Talk:Magic

From Encyclopedia Ermariana
Jump to: navigation, search

Fields vs. types

I am having a little difficulty deciding what sort of thing should be classified where. It is easy to separate alchemy from spell casting, and possibly crafting as well. But the other fields all involve spell casting. The Vahnatai mention, for example, that they form a Crystal Soul by casting "our most powerful spell."

Now, Crystallomancy clearly involves skills that are not shared by traditional mages. The problem is that so do most subfields of spellcasting! Demonologists use skills that have nothing to do with any other kind of spellcasting. So the distinction is mostly profession-based, I guess: spell casting is all the stuff that mages traditionally do. But then what about Enchantment? The only heavy duty enchanting we've seen was done by three mages...

Would it work to list item crafting and crystalsmithing as separate fields, and to explain item enchantment and crystal soul creation as combinations of those fields with particular spells? ---Slartucker 10:39, 26 January 2006 (CST)

Narrow down "Spellcasting"?

Spell casting becomes a suspiciously broad field if we stretch it to include everything that is described as a spell. For the purposes of the entry, we should consider having spell casting be a "catch-all" for those kinds of magic that doesn't fit into other fields. Or we could eliminate it altogether and find a specific category for ALL spell-casting magic - if necessary, make one for "combat spells" or "battle magic".

But I'd hesitate to put all fields that aren't Alchemy as sub-fields of Spell-Casting, because that would distort the relative scope of the fields - it would make Alchemy seem like a field as broad as teleportation, necromancy, enchantment, etc. put together, when it really is just another field on par with these. Arancaytar | Send Reply! --- That is not dead which can eternal lie... 10:52, 26 January 2006 (CST)

Remove Spellcasting as a field?

What if we just moved Spellcasting up one level in the section hierarchy -- making it a general skill used in most magical fields, but not a field in itself. That sounds like it would resolve the conflict, and frankly it makes sense, so I'm going to go ahead and do it, unless you object. --- Slartucker 11:04, 26 January 2006 (CST)

Alchemy

I've always assumed that Alchemy isn't magic, more along the lines of the science of the day. Plenty of good alchemists are terrible mages or not even mages at all. --Drakey 14:52, 26 January 2006 (CST)

Sounds reasonable. Perhaps a section on things that are *not* proper magic? ---Slartucker 15:37, 26 January 2006 (CST)

Specialists

Should I list Solberg as a demonologist, too? I've always found that to be an extremely incongruous fact, considering his total lack of assistance fighting demons, and the fact that he was not one of the mages who sealed Grah-Hoth. The master minddueler bit was a lot more interesting and believable, and explained his exile. However, A2 does claim he's an expert on demons. Also, I've left Erika and Rentar-Ihrno out as they seem to have their fingers in everything. ---Slartucker 10:39, 26 January 2006 (CST)

He could well be an expert on exorcising demons - this field of magic might be lumped in together with demonology, thus making him a demonologist even though he has never summoned any. Arancaytar | Send Reply! --- That is not dead which can eternal lie... 10:52, 26 January 2006 (CST)
Micah lists Solberg, Rone, Linda, and Erika as those who attacked Grah-Hoth and the demons, even if he wasn't strong enough to seal Grah-Hoth. --Drakey
Technically, Micah just said Solberg was one of their leaders; given Solberg's tendency to avoid danger, I think it's very plausible he was a master strategist who cast lots of buffing spells and perhaps lobbed some ice lances but did not stand in the front lines. At any rate, if there are three other mages who know more about exorcism than Solberg, I *hope* it's not his area of specialty. ---Slartucker 12:44, 29 January 2006 (CST)

Additions

Elderan was a nice catch. Questions:

  • Garzahd and psionics? Considering that minddueling was supposed to be his weak spot, it hardly seems right to give him so much credit. Am I forgetting something?
  • X should probably be Enchantment (for the Xian items) but not Transformation. Transformation was inspired by the comments that it was easy for Erika to modify plants and trees to survive in Exile, but almost impossible for anyone else. Similarly, Rentar's alterations of the plague monsters. The Empire wizards who mutated giants might also go in that category. I need to put some descriptions in.
  • Sulfras and enchantment? Why?

---Slartucker 15:37, 26 January 2006 (CST)

I'll take Garzahd out and move X, but Sulfras should be in Enchantment because of the Beastslayer Blade. Also, wouldn't Nociduas be in Demonology? --Drakey 05:36, 27 January 2006 (CST)
He does summon a demon, but the game says "Nociduas, the deranged necromancer who built a little empire of the dead in these tunnels." I think we should change "specialists" to "known enchanters" in that category, since the art is so rare, and few if any of them spent most of their time enchanting. ---Slartucker 09:41, 27 January 2006 (CST)

Categories

Items? Bestiary? --Drakey

Wiki markup trouble

Slartucker wanted to link to those categories from the Divination section. Category links, like Image links, are automatically parsed differently from normal ones - and you can enter a category link at any point in the article.

For future reference, to make a "forced" text link to an image or a category, you need to prepend a colon.

[[:Category:Items|]] will link to Items. [[Category:Items]] will place the article into the Items category.

Arancaytar | Send Reply! --- That is not dead which can eternal lie... 06:12, 31 January 2006 (CST)

What makes a field

I don't think Curses constitutes its own field. We have seen relatively little cursing magic in E/A -- just several spells that do exactly the same thing, plus dread curses, cursed items and altars, and the special curse on Erika. The permanent curses on items, locations, and persons are clearly covered by the Warding and Enchantment fields. So the only reason to make such a field would be the generic curse spells, and one spell effect does not justify making a field, if you ask me. --- Slarty 20:56, 11 October 2006 (PDT)