Non-Genetic Magic Systems in Fantasy—With Brandon Sanderson, Marie Brennan, and David B. Coe

:{ D

In this panel, we have a bunch of authors who have never been in a fight in their adult lives, claiming that decorated combat veteran Robert Jordan didn't know how to write fights.... based on their complete and utter misunderstanding of hand-to-hand martial arts techniques.

Soft magic is an art, hard magic is a science.

This is a panel? lol

I’ve liked the idea of something running through family so they think it’s genetic but it’s nurture not nature, being raised around magic makes you absorb more as a child. But since people just raise their biological children everyone assumes it’s a bloodline thing.

Story I'm writing revolves around evil god wanting to get a child to be his mortal coil and the body that he choose to birth the child rebelling and turning into god in its own right dead set on eating the world to prevent the evil god from doing it out of spite. So all magic comes from descent or grace from either pagan minor gods, the false god, god's fetus or the evil god. Magic is not a science it's violence born of rape and cannibalism, every magician is guilty of some crime, so false god offering "pure" way to magic by rebirth is very attractive.
I try to be in touch with the collective psychosis i see in right wing groups of our world.

i'm so high and their talk is so good

This was a very interesting panel, but while Sanderson started it off pointing out that magic being genetic has capital "I" Implications, I feel it got a bit sidelined from that. What I really was hoping for when I saw the title was a discussion of precisely that.

Fantasy readers--and I know this is true for me at least--choose fantasy over other genres in no small part due to wanting to read about the chosen one who is better than everyone else and can do things that others simply cannot, no matter how hard they try. It's very similar to superhero comics and literature in that regard, and there's a very significant crossover between fans of the two genres for that reason. But as Mr. Sanderson points out, this has obvious implications. It very quickly leads to eugenics and fascism when you can point to a way in which some people are objectively better than others. In fact it would be pretty hard to argue that people shouldn't try to breed to spread such a talent due to the utility they would bring to their host society.

So since obviously--I really hope anyone reading this considers it obvious, at least--we find the idea of considering some people better than others and the social philosophies it leads to, the aforementioned fascism and eugenics, amongst others, a detestable and/or pitiable sickness of thought, how do we address this in writing?

As someone who has often aspired to being a writer in fantasy and sci-fi and even superhero lit, I often find myself struggling with this idea on a philosophical level: Is it ethical to write a book where power is linked to genetics, given that it might encourage this sickness of belief in some? And if you choose not to utilize a genetic-linked power system, how do you still make the protagonist a "superhero" or "chosen one", or otherwise give the reader the power fantasy they're looking for?

I would have really liked to see the panel explore this issue more deeply.

I’m with Brando Sando on defending Harry Potter. It’s called fantasy for a reason. By default, it’s not going to make sense in our reality as we know it. What matters is the story Rowling told, her ability to spark a love for reading in so many children and creating a timeless classic that will never get old. I mean, in many ways she completely changed how we see fantasy and the direction the genre moved in, and she’s one of the most successful authors for it.

My favorite kind of magic system is the kind that isn't explicitly stated to be "magic," something ever present throughout the world that influences people's daily lives. For example, bending in Avatar the Last Airbender. Unlike most magic systems, bending in Avatar is explicitly stated not to be magic despite it obviously being "magic." It behaves more like a martial art and that's how the writers intended for it to be.

Taking inspiration from this; the magic system that I use in my writing behaves the same way. One obtains a magical ability unique to themselves based on their ultimate goal in life. Anyone could use magic, but not everyone does; the reason for this is because you need to be a specific type of person to use magic - the kind of person who would sacrifice themselves or more for their dreams to come true.

In my Mind the Alchemy in Full metal Alchemist is a extreamly good example of non-genetic Magic

ewr

I'm kind of struggling because I genuinely can't understand half the things Marie is saying through that mask. I'm losing every fourth word or so.

I've only gotten like 20 minutes into this video and it seems like the only one who's providing real value to the conversation is David Coe

In my world everyone has magic but they are different based upon which ethnic group you belong (for humans) there is also a separate magic system which is more powerful and is based around culture but it is an achieved thing and not everyone has it

The core point in the “believable” is internal consistence, I believe. If a setting is consistent its cosmogony, history of nations, and the sort of people who lives in it belong together. As long as you are able to explain the system without being boring it will be believable. The most believable cosmogony I ever saw is Aristotle’s Physics of Natural Places. If happens to not be how our universe is, sadly, but it explains all things (that normal humans see with their own senses) with gorgeous simplicity and perfect consistency.
However, explain a world without being boring is tricky. Use familiar elements makes that task easier. And New Darwinism is fairly familiar to about every audience able to read nowadays. It happens to be the way most of us believe the (arguably) real world functions. Most people probably have a cloudy and imperfect notion about “Evolution” and “natural selection”, but they have a general notion, and that points in the same general direction. Which is, broadly speaking, the direction New Darwinism points to.
No one has to go in the fine specific points of Genetics to get that familiar taste. People do selective breeding since before written language, the notion that you get animals a lot more aggressive if you cross the most aggressive dogs you have with the each other on purpose for a few hundred generations is so self-evident that any “scientist” who tries to “disprove” it will sound like a liar. For good reason.
Is an interesting exercise to imagine how would be the world if was not a general truth (general, not universal) that children inherit their physical characteristics and temperament from their parents. Broadly speaking. Or how would be a world where individuals where actually “born equal” in potential, with the same advantages and disadvantages (even if only in the organic level). One thing that is obvious from start is that a setting with any of those characteristics would be radically different from the setting we are living in. The (arguably) real world.

Panel host roasting Robert Jordan twice, trying to bait Sanderson. He resists, valiantly and does not take the bait!

I read a lot of Mercedes Lackey books(Heralds of Valdemar/Velgarth), and love her magic systems. Basicaly there is a pool of magical power that a few people can tap into. This requires a natural Mage level gift and training, plus some are stronger than others. (Some can barly manage a basic fire spell to light a camp fire, others can build a hotpool for bathing for eg). Blood magic users tends to be evil. Then you have the self powered personal 'gifts' of the Heralds (everthing from mild empathy telepathy, fetching gifts up to the one or two pyrokenetics. (Not Mages)

I have been listening to the audio books of the stormlight archive and I have to ask... wtf. They are so long. While I promise I am not trolling you, I have to ask, why is so much of the dialog repetitive? And it really is. Different characters speaking with other characters will have the same conversations over and over. and it could be forgiven if the subject matter was something that might need to be conveyed from character to character as a realistic progression of plot, but it's not. Caladen is maybe the worst of the bunch with regard to this. im 21 hours in to rhythm of war and I have to say after such a massive investment of time and energy and actual money I feel like we were entitled to better than that. I certainly expected better than that. After the twilight chic and the book of mormon I am starting to think that maybe Mormons shouldn't be authors.

bruh what the hell is that thing with crown

Never have I been more relieved to hear them acknowledge/point out how, while Harry Potter is a 'good' book/(more accurately) *product*, it is NOT a good piece of literature. I can't state how frustrating it is to hear grown adults love H.P. so much without ever acknowledging its incredible flaws. Character development being awful, no excusing that it happen across books rather than also within each one—age isnt the only thing that changes people, but experiences themselves; Just like how H.P. also has a basic 'destined' child, no matter how much people say 'but it wasn't destiny', it doesn't matter when said destiny still ends up coming true. Saying the destiny was false was just a lazy way of adding stakes to the series by making it seem possible that H.P. wouldn't fail. Also there is a surprising amount of Catholic reading groups that love H.P. which further shows its shoddy writing. The U.K.-centric portrayals of other Europeans, the antisemitic portrayals of goblins, the poor-man's version of Zodiac symbols, etc. I mean, people actually praise the sorting hat and House system, one of the laziest approaches to character distinction ever—the Houses are based on such severe generalizations that somehow are never challenged. Rather than having it properly questioned and addressed how wrong such systems can be in the real world, the Houses support the idea of labeling and that people are unable to change. Also, Voldemort is literally Funny Mustache Man, another basic approach to characters.

I love you mr Sanderson .

I always think about how many different types of magic schools do I want. I worry that too many might be too much. Too few is a waste
Schools of magic: Necromancy, Elemental(whether they should have their own schools; fire, water, earth, wind), Higher/Rarer Elemental(Explosion, Oceon, Metal, Storm), Shadow/Illusion, Light, Transmutation, Conjuration(familiars), Divination, Nature(druids).
How exactly does someone with high intelligence cast spells? What are they doing? Should it be more scientific, if someone does "x" therefore "y" no matter who does it. Cause it feels like anyone can "wave their hands in a specific way, and say certain words." It makes it feel like a sorcerer, can just say "firebolt" and hold their hand out. It's not intelligent.
Then there is the magic school of faith in fantasy worlds with clerics and priests. Like does force of will and knowing this specific chant grant these miracles? How can you measure "faith"?
Bards make sense, mastery of the instrument, telling certain tales, their mastery can be measured by how complex and beautiful the song and how many differnet songs. These are logical limitations as you cannot always sing beautifully, you must remain calm and sing in battle, and can only remember a few songs off the top of your head. Maybe I should just say "the guy trained enough to do the spell" cause I'm just stuck on details that dont realllly matter, I need to brainstorm other important things. Maybe recited spells create this fundamental feeling, and you can summon that feeling without reciting the entire chant. So all the intelligent stuff is in the background while not slowing down the wizard in battle.

Then there is restricting magic users: one is by study, another is by blood, luck, a pay wall(grimoirs are expensive), specific material requirements, consumables,

Then there are classes within magic schools:
Like a bladesorcerer, paladin, a summoner/necromancer(focus on lots of low level minions or just 1 strong minion), a guy who blasts lightning all the time(dps), buffer, debuffer, healer. Can I make a magic that requires both faith and intelligence?
Maybe I don't include druid. Maybe this school of magic/class is locked to outside the player/protagonist(like gandolf, so therefor it can be a soft magic where you don't need all the details). How do I make "evil magic/miracles"? Can dark magic exist, but have it not be evil? Why is dark magic users mistreated?
Then how do you make a wizard and a knight equals?
How do I balance/restrict a necromancer/summoner? Do I pokemon it and say "you may only carry 6 max, and they cannot be all out at the same time/maybe two depending on the circumstances." Or a mage has 6 units of mana concentration, and can either have 6 familiars with each consuming 1 unit of mana or 1 super familiar consuming 6 mana. As long as it doesn't pass 6 units. If this were to be a video game, how do I make this fun? The summons go kill the thing while I sit and watch. Summons are cool if its like a turn based strategy like pokemon or fireemblem, with weaknesses, positioning, and strategy.


You either gotta give the knight some magic stuff, or give items with cool properties that can only be weilded by those who reach the strenght requirement, or make them superhuman. Maybe the wizard does really really cool stuff, but takes extra time reciting the spell in battle(thus the need for protection from tanks).

Then there is using magic in a creative ways to solve problems. Like blessing fields, purifying sewers for infinite water. Which is kinda fun.

Not sure who the speaker who's hosting this is but her whole "Robert Jordan was bad about writing the sword forms in combat" is a really bad and poorly thought out point. Wheel of time isn't written in first person, you're getting a sense of what the characters are thinking yes, but the sword forms more than anything let your imagination create a much more evocative fight that's original to the reader. There is a flow to it and it's exciting. I can't remember her first comment but she said something else disparaging towards wheel of time and as a major wheel of time fan I just needed to speak up.

Actually I have a pretty generous suspension of disbelief when it comes to magic in Fantasy. What kicks me out is when it is obvious an author creating a world has no background in history, politics, logistics, economics, industry, and or military science.

Danm masks, skipped

In a fictional world, sun rising from the west and being on the southern hemisphere is the same thing.

I really want non-genetic magic in stories. Tired of hero is born with power. Only the special people born from the right parents can make a difference.

One idea is a system based on choices and personality, where magic could be given by a god to a worthy person. Not due to birth but due to their choices.

I have always wanted to make a comic series or manga I have been slowly designing and drawing a world over the last few months but magic is my biggest problem. I want to do magic that is interesting and works well. Having people devote to a god or a energy that flows through life or the world that can allow them to do magic. However I want magic to take something life magic would be the easiest you use your own life energy which would basically poison your body and just slowly drain you of life but as a result you can cast magic. However I want there to be multiple types but all of them being bad but rewarding. Essentially you are allowing yourself to use magic but at the same time poisoning yourself. Like blood magic you use your own blood to do like blood power type stuff. But I feel like thats generic and I think the magic feeding off your blood is kind of dumb. Like in berserk which I am reading right now I imagine that demons feed off of the sorrow and despair of humans. So something like that like dark or evil magic which can feed off of someone despair so you can counter it by being a happy person but they could feed off a little of everyone but I feel like that has probably been done and might have been overdone. Same with the life one. I dont want there to be good magic tho all magic needs to be bad as the world is total dark fantasy. I also want magic to be something anyone can achieve anyone can use the magic and anyone can get the ability however it will destory most people and most people wont go the reaches they need to actually achieve it. So there will be knights that will have magic but at the same time there will be peasents who achieve the ability to use the magic but it will over time drain them and they will try and use it for their benefit not really thinking and just end up killing themselves. I always thought the force was a interesting concept with the meditating type stuff. Idk if anyone have interesting idea comment I would love to hear peoples opinions.

777⁷7

Not only could the witches of Harry Potter stop witch trials but their existence means the witch prosecutors were right.

That either completely changes the potential truths of social science or delays their examination.

Yes let’s have people speak in public muffled by masks. I love the anti science we did, not too long ago, showing how easy it is to write the typical hysteric mob society. Fiction stories showing this level of obedience and ease of those in power to enslave the regular people seems unrealistic yet here we are. 😂

I think a really cool example of media exploring these two things is the manga Witch Hat Atelier, where the premise kinda is that magic is thought to be genetic by most of the people in the world, but the main character discovers that anyone with the right tools can do it, and it goes on from there. I think that the implications of it as it explores this kinda contrast between the ethics of those who were born being taught magic between those that aren't is just really fun to read.

I think this is another areas where the MICE quotient is relevant. Idea-based magic systems will be "hard", character-based magic (like which depends on moral issues, like moral purity, or being able to make a sacrifice to exchange for magical power) will be soft. Event-based magic would be situations that depend on an event happening that won't repeat for a long while, like an astronomical conjunction) is pretty hard; and setting-based magic will depend on relationships or status, or environment, can be hard or soft.

Mistborn Era 3 eugenics? 👀

I had never heard the term "soapbox" before..

"...If you've created a relationship of trust between your point of view character and your reader..." So.. basically, NOT Kvothe? 😅🙊

I like non-genetic/non-inherited magic systems, because they're more immersive.. I like the idea of, if I was in this world I COULD do that too.. But if it was genetic or required certain circumstances to achieve, even if I was in that world, I could just as easily have either not been born with it or been at the right place at the right time to attain it.. That's less fun to imagine. Even in my fantasies/musings, I don't want there to exist the possibility of me being uninteresting; who fantasizes about living in the Harry Potter world as a Muggle? If Harry Potter was real, and you were born a Muggle, that'd be really unfortunate.. So even though you can imagine yourself as "oh, I'd definitely have been born a Wizard!", but that's not a guarantee.. and maybe I am a pessimist or something, but I'd rather the POSSIBILITY be open for those not born within the system/world.

I started supplementing my hard sci-fi with urban fantasy back in 2010 which tends to stick to a harder rule set in their magic systems and I really appreciate that. so I usually reference the magicians or the Dresden files over harry potter when discussing such things personally.

It equals up to a different kind of escapism I guess because you have potter who gets whisked away into some secret world which allow him to distance himself from "Real world" problems while Dresden never really escapes and Coldwater's escapism is temporary.

I'm a audiobook fan so I listened to elantris some years back and just finished The last empire a few days ago and now I'm in warbreaker figuring things out.

If you write for children, you are given a blank check.

I like systems that are not genetic. I rather the hero gets taught any those systems by eccentric characters

Just remembered the first generation magic users born to muggle parents in Harry Potter

Potholes (breaks in the world building) are potholes. You travel down the road the story is taking and occasionally the is a bump. If the journey is interesting you ignore occasional small bumps. The bigger the bumps and the more often they come the less the top is worth it.

That's why I hated the water of irreplaceable resources for comparatively little on Waterworld but ignored it in Mad Max II