<< > Simply being a true giant could be argued to be some sort of
> magic, I suppose, given that giants seem to predate even the Green Age.
But
> it isn't the sort of magic you can use in the way that you do with
draconic
> magic or animism, say - it doesn't seem to me to be anything like a 'sixth
> type of magic' in rules terms.
Then again, draconic magic is pretty much just 'being a dragon', if it comes to that... (What makes it flashier is the fact that it's generally practised by those who aren't outwardly draconic...)>>
No; being a dragon (in some sense) is the means of acquiring it, but it can be used to zap people at a distance, alter your own size, and do all the other sorts of obviously magical things that you can do with theist magic etc. Giants, OTOH, can't do any of these sorts of things - though, admittedly, if you thump somebody hard enough, the fact you couldn't boost your damage magically may not make much difference. So I think there's a distinct difference between draconic magic (and all other known magics) and 'giant magic' in so far as such a thing exists.
Certainly, AR has no rules, or mention of, giant magic, but it does describe draconic magic as a distinct style, which is not the same as 'innate abilities' (like a giant's size or a unicorn's healing). Nobody commented on this lack during the editorial process, so I have no reason to suppose its false...
Andrew Barton:
<<> Giants don't generally use magic, and when they do it doesn't appear to be anything unique to them,
Exception: the Cradles. >>
Yes, that's true enough. It isn't necessarily spell casting as such (although a giant could use whatever magic he does know to help protect it), but either a magical Construct Cradle skill and/or an ability to bargain with powerful otherworld entities, perhaps reflected in a high knowledge skill of some kind.
Forward the glorious Red Army!
Trotsky
Powered by hypermail