From: | Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU> |
---|---|
Subject: | Magic (Was: Re: Playing by the book) |
Date: | Wed, 27 Jul 1994 10:33:01 +1000 |
> Still coming, huh Luke? Ok,
Heh Heh.
> > [...] No, I mean the western tradition that you read about -
> > magic circles, Kabbalism, demon summoning, alchemy, etc. (Even Aleister
> > Crowley didn't stray _too_ far.) [...]
> Yep, there are a lot of writings, indeed. The actual roots are pretty
> fixed though. And well depicted in SRII. Instead of demons they have
> Horrors and Invae, Alchemy is alive and well, and circles too. Summoning
> circles used by Mages to call Elementals are an example. Demons aren't
> used for obvious reasons (fundies and fools) but a lot is.
Actually, I was listing the things that SR magic has that bear little or no
resemblance to the western tradition! I.e., the areas where SR doesn't
match the western tradition.
I guess the one I listed which comes closest is the magic circles. On the
other hand, the way you cast spells is wildly different (explained by saying
that the magic is easy, now, and doesn't require long complex rituals - fair
enough - but this should show you that it doesn't `match' the tradition).
Our GM (who did a Masters degree on the history of Alchemy), says that the
Alchemy in SR bears very little resemblance to real Alchemy.
> And if magic worked it would probably work in exactly that way.
I know what you mean by the above, but it sure sounds like a circular
argument, when taken out of context. Don't you just love the richness
of the english language? :-)
Incidentally, I have a theory:
A language's expressive power is inversely proportional to its
precision.
By `expressive power' I mean the ability to communicate all that the
originator of an idea meant when she came up with it.
luke@******.philosophical