[Books] What "level" of magic do you prefer in your fantasy literature?

[Brightamethyst]

I've got no prefference.
Just what is in the world has to be solid and thought through. It needs to keep the same and not just "Did you know what?" About it two thirds into the story. You can leave things unexplained, or untold. But not outright CHANGE the rules.
If magic is well incorporated and thought through I don't mind any different way.

Pretty much this. As long as the system -whatever it may be- works well, I don't really care how intense on prevalent the magic itself is.



On a side note, it's interesting that someone mentioned Sword Art Online as that falls into a different category altogether. One where the world itself is magic (dragons, health potions, teleport crystals, etc) but there's no spell casting by people themselves.

[aekya]

Just want to point out, magic may be everywhere in Harry Potter, but magic in LOTR is much more powerful, and can achieve some batshit crazy effects. So it depends on how you look at it, which setting is "higher" in magic.

On topic, I prefer D&D, where magic is on ultra super mega crack 24/7.

Example of magic in D&D: Nailed to the sky.

Conjuration (Teleportation)
Spellcraft DC: 62
Components: V, S ,XP
Range: 300 ft.
Target: Creature or object weighing up to 1,000 lb.
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
To Develop: 558,000 gp; 12 days; 22,320 XP. Seeds: foresee (to preview endpoint of teleportation) (DC 17), transport (DC 27). Factors: unwilling target (+4 DC), increase range from touch (+4 DC), 1-action casting time (+20 DC). Mitigating factor: burn 1,000 XP (–10 DC).

Nailed to the sky actually places the target so far from the surface of the world and at such a speed that it keeps missing the surface as it falls back, so it enters an eternal orbit. Unless the target can magically fly or has some other form of non-physical propulsion available, the target is stuck until someone else rescues it. Even if the target can fly, the surface is 2 to 4 hours away, assuming a fly spell, which allows a maximum speed of 720 feet per round while descending. The target may not survive that long. Depending on the world where nailed to the sky is cast, conditions so far from its surface may be deadly. Deleterious effects include scorching heat, cold, and vacuum. Targets subject to these conditions take 2d6 points of damage each from heat or cold and 1d4 points of damage from the vacuum each round. The target immediately begins to suffocate.

Yes, there is a relatively minor Epic Spell in D&D that sends the opponent INTO FUCKING ORBIT.

Hahaha gotta love D&D magic, then again if one has enough power, why the hell not?
One of my personal favorites is "avasculate":

"You shoot a ray of necromantic energy from your outstretched hand, causing any living creature struck by the ray to violently purge blood or other vital fluids through its skin."

Nasty stuff.

Elemental magic can also be quite nasty if used "creatively"
For example an air magician can suffocate someone, or make someons lungs explode, why bother with over complicated stuff?
Or a water magician... well, the body is mostly water, so go figure what you can do with that.

Now that i think of it, fire is likely the weakest element...

Anyway!

I like all of them to be honest, although i wouldnt consider harry potter magic to be "high magic", since most of it is quite... weak and unspectacular, but if you are referring on the amount of magic usage, then yeah ok, compared to the others it is higher.

Would have preference for "high" magic, albeit a tad stronger than harry potter.
If its fantasy, then hell, go fantasy!

[Kerath]

No real preference here.
As long as the magic system (if it exists) is well thought out, and the author uses it in a consistent manner, I'm content.

[Deleted]

Warcraft level kind of magic and The Elder Scrolls kind of magic.

[vep]

Just want to point out, magic may be everywhere in Harry Potter, but magic in LOTR is much more powerful, and can achieve some batshit crazy effects. So it depends on how you look at it, which setting is "higher" in magic.

I haven't read the LoTR books but I know all three movies well enough. Nowhere in the movies is magic used to such an extent that would give an impression that it is much more powerful than Harry Potter's magic. In the Return of the King, as far as I can remember, Gandalf uses no kind of magic against a freaking army of orcs, trolls and similar. Harry Potter, however, has tons of spells. Each one different from another and more powerful than the other.

Also, as to your "Conjuration" spell: O_o


EDIT: I apologize for that. I failed to note the [Books] in the title :/

[draynay]

I am fine with whatever as long as the rules for the world are pretty standard and enjoyable

just because there is plenty of magic does not make it unremarkable

take the Xanth series for instance, there is magic everywhere, but it is still stratified enough that remarkable practitioners are remarkable, and other rubes can only make their pee change color or something

[OrcsRLame]

I haven't read the LoTR books but I know all three movies well enough. Nowhere in the movies is magic used to such an extent that would give an impression that it is much more powerful than Harry Potter's magic. In the Return of the King, as far as I can remember, Gandalf uses no kind of magic against a freaking army of orcs, trolls and similar. Harry Potter, however, has tons of spells. Each one different from another and more powerful than the other.

Also, as to your "Conjuration" spell: O_o


EDIT: I apologize for that. I failed to note the [Books] in the title :/

The movies aren't canon. First off, Gandalf never unleashes his true powers, ever. Gandalf is basically a demigod. If he wanted to vaporize the entire planet in a hail of fire and death he could. The reason Gandalf doesn't use his real powers is simply because he promised his father, Eru Iluvatar that he wouldn't.

You see, Eru is God, and his intentions are a little difficult to discern. The way I saw it, it was sort of like a test for Gandalf. He was told that he was to go to Middle Earth, battle Sauron, act as a guide to the people of Middle Earth, and ultimately defeat the shadow, saving the world. And he was to do all of this while only relying minimally on his powers. You see, Gandalf is actually the same species as the Balrog. Only he's much more powerful. The Balrog of Morgoth was one of the hundreds of unnamed Maiar created in the first age. Gandalf was one of the original 14 Maiar created to serve the Valar. The Balrog from the movies is an ant compared to Gandalf. It's like comparing a baby to a heavyweight boxer.

---------- Post added 2012-08-23 at 11:38 AM ----------

Hahaha gotta love D&D magic, then again if one has enough power, why the hell not?
One of my personal favorites is "avasculate":

"You shoot a ray of necromantic energy from your outstretched hand, causing any living creature struck by the ray to violently purge blood or other vital fluids through its skin."

Nasty stuff.

Elemental magic can also be quite nasty if used "creatively"
For example an air magician can suffocate someone, or make someons lungs explode, why bother with over complicated stuff?
Or a water magician... well, the body is mostly water, so go figure what you can do with that.

Now that i think of it, fire is likely the weakest element...

Anyway!

I like all of them to be honest, although i wouldnt consider harry potter magic to be "high magic", since most of it is quite... weak and unspectacular, but if you are referring on the amount of magic usage, then yeah ok, compared to the others it is higher.

Would have preference for "high" magic, albeit a tad stronger than harry potter.
If its fantasy, then hell, go fantasy!

One of my favorites is fire storm, just pumped up with lots of metamagic feats. Enhanced intensified enlarged quickened multispell fire storm. 2 20 Foot cubes per caster level, dealing 360 points of fire damage. Cast it as many times per round as you've taken multispell, as long as you have the spell slots to support it. At that point you're ready to blow up a small city with the blink of an eye. For extra funzies throw in energy substitution and bathe everything in acid or electricity.

[Dyra]

Either so rare that it's appearences are unique and foreboding OR so very common and over the top that you move into the realm of otherworldly god-like interaction. The middle-ground, I find, to be boring.

I think this sums it up for me. But tbh I do prefer books that have large amount of uses of magic. So that's the option I went for. ^_^

[Deleted]

Low or medium.

[Daws001]

I voted "No strong feelings" because I loved how Tolkien handled magic in his books but I also loved Rowling's take in Harry Potter.

The only time I don't like magic is when there's no rules to keep it in check (or loose/unclear limitations or boundaries on magic). When it becomes an easy out and plots are easily resolved because X character shows up and waves her arms and all is better...that's just boring. Harry Potter's magic was kept in check by a bunch of rules and limitations so I really enjoyed it.

[Baracuda]

It's all good.

[PizzaSHARK]

Fantasy literature obviously has many facets and magic if just one of them.

But regarding magic, what kind of books do you prefer?

Those where magic is very prevalent and dominates much of the plot. Think Harry Potter where almost very plot item is either a wizard or a magical artefact.

Those with a medium prevalence of magic as for example in Lord of the Rings, where magic is special but not rare. It takes many shapes and forms but most of the protagonists and antagonists follow mundane rules.

Or do you prefer those with a low/non-existent level of magic as is the case in A Song of Ice a Fire, where magic used to exist, but has practically died out (and is now only slowly returning)? Most actors follow within the naturally determined guidelines of human behaviour.

Low-level magic, like in the Black Company books and most everything else Glen Cook has written. Magic is powerful but is constrained by real limits, and battles are won or lost by soldiers, not by sorcerors. Sorcerors can influence the shape of a battle but can't win a battle alone.