Limyaael ([info]limyaael) wrote,
@ 2003-12-20 14:35:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood: artistic
Entry tags:fantasy rants: winter 2003, world-building: magic

Two-part rant.
This will probably be a two-part rant, because otherwise it would be absurdly long. Besides, I'm sure that I'll think of more things I want to say tomorrow.

Swinburne poem part! From "The Triumph of Time," a poem about him losing the one love of his life and deciding not to tell her that he loved her.

Your lithe hands draw me, your face burns through me,
I am swift to follow you, keen to see;
But love lacks might to redeem or undo me;
As I have been, I know I shall surely be;
"What should such fellows as I do?" Nay,
My part were worse if I chose to play;
For the worst is this after all; if they knew me,
Not a soul upon earth would pity me.

And I play not for pity of these; but you,
If you saw with your soul what man am I,
You would praise me at least that my soul all through
Clove to you, loathing the lives that lie;
The souls and lips that are bought and sold,
The smiles of silver and kisses of gold,
The lapdog loves that whine as they chew,
The little lovers that curse and cry.



1) If you base your magic on physical strength, make sure it actually has consequences. One of the most common magical types- and it has the advantage of being pretty easy to use- is for magic to be dependent on the body, the way that stamina is. This is fine as long as it actually imposes limitations. In practice, a lot of magic like this turns out not to be limited, because the protagonist can always find more strength- and because a lot of fantasy tends to ignore things like when the characters last ate or slept in favor of concentrating on the "important stuff."

Imagine how hard it would be for a mage whose magical strength depends on his physical strength to function when he's dog-tired, hasn't eaten well in days, and is very thirsty. For that matter, imagine how hard it would be to think about anything but a full bladder while you have a full bladder. All of these conditions could reasonably apply during a chase by enemies, which most fantasy heroes go through at least once a book. Some fleeting mention is sometimes made of how the characters can't find anything but berries to eat, but there's the mage flinging firebolts as strongly as ever.

This could be generalized to a broad rule- make sure the rules of your magic system always apply- but here, if your mage is about to fall over, then his magic should be about to fall over, too.

2) Don't break your own rules without an excellent reason. The most groan-worthy example I've seen of this is in stories that allow only three wishes, where the main character ends up getting a fourth wish. Most of the time, this seems to be due to author forgetfulness, but a few times I've seen it justified as being "Well, Syrenna is the heroine, so of course she gets another wish!"

Either of those is not just laziness. It's lazy plotting, which is much harder to forgive.

You're perfectly free to make up arbitrary rules about magic in the way that you can't about, say, the law of physics. This kind of magic is only common in women? Great. Only children can create blue flames, and everyone else is limited to red? Fine.

Just don't change your mind in the middle of the story. The greatest creative freedom comes with the rough draft, the beginning. Later, if you change your mind, you should have to think about all the possible consequences- if there's a pair of magical rules that depend on each other, altering one will alter the other, or should- and keep in mind that you've condemned yourself to go all through the text and change all the places that rule's come into play as well.

3) Do not give the most powerful magic to the good guys. If it seems as though the evil enemies are incompetent and not at all powerful, what's the point of fighting them? The reader will most likely yawn and nod off while your suspense-free story plods on. It will also seem very strange that the good guys can't just take the magical shortcut and end the war, either. The author usually places truly ridiculous obstacles in the heroes' path to justify the equally ridiculous imbalance.

Bottom line: If your good guy can read people's minds, fling firebolts around, and resurrect the dead, the evil guy should at least be able to send a plague.

4) Don't leave your loopholes visible. A favorite trick of fantasy is to let the underdog win, and a favorite way to do this is to leave a hole in a magical spell or oath that the hero can get around. However, most amateur fantasy authors are not skilled in concealing their loopholes, in making it seem at the end as if this is a plausible way out but not showing their hand too early either. If your hero picks up a magical trinket that the wise old wizard tells him solemnly to keep, I can guarantee at least half your audience will call, "Plot device!"

There are several ways to avoid making your loopholes just plot devices. One is to infuse them with a real element of chance or risk; the hero uses the magical amulet several times and it betrays him a couple of those times, which means he can't know for sure it will work when going up against the bad guys. Another is to make it something that the evil guys could use as easily (this means that the risk is always there of them stealing it or finding it and wielding it against the hero). Or another character not entirely loyal to the hero can have charge of it, and because the hero can't control the other character's actions, he doesn't know if that person will help him.

If nothing else works, make the use of such an amulet a true sacrifice. If the hero uses it, then he saves the world but he destroys his true love. Something like this may come across as cheap melodrama, but can also end up forcing your characters into true moral decisions and make it seem as if the victory is Pyrrhic, which is far better than it being a walk up Big Rock Candy Mountain.

5) No innocence clichés. This is another one of those devices I am picking on specifically because I hate them. An innocence cliché is a case where the evil side can't use a particular piece of magic or a particular device because it can only be used by "a true innocent," "the side of good," or "the pure of heart." What a copout. It levels your characters into black-and-white cardboard cutouts, leaving no doubt who is Good and who is Evil, and takes all the suspense away. Besides, what smart evil guy worth his salt would just leave the magic or device there instead of trying to destroy it?

Far better, say I, to make a morally ambiguous character take up and use that magic or device, and throw the whole stupid mess into confusion. Or just don't have them at all.

6) Don't skimp on detail for your destructive magic just because the good side is using it. I can't tell you the number of fantasies I've read where the evil side's use of horrible magic is described in horrible detail- the intestines sliding out, people roasting alive, the screams as the good people die- and yet somehow when the good side uses magic just as powerful and just as destructive, there are no screams and nothing beyond a slight scent of burning flesh. Sometimes the good side's magic is even referred to as "cleansing" the place where the evil forces stood, with no reference to the fact that the good guys have just destroyed a whole host of living beings. If those living beings were good, though, you better believe the author would refer to it as terrible.

Don't do this. Burning people don't smell good, no matter whom they hold allegiance to. Powerful and destructive magic can be awe-inspiring, but it shouldn't be awe-inspiring in the hands of the "right" people and simply horrifying in the hands of the "wrong" people.

7) Keep a realistic eye on your magic's limitations. One of the nice things about the magic system in the Harry Potter books, though it sometimes seems overly simple, is how easy it would be to destroy the magic as well as use it. Take a wizard's wind away or break it, and he seems mostly helpless, unless he's one of the very few and specialized powerful people (like an Animagus). Similarly, if you have a magic system that depends on subtle gestures with the hands and arcane words, stopping a mage's mouth with a gag and binding- or breaking- his fingers would put him pretty much out of business.

Yet that doesn't seem to occur to a lot of enemies facing these kinds of mages. They just sit around and gape while the mage devastates their ranks.

Bottom line: Your mages should never be all-powerful, and they shouldn't miraculously figure a way out of every situation where they might be weak. Even if your magic depends on something outside the mage, like the arcane gestures or a source of power elsewhere in the world, rather than on what's in him, that shouldn't be an excuse to have him go around dropping mountains on anyone who opposes him. For example, what are the physical limitations on the power source? Wouldn't the mage be more powerful closer to it, and weaker further away? One would certainly hope so, but it doesn't really seem to affect most magic-workers (or they find ways to get around it, like in Mercedes Lackey's world where magic comes from nodes of power and people who have drained one often end up just reaching to a fresh one further away).

Magic should always have some weakness, whether it's a complicated arcane theory or something as simple as the old prohibition of cold iron and salt breaking fairy magic.



Yes, I'll definitely have some more tomorrow.




(Post a new comment)

BbHtrYoink
(Anonymous)
2003-12-20 09:24 pm UTC (link)
Wow...having a full bladder would make it difficult concentrate in order to cast a spell... Hope you don't mind if I steal the idea! =)

And I also like the idea of having a morally ambiguous character use a "for the pure of heart only" object. But, then of course, there will be those who refuse to think that the object could be flawed in determining who is pure of heart, and instead insist that the character must be pure inside, no matter what he has done in the past...Hm. That could make for a very annoying character. I LOVE it!

Oh, and by the way: What is a Pyrrhic victory? I've never heard the term before.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: BbHtrYoink
[info]gehayi
2003-12-20 10:23 pm UTC (link)
I've said most of what you say about magic many times before. You say it better, though.

Oh, and by the way: What is a Pyrrhic victory? I've never heard the term before.

It's from Pyrrhus of Epirus, a Greek whose troops defeated the Romans at Asculum in 279 B.C.E. The losses were extremely heavy on both sides.

It is said that when the battle was over, Pyrrhus stood, stunned, on the battlefield, looking at an endless forest of bloody corpses. A messenger ran up to him. "Sir!" cried the messenger. "We won! We won a glorious victory!"

Pyrrhus stared at the bodies of most of his troops, at the countless maimed and wounded, at men who would die of starvation or disease before they got the healing they needed.

"Victory?" he whispered. "Another victory such as this and we shall be undone."

That's a Pyrrhic victory. One where you irrevocably lose more than that you win.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: BbHtrYoink
[info]limyaael
2003-12-21 12:42 am UTC (link)
I don't mind any ideas you want to take. If it was something I really wanted to use, I probably wouldn't post it. *grin*

And gehayi explained what a Pyrrhic victory with far more historical detail than I could, so I will leave it in her capable hands. *bows*

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]insert_world
2003-12-21 08:10 am UTC (link)
I'm lucky; I've never come across any innocence clichés. But just reading about it is fsking painful. >_o; I've never given thought to number six, but I suppose it's one of those things that you subconsciously do. I'll have to go back to my own story to see if I made that mistake. Thanks for that tip.

And Gehayi, your icon is absolutely hilarious! It made my day. :)


(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]gehayi
2003-12-21 01:53 pm UTC (link)
Thanks! [info]tviokh of [info]deleterius made it. I, alas, have no knowledge of how to create icons.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]limyaael
2003-12-21 05:48 pm UTC (link)
The worst innocence cliché I ever came across was in Eddings' Belgariad series, where only a true innocent was able to touch the magical Orb or some such nonsense. Of course, that hadn't prevented it from being able to cause great harm in the hands of the evil guys in the past.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]newbia
2005-08-13 10:53 pm UTC (link)
I just discovered your rants and am trying to read all of them. I totally agree on "Don't break your own rules without an excellent reason" and would like to add something that Dr. Suess said: even if the story is completely ridiculous and fantastic you must act as though it is entirely serious and have rules. If a creature has two heads, he must have two pairs of glasses on the night stand.

(Reply to this)


[info]fluffy_evil
2005-10-17 10:36 am UTC (link)
"Take a wizard's wind away or break it, and he seems mostly helpless"

I know it was a typo, but I couldn't helpl cracking up. Farting wizards, helpless without the farts!

(Sorry, sick mind)

I think your rants are *VERY* helpful, it's giving me some tips for my nano.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]gwenaterra
2007-06-06 01:41 am UTC (link)
I know, I read that part too and I couldn't help but stop for a second and go wha? But overall this is very helpful. I'm actually using magic and you have made some very good points here. I had to pause and go through the story in my mind and edit some of my ideas.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]laraqua
2006-02-18 05:00 pm UTC (link)
About No.5, is it still wrong if "Only Innocence Can Do This" when innocence basically means having your soul (reincarnation rules in this world) scrubbed clean of all past experience, memory, torment and the ability to reincarnate near/with loved ones? And then that 'innocence' characterises itself by what we would assume was insanity, with chronic distractibility, gullibility and 'slow' mental faculties? Since most people have had thousands of reincarnations to get where they are, sixteen or seventeen years won't have much of an effect - which is part of their 'slowness'.

(Reply to this)


[info]punk_rock_nerd
2006-09-26 02:30 am UTC (link)
This goes back to ideas on villains not being stereotypical and doing "evil for evil's sake" (I hate those villains. Really. The only villain I've seriously written that was like that was a psychopath in the psychiatric illness sense. "A psychopath is defined as having no concern for the feelings of others and a complete disregard for any sense of social obligation" Tearing out the heart of an old man? He wanted to see if someone could live without their heart.

Rape? Well, he wanted sex. She was there. So he had sex.

Writing that character still disturbs the hell out of me)

Wow, I got sidetracked. Let's start again

This goes back to ideas on villains not being stereotypical and doing "evil for evil's sake". You don't find people like this. Seriously. But what you do find is people who believe their methods are right, and pure, and just.

An object that can only be used by those whom have a "Pure Heart"? Hi, the villain believes with all his soul that what he's doing is right.

Thus, he's pure.

The hero, however, is torn, has doubts, doesn't believe that strongly, whatever.

Sucks to be him now, don't it?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]metalfatigue0
2007-05-01 05:13 am UTC (link)
I love that idea.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]sophinee
2007-09-28 11:56 pm UTC (link)
I know I'm really late replying to your comment, but your 'villain' sounds amazing; being a psycho never sounded so logical/fun :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ingriam
2008-05-15 03:24 am UTC (link)
Chiming in - late as usual - with my sheer love for that idea. In fact, your second example sounds like the guy in my icon. Long, complicated story short: he was created by an alien race who then left the planet, probably 200,000 years before the main story started, and now wants to go and find them. He also wants to show his alien "parents" that's he's done good by them while they were gone.

To this end, he's created an orginization that captures humans and genetically alters them to become obediant super/monster-soldiers and used it to take over the world.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…