Hey guys,
According to the stub in the PathfinderWiki, arcane magic is governed by Laws of Arcana, discussed (with any luck, more fully) in Dave Gross's King of Chaos. I don't have any access to this text so hopefully someone who has read it can throw me a bone here.
Does Golarion have any overarching general theory of magic and what are these so-called Laws of Arcana?
Thanks in advance!
Huh. First I've heard of this. I don't think it's a major thing in canon. Mr. Gross may have made it up for the novel (which I have not read either).
Huh. Dotting for later.
Actually, let's see if I can summon him here...
EDIT: (No promises, though, summoning is an "iffy" business...)
I have read King of Chaos and i don't remember any Laws of Arcana. Let me go check.
Contributor
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tacticslion successfully summoned me. If you don't hear from him again, you'll know he couldn't pay my toll.
My reference to the Laws of Arcana in King of Chaos was meant in the general sense, that wizardly magic depends on formulae and reason, as opposed to the more free-form, intuitive magic of sorcerers and bards. My intent with that phrase had more to do with Varian's philosophy of magic than any external protocol.
I have no idea why I capitalized the phrase, which I agree makes it look like some formal list of rules. Sorry about that.
That said, the Wiki stump mentions the schools of magic, and there are plenty of formal structures in Pathfinder and Golarion magic, so perhaps someone else will one day collect existing codes and expand them into something she or he will call the Laws of Arcana. That would be super awesome, and it would make me look prescient rather than careless with caps.
Although i am late (since Dave Gross already answered), i also find a single reference to Laws of Arcana and i took to mean things like schools of magic(necromancy, evocation etc.), spell slots, somatic and verbal components, spell effects, casting times etc.
Ah, wonderful! I didn't expect any Word of God to happen in this thread...! Thank you one and all for your responses (especially you, Mr. Gross)!
I agree that it would be nice for someone (nudge nudge, Mr. Gross) to give Golarion a unified theory of magic, which would (ostensibly) be the Pathfinder rules governing magic, but could certainly be expanded further. While it's all well and good that bards and witches are the only arcane casters that can cast cure spells, it would be interesting to have an in-setting reason (besides game balance, of course).
Thanks again for the responses!
Actually, I'd prefer to keep the underpinnings of magic mysterious. It's not supposed to make sense! It's magic!
Actually, I'd prefer to keep the underpinnings of magic mysterious. It's not supposed to make sense! It's magic!
Well, to the layperson it most certainly would remain so, but I can't imagine that a 20th-level wizard would be wholly unfamiliar with the underpinnings of his spells. That being said, perhaps there could be competing theories, each maintained and studied by the hot-shot wizard schools, like the Acadamae, Magaambya, and the Arcanamirium.
Macros and Pug versus Nakor..(Lesser and Greater paths of magic versus "its just magic!)
I tend to think of powerful wizards as similar to theoretical physicists. They are all observing the same effects, but can have different, even wildly different, theories for the reasons behind those effects. Thus leading to discussion, argument, and heated conflict between their supporters. Perhaps that just because I find the idea of wizard fights based on incredibly minute arcane theories to be both hilarious and awesome.
|
The thing about magic is that it's like trying to catch smoke with your bare hands that can only be seen through a prism. Each theory on magic requires you look through the prism from a certain perspective. No one is more right than the other, but by looking at magic from these varying vantage points, you learn new mysteries. Those with a mind for order see Laws of Arcana, those with an innate ability might perceive it as an spiritual connection to the cosmos. They are all right and all missing something.
I hope that helps :)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, I'd prefer to keep the underpinnings of magic mysterious. It's not supposed to make sense! It's magic!
now you see I strongly disagree with this. Some of the best Fantasy Fiction work because the author takes the effort to define magic. Having that in setting understanding of magic helps lay down the limits of what is and isn't possible. Even something as simple as Rumplestilskin's "Magic comes with a Price" establishes a boundary that makes for story developments and defines what the risks of magic are vs. the rewards.
"It's magic so I don't have to explain anything" is the lazy writer's answer, it leaves the door open for magic to be a Deus ex Machina.
For my Pathfinder games I've been going off the idea that Magic involves manipulation of Planar energies to warp reality by imposing the Physical Laws of other Planes onto the world. Arcane Magic draws energy from the Inner Planes while Divine Magic draws from one of the Outer Planes aligned to the caster's god.
Fireball, for example, works because I am imposing the physical laws of the Plane of Fire onto the world for a brief instant.
Actually, I'd prefer to keep the underpinnings of magic mysterious. It's not supposed to make sense! It's magic!now you see I strongly disagree with this. Some of the best Fantasy Fiction work because the author takes the effort to define magic. Having that in setting understanding of magic helps lay down the limits of what is and isn't possible. Even something as simple as Rumplestilskin's "Magic comes with a Price" establishes a boundary that makes for story developments and defines what the risks of magic are vs. the rewards.
"It's magic so I don't have to explain anything" is the lazy writer's answer, it leaves the door open for magic to be a Deus ex Machina.
For my Pathfinder games I've been going off the idea that Magic involves manipulation of Planar energies to warp reality by imposing the Physical Laws of other Planes onto the world. Arcane Magic draws energy from the Inner Planes while Divine Magic draws from one of the Outer Planes aligned to the caster's god.
Fireball, for example, works because I am imposing the physical laws of the Plane of Fire onto the world for a brief instant.
That sounds really interesting. If such self-imposed rules make your job as a GM easier, then feel free to define magic however you like in your campaign world. For me, that's a level of detail that would detract from my game style more than it would enhance it.
I greatly appreciate the fact that the writers in the Campaign Setting line have deliberately kept it vague. Formal rules about the mechanical underpinnings of magic can hamstring the creativity of a GM to write the stories he or she wants to tell. e.g.:
GM: You step into the room, and what you see appears to be impossible: above you, seemingly at a great distance, spins a vortex of magical energy, around which orbit pulsating motes of crackling lght, like debris swirling into a whirlpool. A coruscating bolt from the center of the vortex flashes toward the party! Everyone please make a...
Player: [interrupting] Actually, a magical vortex couldn't do that, because it says on page 35 of the Campaign Setting: Secrets Mortals Were Not Meant To Know that... [quotes source material intended for GMs].
In-game, how wizards understand the theoretical underpinnings of magic may or may not be how oracles, or bards, or sorceres, or clerics understand it. The beauty of vagueness is that they can all be right.