Magic vs. Mundane

From: Jonas Schiött <jonas.schiott_at_...>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 00:28:25 +0200


Mikael Raaterova:

>Magical abilities aren't superior to similar mundane abilities; the
>'magic' of magical abilities is that they can allow you to attempt
>actions that are inhuman: flying, casting lightning spears, igniting
>fires without flint or tinder.

I agree with this in principle. It's just that I differ with you in practice. ;-)

>Whether or not you can successfully leap over a tree is a matter of
>relative ratings, not whether the ability used is magical or not.

Yes, BUT: I would also factor in what the ability is _supposed_ to do. Saying that a "Leap Tall Buildings" feat is no better than a mundane leaping ability makes no sense at all to me. Why the heck does it have that name then? It should be called "Boost Leap" or something.

One way of putting your view is that how magical an effect is depends on how similar it _sounds_ to a mundane ability. If it's called "Flying", well that's not natural, so hey - you can fly with it. But if it contains the word "Leap", that immediately brings it down to earth - everybody can jump, so this is just the same thing with a colorful tag.

Then again, just because a feat contains the word "Kill", that doesn't make it an instant-death ability.

Hmmm, as I said I agree with you in principle, but I wouldn't draw the line in precisely the same place.

I also feel we're on shaky ground here, letting gloranthan reality be determined by semantics...



Jonas Schiött
Göteborg

Powered by hypermail