What's the problem with this?
No one would have magic...
That much is understandable.
No one would learn "Kill myself skill unless I manage to not die 100 times"-No-Jutsu
More like "Injure myself unless I know what the heck I'm doing."
As an analogy, imagine a demolitions expert. It's dangerous to learn, and if you don't know what you're doing you could easily kill yourself, but it's useful. Now imagine that explosives could do things other than destruction and murder.
Problem is, "learning" power like that doesn't make sense
Makes perfect sense. It is revealing the true nature of things and as such with that knowledge you gain what others do not which is the ability to manipulate it. Nothing more then complete knowledge of this will suffice.
In otherwords it is magic, actual magic. The context of real magic and not magic as a quasimechanical skill.
Well, that requires magic to be something that happens whenever someone does something instead of an actual force. The latter makes more sense. Also, even with that knowledge, you'd need to practice some to do it right or, alternatively, to not do it when you don't want to. Regardless, skill is useful.
Why is that?
Response as a quote
Why, not what. Also, you seem to be doing the exact same thing, so...
Sure, if magic is granted by gift. If it's meant to be studied to learn it...
Confused as to what you mean
If magic is given as a gift by a god, it makes total sense to not need to study to learn how to use a spell--although other learning may be in order if you're not expecting the god to intervene every time you need it done. On the other hand, if magic is independent of greater powers (e.g, arcane spellcasters in D&D, including the wizard which is pretty close to your idea of arcane magic, or mages in Shadowrun, which are even more so), you'd need more practice--not just to learn how to do the spell, but how to do it
right.
All the knowledge of true names in the universe won't help you if you if you can't use any kind of magic. You still need some learning, if only to make sure you don't accidentally use magic
Silly Rabit. The True Name "IS" magic. If you know the true name of a creature and you use it, you ARE using magic. There is no skill required no degree of skill required. You either know the true name or you do not.
Depends on the world. But, most of the time, while knowledge is power, you need power to back up the knowledge. Again, in D&D (I keep using that example because it's well-known, and more importantly because its rules are well-defined), you can know all the true names you like, but you can't do squat without a level of truenamer.
I've played some RPGs, and I don't remember any of them having new levels of a specific spell. New spells? Sure, but that's different that what I said
Necromancy isn't a spell. So the equivilant would be an entire magical system.
Necromancy is a single ability. It's pretty much a single spell--Animate Dead. Heck, it's
less versatile than the D&D spell of the same name, because you can only create one kind of undead. So yeah, it's basically a single spell. The only game in town? Sure. A whole school of magic? Not as it is now.
If your definiton of "magical" is "utterly inexplicable," sure
It is rather easy to understand. Though it is by far more philosophical then academic. Where the requirement is a true understanding rather then academic conjecture.
In otherwords Philosophy based magic rather then Science Based Magic.
It does require you to step outside the barriers created by modern living where philosophy is treated with such disrespect that useless is synominous is philosophy.
Where to understand a concept is to gain power by that concept and where true revelation is power. You can manipulate something you cannot understand with science magic because understanding is not required, you just need the basics and you are done.
In this form of magic which I shall dub Philosophy magic you need that understanding far beyond in order to make it function because it only functions through understanding and not through manipulation of disconnected details like science often does.
This has a major flaw, and I'm not talking about making pretty much every sentence a whole paragraph. I'm talking about how
absolutely nothing, not even actual philosophy or knowledge, works like that. You get better at everything. Why should magic be different?
Arcane magic is magic. You're assuming that current!necromancy is 1.0!necromancy, an annoying fallacy which is used almost everywhere
Read closer I am saying that as Necromancy currently is it actually manages to be more outright magical then science magic. Thus even if Science magic is added in I want Necromancy magic as it currently is to stay, possibly expanded, in the game somehow because it actually rounds out the game and provides a great system for the game to use.
How is necromancy not "Science Magic," if you're using
the definition I'm thinking of? It does the same thing, reliably, every time. And if that isn't what you mean by "science magic," what DO you mean?
Why? I can see a vampire knowing "I need to bite peoples' necks kinda like this," but not "Here's a way I can feed off a person to keep him alive even with a bit less blood," or "I need to remember to secrete that anesthesia before biting next time." The basics? Sure, those can be innate. The details? Not so much
A lot of that sounds like it should be either unconscious or just outright logic. If a Vampire cannot "keep someone alive" then it is another kind of skill outside of feeding. As well whether or not to use Anesthesia sounds unconscious and a vampire would do automatically.
Well, about the "keeping someone alive" thing: The idea is the same, you get better at something you already know how to do.
How to put it. If a skill caps out at Novice it isn't a skill or it is part of an aggregate of skills. "How do I bite?" caps at novice because once you got an idea it is done.
That's frankly a stupid idea, made stupider by the fact that there's already a skill for just that goes all the way from Dabbling to Legendary+n.
A "Vampire" skill I could imagine existing. It representing the knowledge and skill of just being a vampire. Yet it would still need to be expanded (which Vampires will eventually have, with elder vampires unlocking new abilities with age)
I don't think this would work well as a skill, or perhaps not as being restricted to vampires, depending on what you mean.
-----
I'd like to make something clear. I don't think that having some magic be granted to someone, requiring no study to use, is bad. I just expect natural consequences. The consequences can be divided up into three categories, based on how this "gift" works:
1. The "gift" requires merely a simple physical action to use (e.g, wave your hand at a corpse that you want to resurrect). This doesn't require any training to use, and can't really be improved, but you
do need to learn how not to use it when you don't want to--say, if you're greeting a comrade-at-arms in a fresh battlefield. Or if you're in a butcher's shop. Or...pretty much anywhere with dead stuff.
2. The "gift" requires a semi-elaborate ritual to use--e.g, special gestures or some mental exercises--to avert the above problem. There's a problem with this, too--if you haven't done it much (ie aren't skilled), you could mess it up; practice makes perfect, however. In addition, such a ritual is likely open for experimentation...
3. The "gift" relies on direct intervention from your deity of choice. No problems, but keep your god happy with you...
In case #1, skill represents
control. In case #2, skill represents pretty much what you're expecting. In case #3, no skill is needed, but having a god at your beck and call to perform a miracle for you just doesn't seem to fit DF.
Author
Topic: The guideline for magic/combat should be "how do i shot web". (Read 2430 times)