Post by Hieronymous Banks-Walker on Mar 26, 2013 13:25:12 GMT -6
Magic is a sphere or more specifically we live within the Magics sphere. It encompasses the entirety of our known reality plus several we have no understanding.
In generality it can be broken down into several quadrants. Starting with Innate or Learned. And while Learned is the assigned name. It does not mean taught in a formal setting. Though there are schools and teachers willing to instruct in their style and thoughts on magic. Usually however Learned styles are self-taught or passed down from one ancestor usually with lots of trial and error; heavy emphasis on error.
From Innate and Learned there is a choice of High or Low which can be summed up with a choice between ritualized wider larger effects and smaller self-contained usually verbally activated effects. Then the last major choice is Dominant or Off-handed.
Now while these choices are listed as such there is a great deal of overlap. Not just in stylistic choices but in application. A high innate magic wielding witch could in fact use a low born learned style or spell. But as they have grown accustomed to a certain manner and method there would be some translation needed for them. And vice versa. Magic really is all encompassing. And once more we are back to the Dominant hand or Off hand choice.
To put it simply it is one of the most important choice as what is sown will be reaped. As magic is everywhere it is always watching always waiting and when least expected the rubber-band will snap back with the same force as it was pulled. A Dominant handed spell is forthright and designed to help. A Off hand spell is deceitful and designed to hurt. Some would say it’s a choice of good and evil. But its more and less than that all at once. It is not a choice of life or death; as death and life are parts of the same cycle one begets the other. Often out of the normalized order everyone believes. As my father once said as every death can be used for power so can every life learn to use that power. What can I say he was a poet a heart.
It seems a lot I get it but this is just the tip of the iceberg as there are also rules. Well theories that have become rules. You see even as magic is a living breathing thing that is all there are times and moments where it calcifies into a hardened aspect of the world. Such as with the Fae. Though they’ve divorced themselves from the bulk of their magic there are laws that govern them. Things that they can no longer do because well they’ve taught themselves that they can’t. Don’t get me started with them. Well maybe later after a few whisky sours and some very good mescaline.
But the laws, the rules of magic are:
The Law of Contagion: Once together, always together or The part of the thing is the whole of the thing: A part of something - like one of someone's possessions or a part of their body - can be used to work magic on it over a distance as though it were physically present. The more intimate the connection the better the link works so a discarded cigarette packet is little use, whilst a favorite shirt or piece of jewelry is better and part of someone is ideal.
The Law of Sympathy: Like attracts like or the image is the thing: Where a contagion isn't possible an image of the target may be used instead. The better the image, the better the link - and even better if the target has personally endorsed the image. Signed photos are really good for this. Combining sympathy and contagion is the basis of Poppet Magic.
The Law of Correspondence: Things look like what they are or as above, so below: This is the basis of astrological magic (that things correspond with their astrological profile) and can also be used to identify useful herbs and suchlike (if it looks right, or has the same astrological profile as your target, it probably helps). Something similar lies behind the (discredited) theology of the Doctrine of Signatures. It's a toss-up as to whether the use of a target's name in a working is Correspondence or Sympathy - depends who you ask.
The Law of Consent: No injury is done to the willing or this works a lot easier with your co-operation: Depending on who you ask, this is either about the idea that magic is said to have difficulty effecting those who do not believe in it and/or about the idea that it is possible to consciously resist magic and it is far easier to operate a working upon someone who consents to be targeted than someone who doesn't. The concept of the humbug is said to take advantage of this.
Equivalent Exchange: Everything has a price: Magic conserves a given level of value (although one or both "parties" may have different ideas of how something is valued) and a given effect must be paid for with something of at least equal worth. Part of the fun of magic where this applies is making absolutely sure you understand what you are paying before you seal the deal. This also tends to lead to magic that takes the path of least resistance, moving stuff about rather than creating it and what have you. Where the price is far more than the benefit, you're probably entering monkey's paw territory.
Reciprocity (aka. "The Law of Triples"): Whatever you do by magic, for good or ill will be repaid to you threefold: Based on the idea that the universe is "karmic" and rewards or punishes the use of magic. Fervently believed by many people but mostly nothing more than wishful thinking by those who think that there is a difference between "white" and "black" magic. However, particularly when dealing with things like shamanistic practice, maleficium and other "hostile" magics will put you into contact with the sort of spirits that enjoy that sort of thing, meaning they can find you and effect you much more easily and they are rarely the sort of spirits you want finding you and effecting you even without the encouragement of a hostile worker.
Reversal: Whatever magic does, magic can undo: Somewhat controversial, the idea that anything created by magic can be dispelled or otherwise undone by magic without needing to be physically destroyed. Conversely, this also allows there to be space for anything killed by magic to be brought back under the right conditions…
Distortion: Magic changes nothing … permanently: Even more controversial than the "Law" of Reversal, the idea that magic works by bending the universe out of shape but does not actually change it - sooner or later the world will snap back into its original shape. This is a good mechanism for causing no ontological inertia and explosive breakage of magical phenomena but does not fit with everyone's experience of magic.
The Law of Balance: In the end, everything balances out: Very much related to the laws of equivalent exchange and reciprocity, this idea suggests that magic cannot create or destroy anything, but must move it from place to place (or time to time) - so good fortune now must be repaid by bad fortune later, restoring life to someone means taking it from someone else … that sort of thing. Again, not fully attested to by any magical tradition but popular in various mythiea regardless. Known to modern cynics as "the Marxist theory of magic".
Backlash: If you don't know where it's pointed, it's pointed at you: Some traditions hold that once a magical working is started - especially a working of the harmful variety - it needs to go somewhere. There are likely to be ways and means of safely "earthing" an aborted working (if you can get them right and have the chance to do so), but more worrying still are those workings which miss their target and/or snap back because they are resisted or reflected. Death spells are especially notorious for rebounding on the caster if they fail to kill the target. Such traditions may well develop ways of passing the damage onto someone else - especially the clients of those casters performing this kind of sending for hire or reward. This is the sort of context in which you need to be absolutely sure of your targeting data before you start your attack.
Now again this may seem all consuming and immutable. They are; in fact immutable they are the foundations of our grasp of magic. Which means like all things mystical there is an exception for every law and a law for every exception. That however is the advanced class. We’ll get to those at another time. Suffice it to say all things are true and some things are truer than others.
But I‘d like to revisit a portion we’ve already spoken about learned and innate.
Innately all beings are capable of working their wills in the magical sphere to a certain point even if they are not able to do much. In the innate category are nulls. These individuals are dangerous as they in effect are antibodies. Their innate natural state is just that anti. To varying degrees, from those able to see the underpinnings of magic, whether they know it or not, to those who by their very presence can unmake, ward against, counter the very workings of magic. They are more numerous than say your run of the mill mid-level true necromancer (which is a whole other ball of yarn. These folks have been mislabeled for so long, hence why I say ‘True Necromancer’ when referring to them.) but still quite rare. Typically they are killed by the very thing they are designed to rout. Mores the pity.
Also in the innate are psychic. As I stated magic is everywhere to varying degrees. These innate witches are well able to effect magic on a more direct and measurable level. They are just wired a little different. Imagine the difference between a black light and a florescent one. While witches as a whole are blacklights able to see and highlight what most are not able to intuit. Psychics are able to shine a light for all to see though only what anyone who wasn’t blind could intuit. And much like the Mancers versus Kinetics there is a world of difference between one to the next. Even with all of the commonalities. A learned psychic who can remained focused enough to broaden their horizons are very, very dangerous. Able to work their wills subtlely without stretching the rubber-band enough for it to snap back and devastate them and their loved ones. Luckily the truly powerful are usually plagued by their innate abilities and rarely focused enough to cause more problems than one lifetime could erase.
Oh? Mancers and Kinetics, it’s a stylistic argument about which abilities read spells are which. My stance is there is always more than one way to go about a thing and the overlap is not worth the trouble in untying truly. But what do you think a person who can willfully and innately scry the possible futures of decided actions would say. Everything is happening at once for me as each decision each choice creates a shattered kaleidoscope of potential and finding which thread a person should tread is well almost impossible. One thing is as good as another and who cares what you call it so long as you either don’t screw-up, screw-up small enough to not hurt anyone, or fix your screw-up without creating more mess?
In generality it can be broken down into several quadrants. Starting with Innate or Learned. And while Learned is the assigned name. It does not mean taught in a formal setting. Though there are schools and teachers willing to instruct in their style and thoughts on magic. Usually however Learned styles are self-taught or passed down from one ancestor usually with lots of trial and error; heavy emphasis on error.
From Innate and Learned there is a choice of High or Low which can be summed up with a choice between ritualized wider larger effects and smaller self-contained usually verbally activated effects. Then the last major choice is Dominant or Off-handed.
Now while these choices are listed as such there is a great deal of overlap. Not just in stylistic choices but in application. A high innate magic wielding witch could in fact use a low born learned style or spell. But as they have grown accustomed to a certain manner and method there would be some translation needed for them. And vice versa. Magic really is all encompassing. And once more we are back to the Dominant hand or Off hand choice.
To put it simply it is one of the most important choice as what is sown will be reaped. As magic is everywhere it is always watching always waiting and when least expected the rubber-band will snap back with the same force as it was pulled. A Dominant handed spell is forthright and designed to help. A Off hand spell is deceitful and designed to hurt. Some would say it’s a choice of good and evil. But its more and less than that all at once. It is not a choice of life or death; as death and life are parts of the same cycle one begets the other. Often out of the normalized order everyone believes. As my father once said as every death can be used for power so can every life learn to use that power. What can I say he was a poet a heart.
It seems a lot I get it but this is just the tip of the iceberg as there are also rules. Well theories that have become rules. You see even as magic is a living breathing thing that is all there are times and moments where it calcifies into a hardened aspect of the world. Such as with the Fae. Though they’ve divorced themselves from the bulk of their magic there are laws that govern them. Things that they can no longer do because well they’ve taught themselves that they can’t. Don’t get me started with them. Well maybe later after a few whisky sours and some very good mescaline.
But the laws, the rules of magic are:
The Law of Contagion: Once together, always together or The part of the thing is the whole of the thing: A part of something - like one of someone's possessions or a part of their body - can be used to work magic on it over a distance as though it were physically present. The more intimate the connection the better the link works so a discarded cigarette packet is little use, whilst a favorite shirt or piece of jewelry is better and part of someone is ideal.
The Law of Sympathy: Like attracts like or the image is the thing: Where a contagion isn't possible an image of the target may be used instead. The better the image, the better the link - and even better if the target has personally endorsed the image. Signed photos are really good for this. Combining sympathy and contagion is the basis of Poppet Magic.
The Law of Correspondence: Things look like what they are or as above, so below: This is the basis of astrological magic (that things correspond with their astrological profile) and can also be used to identify useful herbs and suchlike (if it looks right, or has the same astrological profile as your target, it probably helps). Something similar lies behind the (discredited) theology of the Doctrine of Signatures. It's a toss-up as to whether the use of a target's name in a working is Correspondence or Sympathy - depends who you ask.
The Law of Consent: No injury is done to the willing or this works a lot easier with your co-operation: Depending on who you ask, this is either about the idea that magic is said to have difficulty effecting those who do not believe in it and/or about the idea that it is possible to consciously resist magic and it is far easier to operate a working upon someone who consents to be targeted than someone who doesn't. The concept of the humbug is said to take advantage of this.
Equivalent Exchange: Everything has a price: Magic conserves a given level of value (although one or both "parties" may have different ideas of how something is valued) and a given effect must be paid for with something of at least equal worth. Part of the fun of magic where this applies is making absolutely sure you understand what you are paying before you seal the deal. This also tends to lead to magic that takes the path of least resistance, moving stuff about rather than creating it and what have you. Where the price is far more than the benefit, you're probably entering monkey's paw territory.
Reciprocity (aka. "The Law of Triples"): Whatever you do by magic, for good or ill will be repaid to you threefold: Based on the idea that the universe is "karmic" and rewards or punishes the use of magic. Fervently believed by many people but mostly nothing more than wishful thinking by those who think that there is a difference between "white" and "black" magic. However, particularly when dealing with things like shamanistic practice, maleficium and other "hostile" magics will put you into contact with the sort of spirits that enjoy that sort of thing, meaning they can find you and effect you much more easily and they are rarely the sort of spirits you want finding you and effecting you even without the encouragement of a hostile worker.
Reversal: Whatever magic does, magic can undo: Somewhat controversial, the idea that anything created by magic can be dispelled or otherwise undone by magic without needing to be physically destroyed. Conversely, this also allows there to be space for anything killed by magic to be brought back under the right conditions…
Distortion: Magic changes nothing … permanently: Even more controversial than the "Law" of Reversal, the idea that magic works by bending the universe out of shape but does not actually change it - sooner or later the world will snap back into its original shape. This is a good mechanism for causing no ontological inertia and explosive breakage of magical phenomena but does not fit with everyone's experience of magic.
The Law of Balance: In the end, everything balances out: Very much related to the laws of equivalent exchange and reciprocity, this idea suggests that magic cannot create or destroy anything, but must move it from place to place (or time to time) - so good fortune now must be repaid by bad fortune later, restoring life to someone means taking it from someone else … that sort of thing. Again, not fully attested to by any magical tradition but popular in various mythiea regardless. Known to modern cynics as "the Marxist theory of magic".
Backlash: If you don't know where it's pointed, it's pointed at you: Some traditions hold that once a magical working is started - especially a working of the harmful variety - it needs to go somewhere. There are likely to be ways and means of safely "earthing" an aborted working (if you can get them right and have the chance to do so), but more worrying still are those workings which miss their target and/or snap back because they are resisted or reflected. Death spells are especially notorious for rebounding on the caster if they fail to kill the target. Such traditions may well develop ways of passing the damage onto someone else - especially the clients of those casters performing this kind of sending for hire or reward. This is the sort of context in which you need to be absolutely sure of your targeting data before you start your attack.
Now again this may seem all consuming and immutable. They are; in fact immutable they are the foundations of our grasp of magic. Which means like all things mystical there is an exception for every law and a law for every exception. That however is the advanced class. We’ll get to those at another time. Suffice it to say all things are true and some things are truer than others.
But I‘d like to revisit a portion we’ve already spoken about learned and innate.
Innately all beings are capable of working their wills in the magical sphere to a certain point even if they are not able to do much. In the innate category are nulls. These individuals are dangerous as they in effect are antibodies. Their innate natural state is just that anti. To varying degrees, from those able to see the underpinnings of magic, whether they know it or not, to those who by their very presence can unmake, ward against, counter the very workings of magic. They are more numerous than say your run of the mill mid-level true necromancer (which is a whole other ball of yarn. These folks have been mislabeled for so long, hence why I say ‘True Necromancer’ when referring to them.) but still quite rare. Typically they are killed by the very thing they are designed to rout. Mores the pity.
Also in the innate are psychic. As I stated magic is everywhere to varying degrees. These innate witches are well able to effect magic on a more direct and measurable level. They are just wired a little different. Imagine the difference between a black light and a florescent one. While witches as a whole are blacklights able to see and highlight what most are not able to intuit. Psychics are able to shine a light for all to see though only what anyone who wasn’t blind could intuit. And much like the Mancers versus Kinetics there is a world of difference between one to the next. Even with all of the commonalities. A learned psychic who can remained focused enough to broaden their horizons are very, very dangerous. Able to work their wills subtlely without stretching the rubber-band enough for it to snap back and devastate them and their loved ones. Luckily the truly powerful are usually plagued by their innate abilities and rarely focused enough to cause more problems than one lifetime could erase.
Oh? Mancers and Kinetics, it’s a stylistic argument about which abilities read spells are which. My stance is there is always more than one way to go about a thing and the overlap is not worth the trouble in untying truly. But what do you think a person who can willfully and innately scry the possible futures of decided actions would say. Everything is happening at once for me as each decision each choice creates a shattered kaleidoscope of potential and finding which thread a person should tread is well almost impossible. One thing is as good as another and who cares what you call it so long as you either don’t screw-up, screw-up small enough to not hurt anyone, or fix your screw-up without creating more mess?