechanically geared mostly towards combat and being crunchy mechanics-wise. The fluff usually is secondary to the mechanics, and you need your spells to do what they should.

Also, since D&D is a somewhat setting-agnostic game -- that is, you can plug it into most any setting -- the metaphysics for magic need to be vague enough to fit multiple settings. 5e does that well, at least in my opinion, but, yeah, it can give a bland taste.

[Millstone85]

My bad. I like the word "magobabble" so much that I tend to forget it is derogatory.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

I really like the flavor and metaphysics that 5th edition sets out. It's enough to have some relatively hard metaphysical basis to understand magic through, but it openly states that the understanding in a given setting (which translates well to table) could vary drastically. It's not even necessarily known to the PCs or NPCs about how divine and arcane magic are really the same, but really they are: just how you access it changes.

Personally, I very much dislike the 5e retcon that spells use magical energy from the Prime and all settings have a Weave-like "interface" between spellcasters and raw magic.

1) Forgotten Realms is the highest-magic published setting for D&D and has a lot of unique forms of magic: Netherese 10th- to 12th-level spells, Elven High Magic, circle magic, rune magic, silver fire, spellfire, and many more. The explanation that FR has a high level of ambient magic that needs to be filtered through a Weave so a wizard doesn't nuke himself and the surrounding countryside when he tries to cast a cantrip is a good in-game justification for why magic differs between that setting and the rest.

2) If Mystra = Weave in FR, who embodies the Weave in other settings? If no one does, why don't they? Seems like it would be handy to be able to personally stop upstart mortals from wrecking things like Mystra does when she alters the rules of the Weave. If being part of the Weave is worse than not, for whatever reason, why is Mystra part of it and why wouldn't she try to extract it from herself since it seems to be a massive vulnerability and anything that happens to her screws over mortal casters.

Basically, having a Weave comes with a bunch of cosmological and philosophical ramifications that don't fit other settings at all, and the 5e designers obviously didn't consider any of those before making the blanket change.

3) Previous editions were very clear that magic draws upon other planes for their effects and the majority of their power, not ambient energy:

The triggering action draws power from some plane of the multiverse. Whether the spell is an abjuration conjuration, alteration, enchantment, or whatever, there is a flow of energy - first from the spell caster, then from some plane to the area magicked or enspelled by the caster. The energy flow is not from the caster per se, it is from the utterance of the sounds, each of which is charged with energy which is loosed when the proper formula and/or ritual is completed with their utterance. This power then taps the desired plane (whether or not the spell user has any idea of what or where it is) to cause the spell to function. It is much like plugging in a heater; the electrical outlet does not hold all of the electrical energy to cause the heater to function, but the wires leading from it, ultimately to the power station, bring the electricity to the desired location.
[...]
Release of word/sound-stored energy is not particularly debilitating to the spell caster, as he or she has gathered this energy over a course of time prior to the loosing of the power. It comes from outside the spell caster, not from his or her own vital essence. The power to activate even a first level spell would leave a spell caster weak and shaking if it were drawn from his or her personal energy, and a third level spell would most certainly totally drain the caster’s body of life!

The only example of a setting that explicitly uses magical energy from the Prime is Dark Sun, where instead of slowly accumulating tiny amounts of ambient energy and using that to trigger a larger flow from the planes, a caster uses massive amounts of ambient energy for everything all at once, and that obviously didn't go too well for Athas. Positing a universal Weave either means Dark Sun wouldn't exist or you have to explain why Athas in particular lacks a Weave beyond "The inventors of spellcasting were dumb and no one has ever noticed or looked for the Weave's existence in the past several millennia"--and for the latter, it's much harder to justify "Every caster in the multiverse relies on a Weave but is able to cast spells just fine when they end up on Athas" than "No caster in the multiverse relies on a Weave, unless they go to Toril in which case the Weave there is set up to be compatible with 'normal' magic.

Heck, FR itself has plenty of examples of non-Weave-using magic! The ancient Imaskari (and probably the Batrachi, though there's less information on them available) bypassed the Weave entirely to draw directly on other planes for power, the Weave isn't present in Maztica, Shou Lung, and other continents outside of Faerûn, and it doesn't extend to other planes either (except possibly divine realms and the Fugue Plain; the Avatar trilogy is a bit fuzzy on that). So the "universal" Weave isn't even universal in its home universe!

I know you say to avoid editions, but this metaphysics for 5th edition seems to set a standard for 5th edition that over editions (I'm guessing) do not have. Some settings in them might, but it is not a universal metaphysical statement for the game.

Previous editions do have overarching magical metaphysics (which generally aligned from 1e through 3e aside from some terminology changes), they just weren't laid out in a single "How does magic work?" blurb in the PHB in any prior edition. The explanations were implicit in most player-facing books and explicit ones (like the one I partially quoted above) were scattered through the DMG and magic-specific books like the Tome of Magic.

[Millstone85]

The only example of a setting that explicitly uses magical energy from the Prime is Dark Sun, where instead of slowly accumulating tiny amounts of ambient energy and using that to trigger a larger flow from the planes, a caster uses massive amounts of ambient energy for everything all at once, and that obviously didn't go too well for Athas.

Nothing in the 5e sidebar says that you have to tap only on the raw magic of your immediate surroundings, or that you can't reach to other planes. This could be unique to Athas, either because of the local properties of the Weave or because of the Athasian approach to spellcasting.

[Max_Killjoy]

Here is more recent magobabble.

Spoiler: 5e PHB p205, The Weave of Magic

Show

The worlds within the D&D multiverse are magical places. All existence is suffused with magical power, and potential energy lies untapped in every rock, stream, and living creature, and even in the air itself. Raw magic is the stuff of creation, the mute and mindless will of existence, permeating every bit of matter and present in every manifestation of energy throughout the multiverse.

Mortals can't directly shape this raw magic. Instead, they make use of a fabric of magic, a kind of interface between the will of a spellcaster and the stuff of raw magic. The spellcasters of the Forgotten Realms call it the Weave and recognize its essence as the goddess Mystra, but casters have varied ways of naming and visualizing this interface. By any name, without the Weave, raw magic is locked away and inaccessible; the most powerful archmage can't light a candle with magic in an area where the Weave has been torn. But surrounded by the Weave, a spellcaster can shape lightning to blast foes, transport hundreds of miles in the blink of an eye, or even reverse death itself.

All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards, warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane magic. These spells rely on an understanding---learned or intuitive---of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are called divine magic. These spellcasters' access to the Weave is mediated by divine power---gods, the divine forces of nature, or the sacred weight of a paladin's oath.

Whenever a magic effect is created, the threads of the Weave intertwine, twist, and fold to make the effect possible. When characters use divination spells such as detect magic or identify, they glimpse the Weave. A spell such as dispel magic smooths the Weave. Spells such as antimagic field rearrange the Weave so that magic fiows around, rather than through, the area affected by the spell. And in places where the Weave is damaged or torn, magic works in unpredictable ways---or not at all.

Edit: Very good magobabble. I love it.

A glimpse at the underlying assumptions, I guess.

But on the other hand, it doesn't really seem to sync up with the spellcasting system very well. It appears to be just literal fluff that isn't really reflected in the mechanics of the game.

[Lord Raziere]

A glimpse at the underlying assumptions, I guess.

But on the other hand, it doesn't really seem to sync up with the spellcasting system very well. It appears to be just literal fluff that isn't really reflected in the mechanics of the game.

also it makes too much sense to be magibabble, it has a logic to it rather than stringing a bunch of magical sounding words together to ward off people asking questions.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I have a theory specifically built to reconcile the 5e PHB sidebar with the mechanics. I do not claim it is true, merely that it is useful (a more important judgement of a theory IMO).

Spoiler: Prolix Discussion

Show

In my opinion, this model and the resulting theory reconcile RAW and RAI (and answer a whole bunch more questions to boot). Whether or not it is a true model is irrelevant--it's a useful model that allows predictions.

Postulates
The resonance theory of magic and magical effects attempts to explain the differences between spells, spell-like effects, and those abilities that, while supernatural, are not affected by antimagic fields or similar effects. It relies on 5 postulates (assumptions and definitions). They are:

Postulate 1:
Surrounding and permeating all of reality is an ambient field of energy. This goes by different names (the Weave is the default in 5e)--for the purpose of this discussion I will call it the aether.

Discussion: While different areas have different concentrations, very few areas (dead magic zones) are completely lacking this energy.

Postulate 2:
Some individual creatures can concentrate this aether within themselves and use it in various ways. I will call this innate magic--any action that is impossible for a "normal" person in the setting is an example of innate magic.

Discussion: This includes such "non-magical" effects as a barbarian's Rage, a fighter's Action Surge, or a rogue's Evasion. Using these abilities sometimes temporarily exhausts the store of concentrated aether, requiring a period of rest (albeit small) before they can be re-used or limiting the number of successive uses. In other cases, the changes wrought by this innate magic are permanent and inexhaustible.

Postulate 3:
Some individuals (not necessarily the same as those in postulate 2) can manipulate aether by imposing a resonant pattern on it, using stored, quantized personal energy Call these resonant patterns spells and the personal energy spell slots.

Discussion: For minor effects or for very practiced casters, the energy needed to induce these resonances is small enough that it's not worth tracking in game mechanics. These are at-will spells (e.g. cantrips). Spell slots are quantized in non-integer ratios--a second-level slot is not exactly twice as big as a first-level slot and they cannot be spent in pieces--either an entire slot is spent or nothing at all. Up-casting a spell (casting it out of a higher level slot than the minimum required) pumps more energy into the resonance which, for some spells, heightens the effect. Certain spells require a measured release of energy into the resonant pattern--maintaining these requires concentration and the biological necessities that imposes, namely that only one spell or spell-like effect can be concentrated on at a time. Restoring spell slots generally is a slow process requiring sleep, as concentrating aether to refill these slots takes time and the soul's full attention. Practiced casters can sometimes hasten that charging process consciously. While different classes differ on how they learn the resonant patterns (and which ones they can learn), all spell slots are identical.

Postulate 4:
Enchanted items resonate with the aether in a similar manner to spells.

Discussion: The source of the energy used to induce this resonance varies--some from stored, concentrated aether (potions, items with charges), some from the wielder (items that are constant effect). Note that charged items seem to regain their charge only when attuned to an individual--otherwise they'd always be found at full charge. This is because they draw on the wielder's soul to concentrate aether. Some items (non-attunement items) only need to be wielded to operate (as their aether draw is de minimis).

Postulate 5:
Some abilities of innate magic manipulates the aether in a spell-like resonant fashion. This is often specified by using the name of the emulated spell in the description.

Discussion: Other innate magic does not operate against external aether but instead is used inwardly to enhance the body or exhaled in a burst of concentrated elemental force, like a dragon's breath.

Results
Given these postulates and definitions, spells and magical effects are those resonant manipulations of ambient magical energy. They're patterned, and may or may not be of extended duration or cover an extended area. The important thing is the resonant pattern. If that pattern is disrupted, the spell effect ceases (at least for that area).

Result 0: Spells do only what they say.
Fireball doesn't conjure a piece of elemental flame, doesn't heat the air to burning. It creates a resonant effect within the area of effect that creates the same end result. Ray of frost can't freeze a pool of water, because the cold isn't there. It's a resonant effect that fades once the energy disperses. Etc. These may or may not follow the usual laws of physics, but certainly one cannot import physical reasoning unless the spell specifies so. One also should not reference another spell to understand a given spell unless the first mentions the second specifically or by mentioning a larger group of spells (a school of magic, for example). Each spell's text stands alone and should be examined with only the general rules as certain reference.

Result 1a: Counterspell
Counterspell is a counter-resonant pattern. It's a momentary, localized noise burst that takes effect quickly, preventing the resonance from forming if successful. Higher power spells are harder to jam, thus requiring either skill (spell-casting ability check) or more raw power (a higher level spell slot) to counter.

Result 1b: Counterspell and non-spell effects
Counterspell only works on actively-produced resonant effects (i.e. spells) as they're taking shape. You can't counterspell a dragon's breath weapon. That's not a resonant effect. You also can't counterspell an existing effect. That's what Dispel Magic is for.

Result 2a: Antimagic Field
Antimagic Field creates a persistent cancelation field. Any effect that requires a sustained resonance (like fireball, or a magic item) to function is suppressed since the resonance cannot take place within that area. One way of thinking about it is an adaptive damping field (like active noise cancellation) that imposes a pattern that is the inverse of the attempted resonant pattern (effect). This is both complex and requires high power, so it's an 8th level spell that has a limited reach.

Result 2b: Antimagic Fields and innate magic
Innate magic (like non-spell ki, or a dragon's flight, or a dragon's breath) does not require a resonance pattern. Thus it is unaffected by an antimagic field (since damping resonance does nothing against a purely physical, natural effect such as ki-fueled punches. The punches are not resonant, nor is there resonance involved in throwing the extra punch (flurry of blows). The monk is drawing against personal energy to temporarily exceed the normal limits of his body. Dragons keep flying (and breathing) and their breath still works (since the conversion is wild and non-resonant). Barbarians can rage just fine--while this draws on innate magic (because it's not possible for a "normal" person), it is not a patterned effect.

Result 3: Dispel Magic
This is counterspell, except for existing spells and their effects. This pattern disrupts the resonance of stable spells, causing them to end early. It has no effect on innate magic, since it only affects resonance effects.

Result 4: Detect Magic
This spell does not specify what qualifies as "magic" to be detected. Certainly active spell effects and enchanted items should count (by common usage, if nothing else). If it detects all magic, then everything should light up--the aether is all around and through everything after all. That's absurd on the face, so it must be less than that. So what is it? In this DM's opinion, it should only detect organized, resonant magical effects--items and spells. Since I'm generous, I'll even allow the detection of residues--the after-effects of a major spell or ritual. But that's not clear from the text and so remains an open question.

Edit: The sidebar (The Weave of Magic, PHB page 205) clarifies that detect magic looks at the ambient field looking for active effects. So this confirms the theory--spells and "magical effects" are all active resonances in the ambient magical field (the weave, the aether, whatever you might call it).

[JeenLeen]

I have a theory specifically built to reconcile the 5e PHB sidebar with the mechanics. I do not claim it is true, merely that it is useful (a more important judgement of a theory IMO).
<snip>

I love how, if you port this back into 3.5 where you have Ex, Sp, and Su abilities, it allows those to be justified in-setting in a way how Ex abilities are 'supernatural', but not in a way they get cancelled out by stuff like Sp and Su abilities are.

It also reinforces that mundanes can do really cool and reality-breaking stuff despite not being 'magic-users', since they are using magic (in a sense). Just not spells.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I love how, if you port this back into 3.5 where you have Ex, Sp, and Su abilities, it allows those to be justified in-setting in a way how Ex abilities are 'supernatural', but not in a way they get cancelled out by stuff like Sp and Su abilities are.

It also reinforces that mundanes can do really cool and reality-breaking stuff despite not being 'magic-users', since they are using magic (in a sense). Just not spells.

That last part was a major impetus for this theory. I wanted to explain that in a fantastic world, things are fantastic, not bound by RL demands. But do so coherently with explaining spells.

Glad you liked it.

[Max_Killjoy]

I have a theory specifically built to reconcile the 5e PHB sidebar with the mechanics. I do not claim it is true, merely that it is useful (a more important judgement of a theory IMO).

Spoiler: Prolix Discussion

Show

In my opinion, this model and the resulting theory reconcile RAW and RAI (and answer a whole bunch more questions to boot). Whether or not it is a true model is irrelevant--it's a useful model that allows predictions.

Postulates
The resonance theory of magic and magical effects attempts to explain the differences between spells, spell-like effects, and those abilities that, while supernatural, are not affected by antimagic fields or similar effects. It relies on 5 postulates (assumptions and definitions). They are:

Postulate 1:
Surrounding and permeating all of reality is an ambient field of energy. This goes by different names (the Weave is the default in 5e)--for the purpose of this discussion I will call it the aether.

Discussion: While different areas have different concentrations, very few areas (dead magic zones) are completely lacking this energy.

Postulate 2:
Some individual creatures can concentrate this aether within themselves and use it in various ways. I will call this innate magic--any action that is impossible for a "normal" person in the setting is an example of innate magic.

Discussion: This includes such "non-magical" effects as a barbarian's Rage, a fighter's Action Surge, or a rogue's Evasion. Using these abilities sometimes temporarily exhausts the store of concentrated aether, requiring a period of rest (albeit small) before they can be re-used or limiting the number of successive uses. In other cases, the changes wrought by this innate magic are permanent and inexhaustible.

Postulate 3:
Some individuals (not necessarily the same as those in postulate 2) can manipulate aether by imposing a resonant pattern on it, using stored, quantized personal energy Call these resonant patterns spells and the personal energy spell slots.

Discussion: For minor effects or for very practiced casters, the energy needed to induce these resonances is small enough that it's not worth tracking in game mechanics. These are at-will spells (e.g. cantrips). Spell slots are quantized in non-integer ratios--a second-level slot is not exactly twice as big as a first-level slot and they cannot be spent in pieces--either an entire slot is spent or nothing at all. Up-casting a spell (casting it out of a higher level slot than the minimum required) pumps more energy into the resonance which, for some spells, heightens the effect. Certain spells require a measured release of energy into the resonant pattern--maintaining these requires concentration and the biological necessities that imposes, namely that only one spell or spell-like effect can be concentrated on at a time. Restoring spell slots generally is a slow process requiring sleep, as concentrating aether to refill these slots takes time and the soul's full attention. Practiced casters can sometimes hasten that charging process consciously. While different classes differ on how they learn the resonant patterns (and which ones they can learn), all spell slots are identical.

Postulate 4:
Enchanted items resonate with the aether in a similar manner to spells.

Discussion: The source of the energy used to induce this resonance varies--some from stored, concentrated aether (potions, items with charges), some from the wielder (items that are constant effect). Note that charged items seem to regain their charge only when attuned to an individual--otherwise they'd always be found at full charge. This is because they draw on the wielder's soul to concentrate aether. Some items (non-attunement items) only need to be wielded to operate (as their aether draw is de minimis).

Postulate 5:
Some abilities of innate magic manipulates the aether in a spell-like resonant fashion. This is often specified by using the name of the emulated spell in the description.

Discussion: Other innate magic does not operate against external aether but instead is used inwardly to enhance the body or exhaled in a burst of concentrated elemental force, like a dragon's breath.

Results
Given these postulates and definitions, spells and magical effects are those resonant manipulations of ambient magical energy. They're patterned, and may or may not be of extended duration or cover an extended area. The important thing is the resonant pattern. If that pattern is disrupted, the spell effect ceases (at least for that area).

Result 0: Spells do only what they say.
Fireball doesn't conjure a piece of elemental flame, doesn't heat the air to burning. It creates a resonant effect within the area of effect that creates the same end result. Ray of frost can't freeze a pool of water, because the cold isn't there. It's a resonant effect that fades once the energy disperses. Etc. These may or may not follow the usual laws of physics, but certainly one cannot import physical reasoning unless the spell specifies so. One also should not reference another spell to understand a given spell unless the first mentions the second specifically or by mentioning a larger group of spells (a school of magic, for example). Each spell's text stands alone and should be examined with only the general rules as certain reference.

Result 1a: Counterspell
Counterspell is a counter-resonant pattern. It's a momentary, localized noise burst that takes effect quickly, preventing the resonance from forming if successful. Higher power spells are harder to jam, thus requiring either skill (spell-casting ability check) or more raw power (a higher level spell slot) to counter.

Result 1b: Counterspell and non-spell effects
Counterspell only works on actively-produced resonant effects (i.e. spells) as they're taking shape. You can't counterspell a dragon's breath weapon. That's not a resonant effect. You also can't counterspell an existing effect. That's what Dispel Magic is for.

Result 2a: Antimagic Field
Antimagic Field creates a persistent cancelation field. Any effect that requires a sustained resonance (like fireball, or a magic item) to function is suppressed since the resonance cannot take place within that area. One way of thinking about it is an adaptive damping field (like active noise cancellation) that imposes a pattern that is the inverse of the attempted resonant pattern (effect). This is both complex and requires high power, so it's an 8th level spell that has a limited reach.

Result 2b: Antimagic Fields and innate magic
Innate magic (like non-spell ki, or a dragon's flight, or a dragon's breath) does not require a resonance pattern. Thus it is unaffected by an antimagic field (since damping resonance does nothing against a purely physical, natural effect such as ki-fueled punches. The punches are not resonant, nor is there resonance involved in throwing the extra punch (flurry of blows). The monk is drawing against personal energy to temporarily exceed the normal limits of his body. Dragons keep flying (and breathing) and their breath still works (since the conversion is wild and non-resonant). Barbarians can rage just fine--while this draws on innate magic (because it's not possible for a "normal" person), it is not a patterned effect.

Result 3: Dispel Magic
This is counterspell, except for existing spells and their effects. This pattern disrupts the resonance of stable spells, causing them to end early. It has no effect on innate magic, since it only affects resonance effects.

Result 4: Detect Magic
This spell does not specify what qualifies as "magic" to be detected. Certainly active spell effects and enchanted items should count (by common usage, if nothing else). If it detects all magic, then everything should light up--the aether is all around and through everything after all. That's absurd on the face, so it must be less than that. So what is it? In this DM's opinion, it should only detect organized, resonant magical effects--items and spells. Since I'm generous, I'll even allow the detection of residues--the after-effects of a major spell or ritual. But that's not clear from the text and so remains an open question.

Edit: The sidebar (The Weave of Magic, PHB page 205) clarifies that detect magic looks at the ambient field looking for active effects. So this confirms the theory--spells and "magical effects" are all active resonances in the ambient magical field (the weave, the aether, whatever you might call it).

I do think this is great, and for making the overall mechanics for spells and other "magical" and more broadly fantastic effects of 3x or 5e synchronous with the setting and "fiction layer" it's probably the best I've seen.

[Psyren]

I have a theory specifically built to reconcile the 5e PHB sidebar with the mechanics. I do not claim it is true, merely that it is useful (a more important judgement of a theory IMO).

Spoiler: Prolix Discussion

Show

In my opinion, this model and the resulting theory reconcile RAW and RAI (and answer a whole bunch more questions to boot). Whether or not it is a true model is irrelevant--it's a useful model that allows predictions.

Postulates
The resonance theory of magic and magical effects attempts to explain the differences between spells, spell-like effects, and those abilities that, while supernatural, are not affected by antimagic fields or similar effects. It relies on 5 postulates (assumptions and definitions). They are:

Postulate 1:
Surrounding and permeating all of reality is an ambient field of energy. This goes by different names (the Weave is the default in 5e)--for the purpose of this discussion I will call it the aether.

Discussion: While different areas have different concentrations, very few areas (dead magic zones) are completely lacking this energy.

Postulate 2:
Some individual creatures can concentrate this aether within themselves and use it in various ways. I will call this innate magic--any action that is impossible for a "normal" person in the setting is an example of innate magic.

Discussion: This includes such "non-magical" effects as a barbarian's Rage, a fighter's Action Surge, or a rogue's Evasion. Using these abilities sometimes temporarily exhausts the store of concentrated aether, requiring a period of rest (albeit small) before they can be re-used or limiting the number of successive uses. In other cases, the changes wrought by this innate magic are permanent and inexhaustible.

Postulate 3:
Some individuals (not necessarily the same as those in postulate 2) can manipulate aether by imposing a resonant pattern on it, using stored, quantized personal energy Call these resonant patterns spells and the personal energy spell slots.

Discussion: For minor effects or for very practiced casters, the energy needed to induce these resonances is small enough that it's not worth tracking in game mechanics. These are at-will spells (e.g. cantrips). Spell slots are quantized in non-integer ratios--a second-level slot is not exactly twice as big as a first-level slot and they cannot be spent in pieces--either an entire slot is spent or nothing at all. Up-casting a spell (casting it out of a higher level slot than the minimum required) pumps more energy into the resonance which, for some spells, heightens the effect. Certain spells require a measured release of energy into the resonant pattern--maintaining these requires concentration and the biological necessities that imposes, namely that only one spell or spell-like effect can be concentrated on at a time. Restoring spell slots generally is a slow process requiring sleep, as concentrating aether to refill these slots takes time and the soul's full attention. Practiced casters can sometimes hasten that charging process consciously. While different classes differ on how they learn the resonant patterns (and which ones they can learn), all spell slots are identical.

Postulate 4:
Enchanted items resonate with the aether in a similar manner to spells.

Discussion: The source of the energy used to induce this resonance varies--some from stored, concentrated aether (potions, items with charges), some from the wielder (items that are constant effect). Note that charged items seem to regain their charge only when attuned to an individual--otherwise they'd always be found at full charge. This is because they draw on the wielder's soul to concentrate aether. Some items (non-attunement items) only need to be wielded to operate (as their aether draw is de minimis).

Postulate 5:
Some abilities of innate magic manipulates the aether in a spell-like resonant fashion. This is often specified by using the name of the emulated spell in the description.

Discussion: Other innate magic does not operate against external aether but instead is used inwardly to enhance the body or exhaled in a burst of concentrated elemental force, like a dragon's breath.

Results
Given these postulates and definitions, spells and magical effects are those resonant manipulations of ambient magical energy. They're patterned, and may or may not be of extended duration or cover an extended area. The important thing is the resonant pattern. If that pattern is disrupted, the spell effect ceases (at least for that area).

Result 0: Spells do only what they say.
Fireball doesn't conjure a piece of elemental flame, doesn't heat the air to burning. It creates a resonant effect within the area of effect that creates the same end result. Ray of frost can't freeze a pool of water, because the cold isn't there. It's a resonant effect that fades once the energy disperses. Etc. These may or may not follow the usual laws of physics, but certainly one cannot import physical reasoning unless the spell specifies so. One also should not reference another spell to understand a given spell unless the first mentions the second specifically or by mentioning a larger group of spells (a school of magic, for example). Each spell's text stands alone and should be examined with only the general rules as certain reference.

Result 1a: Counterspell
Counterspell is a counter-resonant pattern. It's a momentary, localized noise burst that takes effect quickly, preventing the resonance from forming if successful. Higher power spells are harder to jam, thus requiring either skill (spell-casting ability check) or more raw power (a higher level spell slot) to counter.

Result 1b: Counterspell and non-spell effects
Counterspell only works on actively-produced resonant effects (i.e. spells) as they're taking shape. You can't counterspell a dragon's breath weapon. That's not a resonant effect. You also can't counterspell an existing effect. That's what Dispel Magic is for.

Result 2a: Antimagic Field
Antimagic Field creates a persistent cancelation field. Any effect that requires a sustained resonance (like fireball, or a magic item) to function is suppressed since the resonance cannot take place within that area. One way of thinking about it is an adaptive damping field (like active noise cancellation) that imposes a pattern that is the inverse of the attempted resonant pattern (effect). This is both complex and requires high power, so it's an 8th level spell that has a limited reach.

Result 2b: Antimagic Fields and innate magic
Innate magic (like non-spell ki, or a dragon's flight, or a dragon's breath) does not require a resonance pattern. Thus it is unaffected by an antimagic field (since damping resonance does nothing against a purely physical, natural effect such as ki-fueled punches. The punches are not resonant, nor is there resonance involved in throwing the extra punch (flurry of blows). The monk is drawing against personal energy to temporarily exceed the normal limits of his body. Dragons keep flying (and breathing) and their breath still works (since the conversion is wild and non-resonant). Barbarians can rage just fine--while this draws on innate magic (because it's not possible for a "normal" person), it is not a patterned effect.

Result 3: Dispel Magic
This is counterspell, except for existing spells and their effects. This pattern disrupts the resonance of stable spells, causing them to end early. It has no effect on innate magic, since it only affects resonance effects.

Result 4: Detect Magic
This spell does not specify what qualifies as "magic" to be detected. Certainly active spell effects and enchanted items should count (by common usage, if nothing else). If it detects all magic, then everything should light up--the aether is all around and through everything after all. That's absurd on the face, so it must be less than that. So what is it? In this DM's opinion, it should only detect organized, resonant magical effects--items and spells. Since I'm generous, I'll even allow the detection of residues--the after-effects of a major spell or ritual. But that's not clear from the text and so remains an open question.

Edit: The sidebar (The Weave of Magic, PHB page 205) clarifies that detect magic looks at the ambient field looking for active effects. So this confirms the theory--spells and "magical effects" are all active resonances in the ambient magical field (the weave, the aether, whatever you might call it).

For postulate 2, I don't see why having limited uses per day means something has to be magic. I'm not as close to 5e, but I'm pretty sure a barbarian's rage or a rogue's evasion can be used in a dead magic zone even in that edition, so they are most certainly not magic of any kind.

Rather, I would say that they require a mental or emotional state that has limited uses before resting, and the same sort of rest that lets one recover rage is the one that can allow a magic-user to recover their spellcasting allotment.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I do think this is great, and for making the overall mechanics for spells and other "magical" and more broadly fantastic effects of 3x or 5e synchronous with the setting and "fiction layer" it's probably the best I've seen.

Coming from you, that's high praise indeed.

One additional thing the theory does (IMO) is separate the casting of spells from the learning of spells. It allows wizards to figure out the patterns for some spells through study, while druids have them whispered in their ears by nature spirits and clerics download them from celestial file-sharing sites. Sorcerers have them "genetically" encoded, while warlocks get them from a Patron. Etc.

For postulate 2, I don't see why having limited uses per day means something has to be magic. I'm not as close to 5e, but I'm pretty sure a barbarian's rage or a rogue's evasion can be used in a dead magic zone even in that edition, so they are most certainly not magic of any kind.

Rather, I would say that they require a mental or emotional state that has limited uses before resting, and the same sort of rest that lets one recover rage is the one that can allow a magic-user to recover their spellcasting allotment.

I don't personally believe that dead magic zones are really what they say they are. And the theory itself does not require that internal magic be unusable there, merely that you cannot draw in or affect external aether in those regions (because there isn't enough to affect in a meaningful way). So a barbarian with rage "charges" left already has the energy inside of him and can rage as normal. Rogues and evasion is an example of a permanent change due to internal magic.

For the purposes of this theory, "magic" is identical to "things not possible on Earth." As a result, it includes all what 3e would call EX, SU, and SL effects. Is someone hulking out (ie rage) possible on Earth? Not really. Is dodging an explosion centered on you while in the middle of an open, featureless plain possible on Earth? Not a chance. But it's something rogues can do multiple times in 6 seconds for an entire day.

[Willie the Duck]

A glimpse at the underlying assumptions, I guess.

But on the other hand, it doesn't really seem to sync up with the spellcasting system very well. It appears to be just literal fluff that isn't really reflected in the mechanics of the game.

also it makes too much sense to be magibabble, it has a logic to it rather than stringing a bunch of magical sounding words together to ward off people asking questions.

I suspect the underlying (Doylist) explanation is that the designers want a justification, but want DMs who want to modify it to feel they have free reign to do so (not allowance, since that's well established as DM/group preview, but the sense that they can without anything falling apart).

[Max_Killjoy]

I suspect the underlying (Doylist) explanation is that the designers want a justification, but want DMs who want to modify it to feel they have free reign to do so (not allowance, since that's well established as DM/group preview, but the sense that they can without anything falling apart).

I just find that so unsatisfying. The combination of knowing what the underlying "theory" is, and having a mechanical system that suits and syncs with the "theory", makes it so much easier for the players and GM to be on the same page and avoid at least some dispute, and for the GM to expand on what exists, adjudicate on the fly, etc.

[Psyren]

I don't personally believe that dead magic zones are really what they say they are. And the theory itself does not require that internal magic be unusable there, merely that you cannot draw in or affect external aether in those regions (because there isn't enough to affect in a meaningful way). So a barbarian with rage "charges" left already has the energy inside of him and can rage as normal. Rogues and evasion is an example of a permanent change due to internal magic.

For the purposes of this theory, "magic" is identical to "things not possible on Earth." As a result, it includes all what 3e would call EX, SU, and SL effects. Is someone hulking out (ie rage) possible on Earth? Not really. Is dodging an explosion centered on you while in the middle of an open, featureless plain possible on Earth? Not a chance. But it's something rogues can do multiple times in 6 seconds for an entire day.

I get what you're saying, but then I question calling such abilities "magic" at all. After all, you can't detect them with detect magic, can't cancel them with dispel magic, can't suppress them with antimagic field, etc. You're correct that they're not "normal" either, but I still like the idea of them having their own category, to explain why stuff that interacts with Su and SLAs (like the list I mentioned here) don't apply to them.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I get what you're saying, but then I question calling such abilities "magic" at all. After all, you can't detect them with detect magic, can't cancel them with dispel magic, can't suppress them with antimagic field, etc. You're correct that they're not "normal" either, but I still like the idea of them having their own category, to explain why stuff that interacts with Su and SLAs (like the list I mentioned here) don't apply to them.

My current default name for such abilities is "fantastic" abilities. To be more precise, "magic" is a subset of "fantastic". And i discussed why you can't use antimagic field or dispel/detect magic on such abilities--since they're not coherent resonances, there's nothing to disrupt unless you can literally remove the aether from the person entirely. And that would kill them.

Thus, the set of "can be disrupted by antimagic effects" == "set of coherent resonance effects".

The point is to emphasize that even the "non-magical" people are fantastic--they go well beyond what we are capable of on Earth and that's normal for them. It's an attempt to dispel the (to me) false dichotomy between mundane and magic, saying that only spell-casting counts as magic and thus everyone else must be exactly only capable of what's capable on Earth. Which denies the whole point of being in a fantastic realm. I strongly dislike the idea of a world "just like Earth, but with spells stapled on top." It does violence to both real life and to magic, while falling quite short of properly integrating the fantastic. As well, it doesn't describe D&D worlds at all. They're not the real world with a veneer of magic--they're "magic" (fantasticness) to the core.

[Thrudd]

The question of D&D magic theory is editionless, because to get stuck on one edition: that way lies dragons. Worse, starting in 3E D&D has made a huge push to be a near pure mecahnical combat game. You don't ask about magic theory after 3E, you just rol a d20 in combat allready.

From 1E we get: each spell has a point at which it can be "paused". So that means that each spell is actually a ritual by default, and that the wizard actually casts 99% percent of each spell, repeating it for each copy of it they cast. They leave out the last few motions so that the spell can be finished, its effect taking place. The spell slots represent the wizard's inner power, their ability to take the mental stress of the arcane equivalent of an inert bomb, to keep their spell paused until they wish to cast it.
...

So just to be clear, I'm not talking about mechanics. I'm talking more about Magic Theory. Fluff. It does have all sorts of role playing applications in game play, but no mechancal ones.

You have to consider edition in trying to explain the magic, because there are major differences in the editions, it's not just 4e vs everything else.

Also, you quoted the 3e PHB and seemed to be implying that this was the 1e explanation for things. Sorcerers in 3e and later throw off the entire magic system such that it requires significant additional explanation, which they really fail to do. Any theory needs to specify what edition it is for.


Mechanics should match the fluff. If they don't, you need to fix it. Like PhoenixPhyre did for his 5e setting.

There isn't a single explanation for D&D magic, it varies from setting to setting, and each setting varies in the degree to which its fluff is reflected in the mechanics. The best plan is to look at the edition you want to use, and build a fluff/theory that explains why it works that way for your own setting. Or, design a theory and then homebrew a magic system or adapt one of the variants that have been presented over the years in the various D&D editions to match how you think magic ought to work (some people replace all magic with 3e style psionics, or incarnum, or spell points, or whatever).

[Willie the Duck]

I just find that so unsatisfying. The combination of knowing what the underlying "theory" is, and having a mechanical system that suits and syncs with the "theory", makes it so much easier for the players and GM to be on the same page and avoid at least some dispute, and for the GM to expand on what exists, adjudicate on the fly, etc.

Maybe, but I understand how D&D, which is (regardless of what you, I, or the designers would like) the go-to for people who will take it and proceed to use it for whatever gameworld with whatever underlying theory they want, might kind of have to go that route.

Beyond that, regardless of how well a "theory" we make that explains D&D magic, the theory would be an after-the-fact justification. D&D magic works to facilitate the kind of adventuring people typically do in D&D games (with increasing interest in how it effects inter-class balance with each edition). Justifications are just that.

Honestly, D&D is not a great game for any pure theories. Ars Magicka, Mage: the Ascenscion/Awakening, Invisible Suns, all of those have some very strong theories which exist before the actual game implementation. D&D started out with 'we did some stuff that we thought would be fun' and has been back-justifying itself ever since.

I am aware that that's probably not the most satisfying of an answer.

[Psyren]

My current default name for such abilities is "fantastic" abilities. To be more precise, "magic" is a subset of "fantastic". And i discussed why you can't use antimagic field or dispel/detect magic on such abilities--since they're not coherent resonances, there's nothing to disrupt unless you can literally remove the aether from the person entirely. And that would kill them.

Thus, the set of "can be disrupted by antimagic effects" == "set of coherent resonance effects".

I get that, but it's not called "detect coherent resonance effect." It's a branding thing; but branding is important, because that's what leads to intuitive design. When D&D says "Ex abilities may defy physics, but they aren't magic" then the GM automatically knows that none of those effects apply, and they even intuitively grasp related rules like attacks of opportunity. "Ex abilities aren't coherent resonant effects" doesn't carry nearly the same snap utility, it's just complexity for it's own sake.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I get that, but it's not called "detect coherent resonance effect." It's a branding thing; but branding is important, because that's what leads to intuitive design. When D&D says "Ex abilities may defy physics, but they aren't magic" then the GM automatically knows that none of those effects apply, and they even intuitively grasp related rules like attacks of opportunity. "Ex abilities aren't coherent resonant effects" doesn't carry nearly the same snap utility, it's just complexity for it's own sake.

Note that I'm specifically describing 5e's magic system, which does not classify things as EX/SU/SL/etc. There is only "magic" and "not magic", but the sidebar is clear that even most of the "not magic" things depend on the background magic field, just differently than coherent effects such as spells.

There's lots of things that should be magical (by the common understanding) that detect magic/etc. don't do anything with, at least in 5e. For example, a dragon can breathe fire, a demon can use its tactical teleport, a paladin can smite, etc. in an antimagic field, and you can't dispel a succubus's charm effect.

There's this clarification (now part of the Sage Advice Compendium, so official clarification):

Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:
• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Does its description say it’s magical?

And dispel magic doesn't even hit all of those, as it only effects explicitly spells. So just using the names causes its own set of problems. My point was to figure out a reason why certain "magic" (by the common understanding) is affected by such anti-magic effects but most isn't.

The idea that they're coherent resonant effects and thus can be disrupted, just like any other resonance can be disrupted/jammed/damped out, is the key realization. Sure, if you want to call all things that aren't affected by antimagic field "fantastic abilities", nothing about the theory would change. Rename "innate magic" to "fantastic abilities" and you're good to go. The model (that you're working on internalized energy, used directly rather than through some form of pattern) stays the same.

[Psyren]

Gotcha - if it's explicitly for 5e, the theory may apply perfectly. I genuinely don't know enough to debate that.

It probably works for 4e too given that all of its power sources can do similar things.

[AMFV]

I suspect that the reason that D&D's "magic theory" is so sparse is that it's intended to be a generic system that can work in many different settings. Even in early D&D this was the case. Admittedly there are certain assumptions like Casting Cannot Be Done All Day and You have to prepare each spell for the amount of times you need it, sometimes, that would influence setting factors. But magic is pretty open-ended so that you can make it fit whatever you want in your setting. Once you start getting into the specific settings (Especially FR) you start getting a lot more specifics.

[Cluedrew]

Its me, that guy quoted in the first post. I still don't like D&D magic. I don't hate it either it can't seem to get such an extreme reaction from me. But to the topic itself.

To PhoenixPhyre: Of all the attempts to rescue D&D magic I have seen, yours is probably the best. But there are two pieces missing before I would call it a success. First, a detailed description of what each caster is actually doing during casting (and preparation as appropriate) and how this relates to the underlying theory. Not in a lot of detail, but more than "the wizard uses a spell book to implant spells in their mind", which is kind of like saying the construction worker uses tools to build a house. It is true yet I have no idea what is happening. But that is just a matter of work.

The second is the kicker: Spells do only what they say. I know how much spells say they do and it is unacceptably little*. Half the fire spells don't set things on fire, ice spells don't cool things down. And you talked about this, gave long roundabout explanations that come out to (to my ears, even if you didn't mean it this way) "shut up and don't do anything creative". Even worse you can't do anything creative to keep them in check. I mean I don't expect people to understand conductivity, but could I stand in a waterfall/dive into water to survive a fireball? No, because it will not interact with that as effectively as the air. So why bother?

And that is why, I still don't like D&D magic. And some other things, like the wizard always feels too general (but there are specialized classes that feel better in that regard) and the fact it overwhelms so many other things in the system. But those are different topics for a different thread.

* Not always, I would actually accept it in some of the in the shadow of a once great empire settings, where magic is more recovered than learned and too precious to waste on experimentation. But how many D&D settings is that now?