Namely, it seems like magic is a limitless resource. Sure, wizards have to learn their spells, and there are some wizards that are better at learning or performing spells than others, but it seems like in a lot of fiction magic is the gift that keeps on giving and once you have a spell you can use it over and over and over again.
(Of the things I listed, The Name of the Wind is an exception where there does have to be a source that's used for the magic, and the main character learns pretty quick that there can be serious repercussions for using the wrong source.)
But in Harry Potter, they can cast "Lumos" or "Expelliarmus" or even "Avada Kedavera" over and over again without stopping. In Doctor Strange, it seems like there's no cost to doing any particular spell. (It does mention the repercussions of using magic overall, but that's something different). The Magicians, same thing.
This gives magical characters an edge that non-magic users definitely don't have. For one, they get vast powers that aren't available to other people. A youth who has never fought might not have the skill of a swordmaster or know different fighting styles, but they can pick up a sword and swing it around and do some damage. A youth who has no experience in magic can't even attempt it. But on top of that, there seems to be no limit to the number of times these vast powers can be used. Even the strongest swordsman eventually tires, but so far as I can tell, a magician doesn't necessarily seem to tire just by doing magic (learning magic, maybe, or the conditions in which they are performing the magic, but not, apparently, the magic itself). On top of all that, magical users do also have a physical presence that they can build up that doesn't inherently need to be any weaker because of their magical talent.
I'm not, inherently saying that this is a bad thing. I think it makes these things somewhat less believable if I think too much on it, but I'm able to convince myself it's okay if the setting stays consistent. Mostly, I just think it's odd and unbalanced. It makes it so that if your main character is a magic user, then the antagonist must generally be a magic user in order to even begin to compete. Magic might give a broad spectrum of powers, but being limited to being someone who has it seems like a restriction I don't necessarily want to have. Besides that, I think a main character with any ability that is limitless tends to reduce the tension/drama of a story, rather than making it more engaging.
Anyway, that's just my thoughts/observation. What do you think?
In Harry Potter, wouldn't the wands be like a source of power or, at least, a conductor or a conduit. At that point, it becomes more like an alien ray gun with a nuclear battery or an arc reactor-powered repulsor. This leads me to ask if this is common with things other than magic, like technology. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteWhile I do think that limited magic is more interesting and allows for more diverse storytelling, the point of unlimited magic seems to be to set it apart from 'normal' society. Life as a muggle is dull and boring, but life as a wizard is exciting. A doctor can save a few lives, but a sorcerer can save realities. It represents something that promises to be more fulfilling than everyday life, which I believe is a theme in The Magicians from what I know.
I absolutely think that science fiction often utilizes technology in similar ways to how fantasy uses magic. (Although, since I hadn't really thought about Limitless Magic before, thinking about it in the context of Limitless Science makes me realize ways in which I have been guilty of this vary thing.)
DeleteBut yeah, a ray gun, sonic screwdriver, or other piece of technology that doesn't have any energy dependence is equally guilty of this issue. The more functions the piece of technology has unlimitedly (or the more fancy technologies that the character has access to), the more guilty it is. See: Tony Stark, Science Wizard or The Doctor, Sci Fi Wizard.
But yeah, Heroism and Other Lies does some of this, and now that I'm aware of it, it's an issue I'll want to address in future volumes.
I agree that it does serve to set it apart from what is 'normal', but likewise, there is a reason we have very few books about utopias: things that are flawless are less captivating for viewers.
Similarly, I think that Captain America is one of the best super heroes. However, he's one of my least favorite to watch, because he is morally perfect. He doesn't seem to really have internal struggle, since he always knows and does what is honest/right, even if it isn't what will provide the best results. The last two Captain America movies have countered that by making the world itself more morally grey and interesting, making it so that rather than looking to Captain America for the drama/internal tension, they can look to him as an anchor in an otherwise more interesting world. I propose that these movies are less about Captain America, and more about the conflicts the setting is going through. Therefore, they are more interesting than one about his conflicts and challenges.
As I mentioned previously, in stories with unlimited magic, for something that perfect to be interesting, it has to be challenged by equal or greater perfection/power. The enemy has to have magic as well, and have more spells or more powerful spells or any number of things like that.
But yeah, limitless magic is interesting from a wish fulfillment "it would be really cool if I had this" sort of way, but I think it does less for story development than magic that either has limits or that is unlimited but has a price for using it.
If you've ever read the inheritance series, magic in that world is limited by the energy of some source (typically the user). It would take just as much energy to lift a box magically as normally.
ReplyDeleteI believe the practitioner can also store magic in crystals or use energy of nearby nature if they so desire as well.
Even with this constraint, I think there is a large gap between magic users and non magic users.
"It would take just as much energy to lift a box magically as normally." Yeah, this is a huge advantage to magic users. It takes 20 calories to lift a box with my arms, OR, I can do it presumably from farther away (an advantage) magically with no additional cost?
DeleteI think that is a part of the "advantage," at least as far as balance and/or realism goes, of the Kingkiller Chronicles, since it's really hard to get that perfect 1:1 relationship between things-there's usually energy lost.
Yes. This is very true. It does seem to be more limited than say HP, but still much less so than sympathy of Name of the Wind. Though other types of magic in Name of the Wind do not hold to the same rules. Namely... naming isn't constrained to any energy source, only the understanding of the user.
Delete