The Magic of Writing · 10:04pm Nov 15th, 2021
When it comes to writing fantasy or science fiction, locking in the rules of your magic system or unique technology is a huge subject that writers can get lost in when they try to tackle it. Whether it’s some field of future tech or a system of spells, “magic” in a story is simply a way for your world to stand out on its own.
Magic systems employ a lot of ideas about worldbuilding, reimagining how societies form around the existence of magic, how the magic itself is used, whether magic is esoteric knowledge or studied like a science. And most famous of all, the “hard vs soft” magic might be the most commonly known topic within how to write a magic system. But forget all of that because your magic is boring.
That’s right, magic isn’t fun anymore, nobody cares. Soft and hard systems, throw them out! They don’t matter. What makes a magic system an integral driving force of a story is not what that system is, but how it reflects your characters’ actions and relationships.
Part 1: A solid example
Avatar the Last Airbender will be a quick and brief introduction to this concept, and just by mentioning it fans of the show will already know what I’m talking about. The magic system of the world, bending, is considered a hard magic system. Certain people can use martial arts to move 1 of 4 elements, except for the Avatar.
What makes it interesting, beyond the stunning martial arts animation, is that the system incorporates the martial arts philosophies into the culture and mindset of the practitioners, and in doing so, reflects the behaviours of our main cast. As an air nomad, Aang is flighty and evasive in his personality, not just fighting. And he must learn to first stand up for himself before he can physically stand firm as an earthbender. Zuko is a prince of the Fire Nation, a nation which fully embraces their expansionist policy like an all-consuming fire. His interactions with the main cast are driven by his hunger for his birthright: honor and his royal standing, and it’s reflected in the aggression and forward pressure of fire bending.
Part 2: Arcane
Recently Netflix has released a new animated show “Arcane.” Though inspired by the lore of the highly-popular MOBA, League of Legends, thus far the show has proven itself to be a stellar stand-alone title, and it pains me to talk about just one aspect of its amazing performance. However, it has a masterful interplay between magic and its characters, and that is the topic of the day. Minor spoilers for Arcane. If you haven’t seen it, and you have Netflix, go watch it. If you have time to watch anything, there is no reason to pass this show up.
There are two core components to the magic of Arcane: blue energy crystals capable of great feats of physical distortion, called “Hextech,” and “Shimmer,” a performance-enhancing solution peddled as a street drug. The story of Arcane alternates between two sides of a sprawling city, the wealthy Topside and the crime-operated Underground.
Hextech reflects the ideals of the city which its inventors live in. Jayce (shown above) and his dear friend Viktor manifest their visions of progress into their Hextech, and it is widely celebrated by the upper-class elites. Hextech is built into the architecture, its magic is almost mechanical in nature, and its power is not granted to Jayce and Viktor, but rather given to their city. Their power only comes from the reputation and knowledge they acquire from building Hextech.
Reputation and knowledge. Responsibility and progress. These are the two sides of their magic, and it is interesting because it is played out between the two inventors’ relationship. Viktor is sickly and frail, Jayce is charismatic and bold. Both are genius inventors, but as Jayce’s inventions bring him more public and political attention, he begins to focus on his current responsibilities of managing magic, while Viktor’s sickness pushes him further into his study.
Then, we have the drug called shimmer. A purplish fluid, it alters and strengthens whoever consumes it, gradually damaging the body while being addictive. Shimmer as a source of “magic” reflects the main antagonist’s outlook on life and power; for the beaten-down people living underground, true power belongs to those who will “do anything to achieve it.”
Shimmer is powerful, immediate, and personal. It doesn’t need to be built up, it’s not embedded in architecture and gadgetry. Its user sacrifices a part of themselves for its boon because they are desperate for the relief it will give. Later in the series, a minute amount of shimmer seems to be added into a potion to immediately heal the injured protagonist. Again, we see immediacy, desperation, and personal benefit.
The power of Arcane’s magic system, as it pertains to writing, is that the audience is not just interested in the spectacle of flashing lights and transformations. The audience can understand the fundamental conflicts between each character or group of characters just from the kind of magic which they use. It becomes ingrained into the themes of the story. It makes the writing itself magical.
Seeing this bold statement: "Make Your Magic System Better" I decided to check it out since I've studied lots and lots of systems used in games and fiction.
In this blog you rave about the glory of two cartoons instead of the art of writing. Ignoring the multiple logical fails, that made up the Avatar cartoon (the 3 seasons I watched). Your post brings nothing of value to someone trying to design a better magic system and present it to the reader.
You don't tell us what readers have to say about the magic system used in Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Eragon, The Kingkiller Chronicle, Game of Thrones, The Witcher, or any other books out there with an audience.
All these books are popular, and I'm sure most of the fans love the system they use. (And kids dressing up as Harry Potter, waving a stick, is probably more common than kids dressing up as Aang and doing a dance?)
To summarize: You love the system in these two cartoons, but that doesn't tell me how to write a good magic system. It only tells me what films you like. Even if I was to mimic it (which you imply), I doubt people will celebrate my plagiarized magic system as better than the other stuff out there.
Perhaps you should instead do a comparison (especially limitations) between the most famous magical systems out there?
These are questions interesting during design, even if you never tell this to the reader.
5607800
I'm not sure how interested you are in learning from my style, but I will start off by saying that you seem to have missed the point of the lesson. There's no need to act passive aggressive if you place more emphasis on a different aspect of magic world-building.
Firstly, this just a short blog post to touch on a very specific aspect of how magic systems integrate into stories. Stories, when broken down to their basic components, are driven by their characters. The world building, including the magic, is the paint on the statue, so to speak. I do not include magic systems from every major franchise because it is not the scope of this post, and would only distract from the point.
Secondly, I doubt that anywhere in my post do I "imply" that anyone should mimic the magic systems of the two examples I give. I breakdown each one to explain how the magic system reflects the story and characters thematically, thereby making the reader interested in learning about magic not because of the spectacle but because they are engrossed in the story. I am not here to hand-hold writers; inspiration and adaptation are distinct from mimicry and copying. Perhaps in another lesson I can cover how to be inspired while being original, but again, that is not the scope of this post.
The three questions you bring up are indeed important elements in world-building, but they're the basic ones. They are the magic tricks, but how does a magician put it all together to make a magic show? There's comedy, showmanship, sometimes even a small story involved. There are layers added on top of the tricks that turns it into a performance. Once the basics of the system is made, there's the question of how to actually use it in your story. What I want to bring is just a helpful tip and example on paying attention to what your magic system represents thematically, which in my opinion is ultimately what makes the system more compelling.
5607953
When you started a thread in the Writer's Group and linked your blog, I believed you wanted critique. My mistake.
If I had realized it was self-promotion, I could have posted my reply in the forum, instead of inviting to discussion. Again, my mistake.
I explained I don't understand your lesson. I also explained how I think, to help us overcome this gap. Once more, my mistake.
I believe that getting away from the audience, can make dialogue easier. With every refresh of this blog, I get views updated with +1, so considering 2 dozen views comes from me looking for more comments; I believe we don't have an audience, as we would in the forum.
Don't misinterpret my honesty as an attack. And don't throw accusations that aren't true. "Passive aggressiveness" = dog whistle or irony. (Looking at your avatar you may originate from the FA community? And they never give criticism, but tons of fake praise in order to bond or make themselves popular, and perhaps you're not used to actual criticism?)
When I sit down to write, having the explanation "magic is the paint on the statue" doesn't help me evaluate my paragraphs. And you don't define "hard vs soft", but you say it's the most famous of all. If I never heard of the most famous, it probably isn't the most famous. I could respond/elaborate about our miscommunication from your "firstly" and "secondly" paragraphs, but that would be another mistake.
I believe your next blog-lesson could improve if you remember that a forum like Writer's Group (unlike a class in school), contains a very diverse set of people, and you need to adapt your lessons accordingly.
This site has some great lessons on writing fiction. Starting with one of those, or a link from "Appendix B", helps set some basic requirement for your pupils.
In my recommendation on formatting (not a lesson since it lacks facts) I'm referencing the guide as a starting point. Something the reader is supposed to have read to understand my warnings.
After reading other blog-lessons from you, I also think we interpret the word "lesson" differently, as I believe it to be an education. Your lessons are written in the same prose as one would write fiction. You can write good fiction (as seen from others' comments) but you are mistaken to think that writing a lesson, is anything like writing fiction.
Please realize the HUGE difference between writing fiction, and writing lessons. A common mistake is to believe that writing one style, automatically makes you good at the other.
Wikipedia has a good introduction due to its brevity, and you can find articles on style, words/prose, and structure. If you are serious about writing lessons. (And the school group is probably the best to post your lessons.)
Good luck with your lessons.
5608258
I don't know what that is. Recently I have been alternating my avatar based on what art I'm practicing. I acknowledge you have may good points, but what I can't abide is people making assumptions, especially about one's character. It's unproductive and easily leaves you incorrect.
Furthermore, which of my accusations are "untrue?" You ignore what I had to say and simplify it down to "raving" about the shows I like. I like to teach using examples, that's all. But you ignore my point, insert your own opinions which are not the scope of the post, and then leave a smiley face. Or, are you trying to tell me how I should feel when someone ignores what I have to say and injects their preferences over my own. Like anyone else, I have particular feelings about that, irrespective of what you think is the "correct" response.
That's my reply to you. By your own admission, already understand the fundamentals of world building. It's just a simple analogy to show that the details of world-building are layers over a story's themes and characters, the true structure of any story. Simply creating a world is not enough if there is nothing compelling to fill it.
I don't really see the point of everything past here. How the lesson is written and what content it contains are different. I write my lessons as if they're transcribed from lectures, and they are meant to be conversational. I use them to teach an idea, not act as a guide or format.
If you believe you're actually trying to give advice, my first suggestion is to not talk down to others. It's a very easy way to piss them off, and it gets you nowhere. I'm not going to waste time explaining my 6+ years of formal education in literary and textual analysis and essay writing.
Disagree and discuss all you want, but it seems to me your only real intention is trying to make yourself seem superior by showing how much you know.