Realistic Magic in RPG's

xXOblivionXx · Post by **xXOblivionXx** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:15 pm

Hey people, long time lurker here, finally decided to post.
So, my question is, what RPG's, tabletop or video games, have "realistic" rules for magic?
Now, when I say realistic I mean that magic follows most scientific principles and is based on science. That means no classical elements and arbitrary "schools" of magic based on how similar the spells are, but spells that have effects that could, at least theoretically, be reproduced by science and are grouped in scientific (or semi/pseudo-scientific) fields.

Edit: Also, if you know one similar to what I asked, please describe it.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:20 pm

If magic doesn't break the rules of physics as we understand them, how is it magic and not applied use of science--i.e., "mundane" technology?

Murtak · Post by **Murtak** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:22 pm

Oblivion: Shadowrun comes to mind in that has clear constraints for what magic can and can not do and that it's "schools" are largely grouped by effect and not by flavor text.

I'll have to second Archmage though, if you can reproduce "magic" with science, what makes it makes it magic?

xXOblivionXx · Post by **xXOblivionXx** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:44 pm

Archmage wrote:If magic doesn't break the rules of physics as we understand them, how is it magic and not applied use of science--i.e., "mundane" technology?

Is said it should follow most scientific principles. It should ignore only those that are required for it to be called magic and have semi-realistic explanations as to why it ignores them.

mean_liar · Post by **mean_liar** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:23 pm

I have no idea how to interpret your question and so I'll just answer the question I wish you would have asked for this thread:

"What RPG systems have attempted to create a codified non-arbitrary framework for their magic?"

Why xXOblivionXx, I'm glad you asked that question!

Ars Magica attempts this with varying degrees of success. It has some troubles as any system would, but on the whole its a coherent attempt to create a ground-up magical system that has a relatively predictable internal consistency.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:25 pm

That's pretty vague and subjective. Many systems could fall under those rules depending on how you interpret "following most scientific principles".

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:51 pm

xXOblivionXx wrote:Is said it should follow most scientific principles. It should ignore only those that are required for it to be called magic and have semi-realistic explanations as to why it ignores them.

Which "scientific principles" are you permitting magic in this system to violate? Conservation of mass? Conservation of energy? Gravity? The speed of light?

Most of my favorite game systems and worlds treat magic as a matter for scientific study--because if magic were real and obeyed consistent laws, that's what would happen. Its use alters physics as we understand it, but in magical worlds, magic plays by its own set of rules. If those rules are at all predictable, the obvious solution is to start thoroughly studying, hypothesizing, testing, observing, and experimenting with magic. Humans are naturally inquisitive, and we like to spend a lot of time trying to figure out how stuff works. The people of those game worlds who knew about would find its effects potentially incredible, but the oohs and aahs produced by an impressive spell are no different than those a fireworks display elicits in our world. The results are spectacular and no less-impressive just because they're understood. Both are examples of carefully applied knowledge and technique to produce something awesome.

The contrasting situation would be a world in which magic is completely random and uncontrollable. The same exact incantations and gestures would produce different and unpredictable results every time, even if all other conditions were as identical as possible (ambient mana, presence or absence of other people, having just the right number of fish within ten miles, whatever).

It sounds like what you're looking for is a game system or world that has rules for magic that are internally-consistent as described by an in-universe "science of magic," something I've seen called thaumatology. Is that correct?

MartinHarper · Post by **MartinHarper** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:07 pm

Archmage wrote:Most of my favorite game systems and worlds treat magic as a matter for scientific study--because if magic were real and obeyed consistent laws, that's what would happen.

I like this too. However, if I'm looking for a more traditional flavour, I prefer magic as an art. It is real and obeys consistent laws, but those laws are too complex for reductionist enquiry, at least for many millennia.

xXOblivionXx · Post by **xXOblivionXx** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:28 pm

Archmage wrote:It sounds like what you're looking for is a game system or world that has rules for magic that are internally-consistent as described by an in-universe "science of magic," something I've seen called thaumatology. Is that correct?

I think you understand mostly what I'm asking but that's not all. I'll try to explain this through examples because I really have no idea how to describe it.
So, I want, when I have a spell that makes zombies, to not have them being explained as the necromancer forcing a soul/spirit in a corpse, but use a semi/pseudo-scientific explanation as to how the necromancer animates it.

I hope I made myself clear enough, and I didn't frustrate you with my use of grammar, syntax etc. but english isn't my native language.

Gelare · Post by **Gelare** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:37 pm

xXOblivionXx wrote:So, I want, when I have a spell that makes zombies, to not have them being explained as the necromancer forcing a soul/spirit in a corpse, but use a semi/pseudo-scientific explanation as to how the necromancer animates it.

Stem cells. Definitely stem cells.

K · Post by K » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:23 pm

xXOblivionXx wrote:
Archmage wrote:It sounds like what you're looking for is a game system or world that has rules for magic that are internally-consistent as described by an in-universe "science of magic," something I've seen called thaumatology. Is that correct?
I think you understand mostly what I'm asking but that's not all. I'll try to explain this through examples because I really have no idea how to describe it.
So, I want, when I have a spell that makes zombies, to not have them being explained as the necromancer forcing a soul/spirit in a corpse, but use a semi/pseudo-scientific explanation as to how the necromancer animates it.

I hope I made myself clear enough, and I didn't frustrate you with my use of grammar, syntax etc. but english isn't my native language.

While there is plenty of fiction for this, no game has embraced it. Even Shadowrun has it's silliness.

That being said, I could probably write such a game using source material like Fringe, various Lovecraftian themes, and random stuff like Full Metal Alchemist, and do so without using psionics or meta-chloriants. However, you'd need to be very specific about how you are creating specific effects and not fall into something like the old DnD darkvision snafu.

The real problem is that one explanation is as good as another for most things. I can create a reasonable explanation for zombies (restarting or replacing the chemical processes for life brings a kind of psuedo life to a corpse), doing the same with a skeleton warrior is so far out of scientific bounds that any explanation sounds like magic anyway (I'd probably say that a personality imprint is put into a jewel, then placed into a skeleton that is animated by magic, but that is no more scientific than putting souls into things).

At best, I think you can cut a lot of the "magic logic" out of magic. So for example, Magic Missiles are not infallible homing rockets that only seek life, but are instead very fast like bullets and will bounce off an invisible Wall of Force instead of you not be able to target because of some magic logic "line of effect" BS that DnD uses.

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:41 pm

K wrote:The real problem is that one explanation is as good as another for most things.

And let us not forget that any sufficiently advanced technology is, to those who don't understand it, indistinguishable from magic.

老子 · Post by **老子** » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:49 pm

"Realistic" magic doesn't work in a game because it isn't balanced. Most effects require the ability to produce force or energy at a distance. With this ability you could easily kill everyone with little or no effort by pinching a blood vessel in their brain or severing the nerve that paces their heart.

A more realistic explanation for such abilities would be to say that one has the ability to collapse the waveform as they choose, which literally can produce any effect, with a cost in energy inversely proportional to the likelihood of the collapsed state. This is at least a vaguely plausible explanation for "magic" although how one would get that ability I do not know. Note that its still unbalanced, because people can be instantly killed with very small changes.

If you want to make realistic magic balanced in game terms you need to give that power only to NPCs (e.g. spirits or gods) and have PCs only access that power through petitioning them. The rules that these agents live by can be invoked to explain why one doesn't get the instant kills, or why some magic requires longer / more resources than other effects. But going back this route essentially brings us full circle, since once again magic works by arbitrary laws, attributable to the psychology of the magical beings.

angelfromanotherpin · Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:05 pm

My favorite scientific magic is from the Invincible comics. Basically, there was a super-advanced precursor race; and as they developed, their technology became more and more unobtrusive until it was basically undetectable (hidden in otherspace?); and easier and easier to control until it was thought-activated. They're gone now, but their tech remains, and while other sapient species' thoughts aren't the same, but they're close enough that they sometimes luck (or unluck) into being able to get it to do something by shaping their thoughts just right. Magic words are passwords or chunks of command interface. Rituals exist to create a particular state-of-mind.

After that, it's just Sufficiently Advanced, and people can tap into it to one degree or another.

Anguirus · Post by **Anguirus** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 2:31 am

Archmage wrote:
The contrasting situation would be a world in which magic is completely random and uncontrollable. The same exact incantations and gestures would produce different and unpredictable results every time, even if all other conditions were as identical as possible (ambient mana, presence or absence of other people, having just the right number of fish within ten miles, whatever).

What systems intentionally do this? How would you balance Chaos magic?

Archmage · Post by **Archmage** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 3:13 am

Anguirus wrote:What systems intentionally do this? How would you balance Chaos magic?

I can't actually think of any off-hand, but it's a common fantasy trope. In those settings, magic is usually depicted as a living and whimsical force that you can petition. It may or may not do what you say.

Personally, I don't think an actual game system like that would be much fun, because while randomness in terms of "do I succeed or not" is good for tension and makes success more exciting, "the same action won't always produce the same result" results in an unpredictable, schizophrenic universe. It wouldn't be too hard to adapt a set of wild magic tables to suit this sort of thing, though. If you were using D&D 3.5e as a base, you might keep the nine spell levels, create nine different tables, and make sure the higher-level tables were (usually) more impressive effects.

It totally turns the tactical landscape upside down when you're just as likely to spray a cloud of purple butterflies from your fingertips as you are to successfully cast grease. By which I mean there almost isn't one. You might as well play a game where all spellcasters have to roll every round to see if they spontaneously combust.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:53 am

Make the world a bit less entropic; let electromagnetic patterns persist a bit longer and be a bit stronger; make tissues a little more adaptable and harder to kill; make alchemists a bit smarter.

That's pretty much a recipe for magitech, but it will look a lot more like Arcanum technology and a lot less like generic "magic". On the bright side, it avoids midichlorians.

On the other side of things, coming up with some bullshit rules that sound reasonable and explaining things in terms of them makes magic seem less arbitrary and more cohesive. Sacrifice, sympathy, and pacts with other people or powerful beings (who have better bullshit magic that may or may nor be explained) are really common tropes.

Itay K · Post by **Itay K** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:52 am

xXOblivionXx wrote:.. that magic follows most scientific principles and is based on science ..

If you mean effects unachievable in Real Life that are explained with pseudo-science and technobabble, there are a couple of games with interesting fluff and horrible, horrible mechanics: oWoD Mage: the Ascension and fan game Genius: the Transgression.

Mage: the Tea Party
in MtA, the main antagonists (the Technocracy) and several playable factions (Sons of Ether and Virtual Adepts) possess PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWERS like the rest of the mages, but must normally explain their miracles through the lense of each factions specific idiom of hyperscience and technobabble. Furthermore, any kind of "magic" that grossly violates laws of causality and common sense in the MtA world is subject to Paradox, and so even the more traditional mages try to mask their spells with semi-plausible explanations, which, while not scientific per se, are often bullshit-science.

Genius: the Broken Mechanics
Where some factions in MtA use discredited scientific theories (most notable are the Sons of Ether, who cleave to the veracity of their eponymous hypothesis), Genius: the Transgression embraces this trope fully: PCs are "mad scientists" who perform miracles (so by definition are *not scientists*) that must conform to a personal, twisted, view of how the world works. The main antagonists are Geniuses who conform to major discredited Natural Philosophy theories - Ether, Phlogiston, Lamarckian and Lysenkoist biology, Orgone Energy, Psionics, Nazi Science, Christian Science, even Alchemy. So not only is there a pseudo-scientific explanation for every "magical" effect, it's also a major plot point. For anyone interested in Science History and the Philosophy of Science, the game manual is a very enjoyable read.

Other interesting reads
Unknown Armies had mechanomancers (or something similar?) who's schtick was using obsolete technology (clockwork and such) to create magical wonders.
Exalted has a mathematical school of magic, and a pseudo-scientific-method-using school of magic. They're not incredibly detailed and are kind of boring compared to the actual setting, but at least there's a bunch of magitech.

Just another user · Post by **Just another user** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:53 am

In a world where magic actually works magic is science.

But if I understand what you want there are some setting in GURPS that try to do that, Technomancer, for example.

If we are talking about internal consistent magic systems I think my favorite is the one in JAGS Wonderland, it is a little hard to explain it here but you can download it for free if you want to check it out, just Google "jags wonderland" to find it. The magic system is in the book called "book of knots" but the whole setting is -IMHO- a very interesting read.

Just another user · Post by **Just another user** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:04 am

Archmage wrote:
K wrote:The real problem is that one explanation is as good as another for most things.
And let us not forget that any sufficiently advanced technology is, to those who don't understand it, indistinguishable from magic.

And that any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:17 am

Realistic" magic doesn't work in a game because it isn't balanced. Most effects require the ability to produce force or energy at a distance. With this ability you could easily kill everyone with little or no effort by pinching a blood vessel in their brain or severing the nerve that paces their heart.

This doesn't have to be true, if you go with a couple principles:

1) The raw power and the precision of the effect both make it more difficult, and they are added, not multiplied. So slicing through a single sheet of paper without harming the piece under it might be as hard as incinerating a house.

2) It's nearly impossible (takes immense power for even small changes) to use magic on or within a living organism. This is the result of eons of evolution in a magical environment, similar to the immune system. Creatures with spell resistance are just slightly farther along in their development.

Korwin · Post by **Korwin** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:40 am

老子 wrote: "Realistic" magic doesn't work in a game because it isn't balanced. Most effects require the ability to produce force or energy at a distance. With this ability you could easily kill everyone with little or no effort by pinching a blood vessel in their brain or severing the nerve that paces their heart.

Reminds me of Eragon.

angelfromanotherpin wrote:My favorite scientific magic is from the Invincible comics. Basically, there was a super-advanced precursor race; and as they developed, their technology became more and more unobtrusive until it was basically undetectable (hidden in otherspace?); and easier and easier to control until it was thought-activated.

Remains me a little of There will be Dragons.

老子 · Post by **老子** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:54 am

Ice9 wrote: 1) The raw power and the precision of the effect both make it more difficult, and they are added, not multiplied. So slicing through a single sheet of paper without harming the piece under it might be as hard as incinerating a house.

2) It's nearly impossible (takes immense power for even small changes) to use magic on or within a living organism. This is the result of eons of evolution in a magical environment, similar to the immune system. Creatures with spell resistance are just slightly farther along in their development.

You could still: fill their lungs with a solid substance / create a blockage in their airway (creating it outside and using magic to force it inside), create a tiny wall of force around their mouth and nose, or drop a cloud of chlorine gas (or some even more lethal substance) on them. People are just too fragile for "realistic" magic; we are killed easily enough in mundane ways. If magic can do anything better than non-magic it will be killing people.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 11:34 am

You know, people play in modern and even futuristic games all the time, and it seems to work out. People being really fragile is no good for Sword and Sorcery, but there´s no reason it can´t work in a game.

You know, guns and shit.

-Username17

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:45 pm

老子 wrote: You could still: fill their lungs with a solid substance / create a blockage in their airway (creating it outside and using magic to force it inside), create a tiny wall of force around their mouth and nose, or drop a cloud of chlorine gas (or some even more lethal substance) on them. People are just too fragile for "realistic" magic; we are killed easily enough in mundane ways. If magic can do anything better than non-magic it will be killing people.

I don't really know why all this stuff has to immediately be possible just because magic obeys scientific principles.

Putting a tiny wall of force around someone's mouth and nose requires a great deal of precision, something that magic may not have. Creating some arbitrary shaped object that generates an airtight seal may well be very difficult to do. Holding it in place on a moving target may be even harder.

As far as generating deadly air based toxins, it's also possible the mage himself could breathe them in.

You can really make magic as deadly or as passive as you want, regardless of how scientific or realistic it is.

The Gaming Den

Realistic Magic in RPG's

Realistic Magic in RPG's

Re: Realistic Magic in RPG's