Over the past year or so, I've had the dubious honor of having an interest I've found exceptionally few people seem to share. So here's a thread to see what everyone really thinks about it!
Low Fantasy is an inexact term for a type of Fantasy that doesn't revolve around magic or heroic feats. This article makes a wonderful case for settings without magic. But Low Fantasy can technically have magic in it; magic just doesn't act as a solution to most problems presented within the context of the story, nor is it crucial. However, this thread is focused on asking the question:
How do you feel about Fantasy without magic? How much magic do you think should exist in your preferred setting? Why do you prefer magic over the lack thereof, or vice versa?
I have a feeling I know the common answer to the last question, as it probably ties into the reason why people tend to RP. But I thought I'd add it for the sake of completion. Don't judge me.
Low Fantasy is an inexact term for a type of Fantasy that doesn't revolve around magic or heroic feats. This article makes a wonderful case for settings without magic. But Low Fantasy can technically have magic in it; magic just doesn't act as a solution to most problems presented within the context of the story, nor is it crucial. However, this thread is focused on asking the question:
How do you feel about Fantasy without magic? How much magic do you think should exist in your preferred setting? Why do you prefer magic over the lack thereof, or vice versa?
I have a feeling I know the common answer to the last question, as it probably ties into the reason why people tend to RP. But I thought I'd add it for the sake of completion. Don't judge me.
Sometimes, getting up to grab the cup yourself should be easier than having it float to your hand, depending on circumstance and individual. But then, that's merely my take on it.
At that point, magic is a shortcut rather than an artifice of design. If I find myself or others using magic in a setting as a crutch to hold up shoddy craftsmanship, then there's a drawing board still waiting to be used and it needs to be addressed.
To be more exact, a world without magic can still be magical. Using spells and such to heighten that experience - not just create it outright - is something I like to strive for when making a setting. But leaving it out entirely should in no way make the world less of a solid fantasy experience. That can be really difficult to accomplish, and there are all sorts of ways to try and conquer that hurdle.
Magic is just one of those trampolines that looks nice right in front of it. But you've got to consider the landing.
It should be added, however, that my current choice of world setting is one where magic is a huge player in the diversity of the landscape and its peoples. But I do like to think that the people I've created to support that setting could stand alone without magic and still be interesting; I created them as individuals first, and then threw them into the setting, considering then how it would affect them from base to form. This has warranted some small measure of success. I say this only to show that while I support a fantasy world without magic at all, there is no wrong side of that fence to stand on. Not in my opinion, anyhow.
At that point, magic is a shortcut rather than an artifice of design. If I find myself or others using magic in a setting as a crutch to hold up shoddy craftsmanship, then there's a drawing board still waiting to be used and it needs to be addressed.
To be more exact, a world without magic can still be magical. Using spells and such to heighten that experience - not just create it outright - is something I like to strive for when making a setting. But leaving it out entirely should in no way make the world less of a solid fantasy experience. That can be really difficult to accomplish, and there are all sorts of ways to try and conquer that hurdle.
Magic is just one of those trampolines that looks nice right in front of it. But you've got to consider the landing.
It should be added, however, that my current choice of world setting is one where magic is a huge player in the diversity of the landscape and its peoples. But I do like to think that the people I've created to support that setting could stand alone without magic and still be interesting; I created them as individuals first, and then threw them into the setting, considering then how it would affect them from base to form. This has warranted some small measure of success. I say this only to show that while I support a fantasy world without magic at all, there is no wrong side of that fence to stand on. Not in my opinion, anyhow.
I personally dislike magic-less fantasy settings. Out of my main three or so fantasy based characters, only one of them could function well in a setting without magic, and even then he's a manticore so he might not work in all non magic fantasy settings. The way I look at it, not having magic at all limits you to what can actually happen in the real world, and I dislike that in role plays.
Admittedly, that sounds like it would be quite the hurdle for a manticore! Do I think it possible? Well, gradually, yes. It might not be a pleasant solution or a tale of joyous adventure, but I can think of a few ways it manages out. But first there'd have to be some acceptance that magic is real, in order for him to even exist as a proper manticore in some narrative. That much is fairly obvious.
Of course, if you override that thread and pick up a new one, aiming to alter the perception of what a manticore is visually, applying it to some realistic guidelines, it won't be the same but it could be just as fun. Maybe something with tattoos and behavior? Occupation and interest?
I had this whole rant up here but, bottom line, your character is likely just fine the way it is. Most magical tales are. Some of those same limitations realism can place on fantasy can not only serve to enrich an idea, though. They can help expand our imaginations by giving you a stable foundation thereby reducing the need to explain certain aspects of fantasy writing that can start to feel contrived by repetition.
Again, not that there's a damn thing wrong with just keeping a manticore in the commonly accepted form. Easily one of the more badass mythical beasts.
Of course, if you override that thread and pick up a new one, aiming to alter the perception of what a manticore is visually, applying it to some realistic guidelines, it won't be the same but it could be just as fun. Maybe something with tattoos and behavior? Occupation and interest?
I had this whole rant up here but, bottom line, your character is likely just fine the way it is. Most magical tales are. Some of those same limitations realism can place on fantasy can not only serve to enrich an idea, though. They can help expand our imaginations by giving you a stable foundation thereby reducing the need to explain certain aspects of fantasy writing that can start to feel contrived by repetition.
Again, not that there's a damn thing wrong with just keeping a manticore in the commonly accepted form. Easily one of the more badass mythical beasts.
I am a big fantasy lover myself, but I am very much a believer in low fantasy, or at the very least magic in moderation. When literally every character in a setting is throwing fireballs or swinging eight foot long blades the stakes of any conflict immediately drop down a great deal. You can't feel any tension if you know the wizard is just going to make up some new spell and fix everything before anything truly bad can happen. Even in the classic high fantasy stories magic is treated with respect and that's why the stories of good. I don't think anyone would have cared about Frodo and Sam if they could have gathered up their wits and cast some sort of spell to protect themselves. It's the struggle that makes a story interesting.
That being said, I also think that magic and fantasy don't really have to mean the same thing. I've played in several settings with non-human species, races and abilities, but when you set out to integrate such things into the lore they don't truly have to be 'magical'. I feel that it's about the importance you place on a thing, an elf can just be another sort of person if in their world it is mundane. A unicorn can be just another animal. That's my philosophy anyway, when I approach worldbuilding I always try to stay away from the old fashioned dynamic of 'humans are here, and everything else is WEIRD'. Obviously it's not weird to the humans, they live there! Anyway I'm not sure if this even has to do with the topic at hand
It's just how I feel.
That being said, I also think that magic and fantasy don't really have to mean the same thing. I've played in several settings with non-human species, races and abilities, but when you set out to integrate such things into the lore they don't truly have to be 'magical'. I feel that it's about the importance you place on a thing, an elf can just be another sort of person if in their world it is mundane. A unicorn can be just another animal. That's my philosophy anyway, when I approach worldbuilding I always try to stay away from the old fashioned dynamic of 'humans are here, and everything else is WEIRD'. Obviously it's not weird to the humans, they live there! Anyway I'm not sure if this even has to do with the topic at hand
It's just how I feel.
I'm a big fan of the Ravenloft setting, admittedly. In it, it's not that there's low magic, but rather 'rare magic' and most of it is in the hands of the bad guys. Wizards and sorcerers are sources of fear and anxiety, rather than common tropes. Player characters by their very nature tend to be unique individuals in any setting so they can generally bend that a little. I like magic in fantasy settings and grew up a big Forgotten Realms fan (which is magic everywhere). I also like the Lord of the Rings take where it exists but it's more courage that wins the day as opposed to flashy spells. I suppose it's your own preference, really. There's no right or wrong way to do it beyond the litmus test of 'is everyone having fun?'.
Warhammer fantasy is a wonderful setting when others prefer people -not- shooting lightning bolts at everything. Or be flying on a bear that is also shooting lightning bolts out of its mouth. I'm looking at you, Pathfinder. In Warhammer, magic is seen by -everyone- as a great danger or witch craft. Magic is tied to the Warp, which corrupts people to the side of Chaos. Every spell cast is another chance of having the Warp overtake the caster, and mutate them into something terrible, or have their mind corrupted or so many other terrible things could happen.
And witch hunters don't care if you were trying to be lazy in fetching things from afar, or funny in turning a man's horse green. They'll take you and throw you on the pyre, just to make certain that the general populace is free of the Warp's grasp. Oh! And if someone were to cast something -big-, the winds of magic are disturbed and anyone of magical sense can know the direction of the caster, which brings in many people that will see the caster tried or killed, or corrupted, it just depends on who arrives!
Most people are safer knowing very little and relying on more natural skills, such as hitting things with a sword, tracking, and even being able to read/write.
And witch hunters don't care if you were trying to be lazy in fetching things from afar, or funny in turning a man's horse green. They'll take you and throw you on the pyre, just to make certain that the general populace is free of the Warp's grasp. Oh! And if someone were to cast something -big-, the winds of magic are disturbed and anyone of magical sense can know the direction of the caster, which brings in many people that will see the caster tried or killed, or corrupted, it just depends on who arrives!
Most people are safer knowing very little and relying on more natural skills, such as hitting things with a sword, tracking, and even being able to read/write.
Well, from my personal experience, it doesn't matter if people can cast spells or not. If the setting has floating islands, mythical constructs, strange beasts, and non-humans, ye got a fantasy setting. Having magic is an optional thing to include. Though, it never hurts to have magic in the form of non-castable magic and energy.
Think about alchemy and rune-smithing. Both are generally considered magic. One has potions which can cause moderate or crazy effects, the other is used to apply magical sigils, engravings, and enchantments onto an item to give it special properties. Those kinds of magic could very well be legitimate forms of magic in low-fantasy RPs.
Personally, I like high fantasy RPs, with the idea of magic being known, and at some times commonly used by some types of people. But hey, when you're going up against a dragon, and pyromancy ain't doing crap to the thing, it's always a good idea to have someone around who knows how to swing a sword or mace. (basically dungeons and dragons style fantasy)
Think about alchemy and rune-smithing. Both are generally considered magic. One has potions which can cause moderate or crazy effects, the other is used to apply magical sigils, engravings, and enchantments onto an item to give it special properties. Those kinds of magic could very well be legitimate forms of magic in low-fantasy RPs.
Personally, I like high fantasy RPs, with the idea of magic being known, and at some times commonly used by some types of people. But hey, when you're going up against a dragon, and pyromancy ain't doing crap to the thing, it's always a good idea to have someone around who knows how to swing a sword or mace. (basically dungeons and dragons style fantasy)
You are on: Forums » RP Discussion » Opinions - Fantasy without Magic?
Moderators: Mina, Keke, Cass, Claine, Sanne, Ilmarinen, Darth_Angelus