Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Absolutely

I dont know

No, its good as it is

[PlumpHelmetMan]

I mean, Toady has said he wants to support as many diverse forms of magic as possible so presumably his ideal involves a system with the ability to generate more folkloric-feeling magic as well, but the above is admittedly what he might have to settle for (at least in the short-term). I like D&D so I'm not complaining, but an eventual system able to support more than that would definitely be cool.

[Ninjabread]

My understanding was that a hard magic system is a system with consistent rules, costs, and effects. Would it not be soft systems that are more difficult to generate? Computers like rules and consistency.

As a side note, with the exception of the occasional spell/item here and there (primarily Wish), D&D is a pretty hard system. Spells have consistent casting rules (VSM, range, duration), costs (casting time, spell slots, consumed material components), and effects (though the actual strength of the spell may vary based on dice rolls).

[PlumpHelmetMan]

DF's magic would if anything probably have to be harder still (though with more randomization, as already established), since a story generated by a computer will probably never be as flexible as a story generated by a human brain. We'll just have to wait and see what we can get, I guess.

[Atarlost]

My understanding was that a hard magic system is a system with consistent rules, costs, and effects. Would it not be soft systems that are more difficult to generate? Computers like rules and consistency.

As a side note, with the exception of the occasional spell/item here and there (primarily Wish), D&D is a pretty hard system. Spells have consistent casting rules (VSM, range, duration), costs (casting time, spell slots, consumed material components), and effects (though the actual strength of the spell may vary based on dice rolls).

No, a hard magic system is one that obeys underlying laws and allows everything within those laws.  It doesn't break into discrete spells other than the "universe as computer" variety, which permits new spells to be programmed with little in the way of limits. 

A softer magic system doesn't need to answer the question of why Fireball and Flaming Sphere have different material components or why Cone of Cold can only be 90 degrees wide.  There are many arbitrary limits instead of few carefully tailored limits. 

Realy soft magic has no rules or vague rules. 

Vance's Dying Earth is in the sweet spot where spells are specific enough to write clear rules for and balance a game around, but magic is undefined enough that you don't have to explain why there aren't nine different fireball spells of different sizes one at each spell level or why spells come in levels at all.  That's why Gygax used it, and why every computer game and most tabletop games to have magic use similar spells even if most of them do away with memorization and spell slots. 

[Ninjabread]

Still doesn't sound impossible to generate, however, it does sound excessively difficult to bug test and, more importantly, control a game that procedurally generates a magic system that hard. Would be better for a pure simulation since there's less to test and nothing to control.

Might be worth asking Toady how hard or soft he intends on making magic, if it will vary from world to world, or if players will have any control over how hard or soft their world's magic is, like they will for fantastical-ness.

[GoblinCookie]

My understanding was that a hard magic system is a system with consistent rules, costs, and effects. Would it not be soft systems that are more difficult to generate? Computers like rules and consistency.

As a side note, with the exception of the occasional spell/item here and there (primarily Wish), D&D is a pretty hard system. Spells have consistent casting rules (VSM, range, duration), costs (casting time, spell slots, consumed material components), and effects (though the actual strength of the spell may vary based on dice rolls).

The question there is how hard a magic system can get before it stops being magic and becomes the laws of physics?

If magic is hard enough and plentiful enough, why would anyone still call it magic?

[Ninjabread]

The question there is how hard a magic system can get before it stops being magic and becomes the laws of physics?

If magic is hard enough and plentiful enough, why would anyone still call it magic?

It isn't uncommon among hard magic systems for it to be treated like any other science, or for it to be called something other than magic.

Or at least I think so, I've been told my interpretation isn't entirely accurate, and to be fair it's not my field of expertise, just something I briefly looked into, best to double-check with Atarlost.

[PlumpHelmetMan]

This discussion has gotten very philosophical. What indeed is magic?

[Nordlicht]

The art of manipulating the physical word by thought, word or gesture without direct physical contact, while defying the laws of thermodynamics?

[PlumpHelmetMan]

The art of manipulating the physical word by thought, word or gesture without direct physical contact, while defying the laws of thermodynamics?

Hmm...fair enough. xD

[GoblinCookie]

It isn't uncommon among hard magic systems for it to be treated like any other science, or for it to be called something other than magic.

Or at least I think so, I've been told my interpretation isn't entirely accurate, and to be fair it's not my field of expertise, just something I briefly looked into, best to double-check with Atarlost.

There is a problem with doing that.  If the rules are logical enough, there is a danger that we are no longer actually describing magic but simply how the laws of physics of that universe works.

This discussion has gotten very philosophical. What indeed is magic?

Magic all stands on a a certain philosophy being to some extent correct.  The general idea that rules can be overridden by our will is based upon the assumption that the rules are themselves built upon consciousness.  A magic system that is too regular and independent of consciousness in in danger of becoming compatible with materialism and not being magic.

The art of manipulating the physical word by thought, word or gesture without direct physical contact, while defying the laws of thermodynamics?

Who says there *is* any laws of thermodynamics in the universe?  We believe in the scientific laws because, aside from magic/miracles the world works that way.  Magic/miracles is basically normally understood as drawing a big *exception* over the normal rules the universe works by.  If magic becomes regular enough that is works just like the normal rules of the universe, then the exception becomes the rule and so ceases to be an exception.  Hard magic systems are basically coming up with rules for exceptions, which works provided that they are still exceptions and the exceptions are not integrated so well into the system they are no longer that. 

[SixOfSpades]

This discussion has gotten very philosophical. What indeed is magic?

It's technology, that has become sufficiently advanced.

On a less facetious note, there are two characteristics we can use to draw a hard line between magic and science: First, magic transcends the laws of physics (that much is obvious), and second, magic is bequeathed by the gods. It seems safe to assume that at least some gods want their followers to be able to draw on fragments of the god's own power. Not only has Toady already drawn a clear indicator of this with necromancers, but I'm sure you're already familiar with the idea of gods being dependent upon mortal worshipers, and thus could easily stand to profit from people casting spells in their name.

Having the deities as a buffer layer could provide "softness" in the (hypothetical) magic system: Toady & Threetoe lay out some hard rules of what sorts of magic can be performed in relation to each divine sphere, and the personalities of each god will affect what that means in terms of what's required for mortals/players to cast actual spells. Of course, that's on top of the procedural randomization of which gods hold which spheres, and if you're learning/casting spells of a certain sphere inside a biome that's already attuned to that sphere, etc.

Where the "gods make magic" system breaks down is when a player chooses to generate a world with magic, but no gods. Then again, even without gods, the spheres would likely still exist, so I guess that's still valid.

[Atarlost]

There is a problem with doing that.  If the rules are logical enough, there is a danger that we are no longer actually describing magic but simply how the laws of physics of that universe works.

That's not a problem.  It's exactly what hard magic afficionados want.  Fantastic worlds with laws of physics that allow what is impossible in reality. 

[GoblinCookie]

That's not a problem.  It's exactly what hard magic afficionados want.  Fantastic worlds with laws of physics that allow what is impossible in reality.

Not really.  What hard magic afficionados want is two parallel laws of physics.  There are strict rules for mundane stuff and equally strict laws for magic.  There is the small problem that we are presently in that two parallel laws of physics situation in reality.