On Creating a Fantasy World

[Lost_Wanderer]

I don’t mean that they represent the Church in that they are the organized religion, I mean that they represent the Church in that they provide the order and stability of the world. They are the keepers of knowledge, the researchers, and the main hubs of magic provide the focal points for the development of civilization and seek to better the areas around them. There will be organized religions, some properly disposed and some deviants, but the mages will be the true keepers of knowledge, ensuring that it is maintained regardless of what happens in the world.

Well, that’s surprisingly neutral. It’s very balanced for sure. I just always interpreted Tolkien’s depiction of Wizardry to be more closer to the use of divine power than anything conventional (like in Harry Potter). I just sense this strong element of ritualism in Gandalf’s spellwork you see.

I saw mention of magitech, I am avoiding that for now, and am avoiding “technology” in general. There may be some vestiges of it (such as with the Dwermer in the Elder Scrolls), but most of the world has not developed along those lines.

Well, you don’t necessarily have to integrate elements of artifice or explicitly mechanical constructs. It’s more of the principles of magitek tropes: Magic is the science of a fantasy world that its mages academically dedicate themselves to understand. Looking at your early description, I would think it could fit.

 

[Powdered_Sugar]

Well, that’s surprisingly neutral. It’s very balanced for sure. I just always interpreted Tolkien’s depiction of Wizardry to be more closer to the use of divine power than anything conventional (like in Harry Potter). I just sense this strong element of ritualism in Gandalf’s spellwork you see.

Gandalf’s magic is very ritual, that’s true, mine is a bit more organic, flowing from understanding the nature of magic and how it shapes the world. In a way, you could consider it a physical expression of the “force” which was used in shaping the universe… it’s hard to explain without a full history lesson. XD

Well, you don’t necessarily have to integrate elements of artifice or explicitly mechanical constructs. It’s more of the principles of magitek tropes: Magic is the science of a fantasy world that its mages academically dedicate themselves to understand. Looking at your early description, I would think it could fit.

That could certainly fit, and is something to consider.

 

[edwest2]

Having helped create fantasy worlds, magic, and how it’s presented, is always a concern. The occult, now relabeled as New Age, has a lot to it. Some people have bought into the trappings and it’s shaped their view of the world and how they interact with people.

In a Fantasy setting, magic does not even have to be called magic. Perhaps some people have abilities and others don’t. Perhaps everyone does. There could be beings who oversee these powers and others who study them. In the end, where do these powers come from? Good versus evil has always been a staple in stories. Today, it’s pretty muddled: anti-heroes, sort-of heroes, heroes that are heroic only because they have a lower body count than the “bad” guy(s) by the end of the story.

I think the best approach would be to use analogy, as opposed to repurposing beings as taught by the Church as being other than what they are taught by the Church, like Angels. In the end, Star Wars is a story about the rise of evil, and a father being redeemed, and turning toward the good.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Kamaduck]

I don’t think there’s a problem with what you’re trying to do, Powdered. But speaking from experience, I will say that reconciling any sort of fantasy world- whether magical or not- with a Christian understanding of the world is easier said than done. You can do what Lewis did, and go the path of direct allegory (with Aslan standing for Jesus, etc.), or you can do what Tolkien did and leave direct analogies out of it, while retaining the basic understanding of morality and a deity that created humanoid beings with souls.

I’ll also say that direct divine intervention (including things like angels) has a tendency to make the story a bit… simplistic? I’m not sure that’s the right word. I mean that it doesn’t reflect our reality very well, and it damages people’s ability to relate what happens in your world to what happens in our world. Since it rarely happens in real life (not saying it doesn’t, just that it’s not nearly as common as it would need to be for us to constantly rely on it), that tends to ring false with people. Most people want to read about (or play as- I don’t know what you’re making this world for, exactly) heroes who ultimately solve their own problems, not ones who sit idly by while angels do the heavy lifting. You can have them as messengers or guardians, sure- but giving them a more active role will take something away from your heroes.

Anyway, just something to think about. I know my favorite fantasy worlds tend to be grayer and more complicated than what some people are comfortable with (I prefer redeemed monsters to heroes that are purely good), so keep that in mind when listening to me talk about fantasy. Best of luck with whatever you decide.

 

[ialsop]

Yep. You’re definite proof.

I’d ask you (as I’ve asked dozen other self-proclaimed witch hunters on these boards) to prove how I’m worshiping Satan by manipulating fire with my fingers.

Then again, you’d probably dodge it and run off to the Adoration Chapel because you know you don’t and never will have the answer.

Self proclaimed witch hunter? LOL where is THAT coming from? And you are trying to have powers of only God. I never claimed you worship satan. I simply say that you are trying to have powers that God has only, that is, manipulation nature in supernatural ways. The Church is against the new age. get over it.

By the way, are you trying to mock being devoted to the Blessed Sacrament? Wow. Amazing. :dts: How anti-catholic. That IS the center of the faith, you know…

 

[Powdered_Sugar]

Having helped create fantasy worlds, magic, and how it’s presented, is always a concern. The occult, now relabeled as New Age, has a lot to it. Some people have bought into the trappings and it’s shaped their view of the world and how they interact with people.

In a Fantasy setting, magic does not even have to be called magic. Perhaps some people have abilities and others don’t. Perhaps everyone does. There could be beings who oversee these powers and others who study them. In the end, where do these powers come from? Good versus evil has always been a staple in stories. Today, it’s pretty muddled: anti-heroes, sort-of heroes, heroes that are heroic only because they have a lower body count than the “bad” guy(s) by the end of the story.

“Magic” as it exists in my game is essentially using the forces of creation which have entered into the world through various means. These forces, as with all gifts, can be used and abused, and the manner in which they are used has the capacity to actually affect the world around them. Magic itself comes from the Realm of Creation, which is God’s realm, and enters into our world through several “bridges” which are created in various ways. These bridges can be pure, created by people who wish to use magic properly, and impure if they are created with evil intent.

I think the best approach would be to use analogy, as opposed to repurposing beings as taught by the Church as being other than what they are taught by the Church, like Angels. In the end, Star Wars is a story about the rise of evil, and a father being redeemed, and turning toward the good.

I don’t intend to actually use Angels, but I will have an analogous entity to them, specifically, non-corporeal beings created by god who are able to exert some manner of influence in the world. I haven’t decided what form that influence will take, or how apparent it will be yet. The story will be up to the person crafting the campaign, I’m just building the framework right now.

I don’t think there’s a problem with what you’re trying to do, Powdered. But speaking from experience, I will say that reconciling any sort of fantasy world- whether magical or not- with a Christian understanding of the world is easier said than done. You can do what Lewis did, and go the path of direct allegory (with Aslan standing for Jesus, etc.), or you can do what Tolkien did and leave direct analogies out of it, while retaining the basic understanding of morality and a deity that created humanoid beings with souls.

I’m really trying to avoid direct analogy, and do more like what Tolkien did in creating a world that is not a direct imitation of ours, but which points to the reality of a loving God.

I’ll also say that direct divine intervention (including things like angels) has a tendency to make the story a bit… simplistic? I’m not sure that’s the right word. I mean that it doesn’t reflect our reality very well, and it damages people’s ability to relate what happens in your world to what happens in our world. Since it rarely happens in real life (not saying it doesn’t, just that it’s not nearly as common as it would need to be for us to constantly rely on it), that tends to ring false with people. Most people want to read about (or play as- I don’t know what you’re making this world for, exactly) heroes who ultimately solve their own problems, not ones who sit idly by while angels do the heavy lifting. You can have them as messengers or guardians, sure- but giving them a more active role will take something away from your heroes.

I don’t plan on them being fix-alls or anything like that. Certain ones will be able to exert greater influence, but I don’t want them to be relied upon by GMs to circumvent the player doing things.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Self proclaimed witch hunter? LOL where is THAT coming from? And you are trying to have powers of only God.

I’m guessing Einstein, Edison, Tesla, and Steve Jobs all have powers of God now. By your definition, I’m usurping God simply because I figured out how to ride a jetpack.

Your mentality that fantastical abilities are somehow a symptom of occult behavior/worship is the rotten core of this religion’s worst. You are the wizarding world’s own paranoid counterpart to William Stryker. People like you are on my list of reasons why I don’t take this faith seriously anymore.

 

[edwest2]

“Magic” as it exists in my game is essentially using the forces of creation which have entered into the world through various means. These forces, as with all gifts, can be used and abused, and the manner in which they are used has the capacity to actually affect the world around them. Magic itself comes from the Realm of Creation, which is God’s realm, and enters into our world through several “bridges” which are created in various ways. These bridges can be pure, created by people who wish to use magic properly, and impure if they are created with evil intent.

I don’t intend to actually use Angels, but I will have an analogous entity to them, specifically, non-corporeal beings created by god who are able to exert some manner of influence in the world. I haven’t decided what form that influence will take, or how apparent it will be yet. The story will be up to the person crafting the campaign, I’m just building the framework right now.

I’m really trying to avoid direct analogy, and do more like what Tolkien did in creating a world that is not a direct imitation of ours, but which points to the reality of a loving God.

I don’t plan on them being fix-alls or anything like that. Certain ones will be able to exert greater influence, but I don’t want them to be relied upon by GMs to circumvent the player doing things.

As a storyteller, I don’t see how any of this points to God as understood and taught by the Church. It seems like a combination of The Force, and some Norse mythology, Different cultures have different creations stories and stories about how their god or gods work. Chinese mythology is filled with beings who are assigned certain attributes.

As someone who is also involved in building role-playing game worlds, I certainly have seen variations on mechanics. I don’t see the point of adding the Christian God to this since only He creates. Man cannot have magic/powers from God’s realm. I think it would be best to avoid the Christian God entirely and create your own version of how magic works and where it comes from in a game setting. Good versus evil needs to be told in stories more, not ‘it’s all grey.’ There is right and wrong. There is true heroic chivalry and the evil plans of evil beings to destroy or enslave or thwart or eliminate the heroes.

On a side note: I am sick and tired of seeing the work Dark on so many media. Dark this and Dark that turns my stomach. Sure, you can have Battle on Crambex or something, but something a lot less dark.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Man cannot have magic/powers from God’s realm.

Depends on how you define magic remember? It still baffles me that some people haven’t realized how subjective the word has become since the turn of the last two centuries.

 

[Powdered_Sugar]

As a storyteller, I don’t see how any of this points to God as understood and taught by the Church. It seems like a combination of The Force, and some Norse mythology, Different cultures have different creations stories and stories about how their god or gods work. Chinese mythology is filled with beings who are assigned certain attributes.

The magic mechanics aren’t intended to direct reflect God, at least not yet. I was mainly asking to get people’s thoughts on using an angel analouge, and if yhat would be appropriate. The magic discussion sort of spang up after the fact.

When I talked about them having specific attributes, it would be better likened to how we pray to specific sai ts to intercede for us in a given situation; not like the Greek pantheon, where there’s a god of the harvest and a god of the oceans, etc. It’s all still in the earliest stages, so there’s plenty of refining to he done.

As someone who is also involved in building role-playing game worlds, I certainly have seen variations on mechanics. I don’t see the point of adding the Christian God to this since only He creates. Man cannot have magic/powers from God’s realm. I think it would be best to avoid the Christian God entirely and create your own version of how magic works and where it comes from in a game setting. Good versus evil needs to be told in stories more, not ‘it’s all grey.’ There is right and wrong. There is true heroic chivalry and the evil plans of evil beings to destroy or enslave or thwart or eliminate the heroes.

I’m not intending to directly include God in the game, and when I’m referring to the god of my universe I use a lower case g. I’m considering some more like Tolkien’s Eru. I am also drawing… loosly… from the story of Adam and Eve… very loosly… right and wrong will be clearly defined, none of these “everything’s grey” nonsense. As for the stakes of the story, this is a system for a tabletop / pc RPG, so that’s up to the GM.

On a side note: I am sick and tired of seeing the work Dark on so many media. Dark this and Dark that turns my stomach. Sure, you can have Battle on Crambex or something, but something a lot less dark.

Peace,
Ed

I have no intent of using yhe word dark unless it’s in reference to the physical quality of the light in a given area.

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut. What do you do that you are creating fantasy worlds? Are you a writer?

Lost, it strikes me that you’re being a little defensive. I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, but edge believed I was speaking of capital G God, in which case his assertion is completely valid. Also, I don’t think ialsop’s reactions are indicative of actaul Catholic teaching, nor are they appropriate given the nature and subject of the conversation. Why would you use his comments, which are not generally in keeping with the tone of conversation on the forums, as a reason for your diminished faith? Again though, I do apprecciate your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[ialsop]

Depends on how you define magic remember? It still baffles me that some people haven’t realized how subjective the word has become since the turn of the last two centuries.

A very good point. So, since your the one who supports what you call “magic”, Ill as YOU to e the one to define it.

 

[edwest2]

The magic mechanics aren’t intended to direct reflect God, at least not yet. I was mainly asking to get people’s thoughts on using an angel analouge, and if yhat would be appropriate. The magic discussion sort of spang up after the fact.

When I talked about them having specific attributes, it would be better likened to how we pray to specific sai ts to intercede for us in a given situation; not like the Greek pantheon, where there’s a god of the harvest and a god of the oceans, etc. It’s all still in the earliest stages, so there’s plenty of refining to he done.
I’m not intending to directly include God in the game, and when I’m referring to the god of my universe I use a lower case g. I’m considering some more like Tolkien’s Eru. I am also drawing… loosly… from the story of Adam and Eve… very loosly… right and wrong will be clearly defined, none of these “everything’s grey” nonsense. As for the stakes of the story, this is a system for a tabletop / pc RPG, so that’s up to the GM.

I have no intent of using yhe word dark unless it’s in reference to the physical quality of the light in a given area.

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut. What do you do that you are creating fantasy worlds? Are you a writer?

Lost, it strikes me that you’re being a little defensive. I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, but edge believed I was speaking of capital G God, in which case his assertion is completely valid. Also, I don’t think ialsop’s reactions are indicative of actaul Catholic teaching, nor are they appropriate given the nature and subject of the conversation. Why would you use his comments, which are not generally in keeping with the tone of conversation on the forums, as a reason for your diminished faith? Again though, I do apprecciate your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Yes, I’m a writer, and I do research for the books I edit.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Lost, it strikes me that you’re being a little defensive. I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, but edge believed I was speaking of capital G God, in which case his assertion is completely valid. Also, I don’t think ialsop’s reactions are indicative of actaul Catholic teaching, nor are they appropriate given the nature and subject of the conversation. Why would you use his comments, which are not generally in keeping with the tone of conversation on the forums, as a reason for your diminished faith? Again though, I do apprecciate your (name removed by moderator)ut.

I’m just saying that ignoring the subjectivity of magic is the basis for reactions of people like iasolp. To be honest, how can we be sure that this or that power is privy to God’s realm? Is this line permanent or changing? God could light up a bonfire with lightning and destroy whole cities. Yet in the span of just a few centuries, we’ve demonstrated the same capacity.

I’m not saying God is weak. I’m simply saying man is not. There are so many conundrums in this area of theology that cause me some serious doubts. It doesn’t help however if some people are quick to demonize wonders simply because their religion has molded their minds that way. Did you know that a priest was among the first designers of the hot air balloon? And yet, when Bartolomeu de Gusmão presented his design in front of the Portuguese court, rumors among the common people circulated that he was a sorcerer and that he fled the Inquisition because of them!

On these boards, you’ll eventually run into the same unsavory critics. I don’t trust anybody who is so quick to say what man cannot do because such powers are ‘reserved’ for God. Bringing back the dead? Sure. Creating artificial humans? Maybe not a good idea.

But lighting things on fire? Flying through the air? Getting my coffee to mix itself? Seriously. People who have a Satanic panic reaction to stuff like this give the impression that God somehow has the monopoly on all convenience.

A very good point. So, since your the one who supports what you call “magic”, Ill as YOU to e the one to define it.

You’ve seen enough of my posts to know how I’ve come to define magic. Like legion, my definitions are many.

 

[ialsop]

I’m just saying that ignoring the subjectivity of magic is the basis for reactions of people like iasolp. To be honest, how can we be sure that this or that power is privy to God’s realm? Is this line permanent or changing? God could light up a bonfire with lightning and destroy whole cities. Yet in the span of just a few centuries, we’ve demonstrated the same capacity.

I’m not saying God is weak. I’m simply saying man is not. There are so many conundrums in this area of theology that cause me some serious doubts. It doesn’t help however if some people are quick to demonize wonders simply because their religion has molded their minds that way. Did you know that a priest was among the first designers of the hot air balloon? And yet, when Bartolomeu de Gusmão presented his design in front of the Portuguese court, rumors among the common people circulated that he was a sorcerer and that he fled the Inquisition because of them!

On these boards, you’ll eventually run into the same unsavory critics. I don’t trust anybody who is so quick to say what man cannot do because such powers are ‘reserved’ for God. Bringing back the dead? Sure. Creating artificial humans? Maybe not a good idea.

But lighting things on fire? Flying through the air? Getting my coffee to mix itself? Seriously. People who have a Satanic panic reaction to stuff like this give the impression that God somehow has the monopoly on all convenience.

You’ve seen enough of my posts to know how I’ve come to define magic. Like legion, my definitions are many.

Well. Interesting. Now may I ask how you came to, eh, do that sort of stuff?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Well. Interesting. Now may I ask how you came to, eh, do that sort of stuff?

At the risk of parroting the cheesiest of kid fantasy cliches:

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/3404774144/hEC04FED8/

 

[ialsop]

At the risk of parroting the cheesiest of kid fantasy cliches:

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/3404774144/hEC04FED8/

You said we are anti science and this is like previous scientists all over again…so I am totally open to science.What science do you have to share with us? And real logic?

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

You said we are anti science and this is like previous scientists all over again…so I am totally open to science.What science do you have to share with us? And real logic?

When your immediate reaction to fantastical wonders (be it fictional or non-fictional) is to brand it as usurpation of God’s power, you are indeed anti-scientific. Any logic shared with you would be wasted. Any experiment performed before your eyes would only incite the sign of the cross followed by a call to torches and pitchforks.

Then again, the only Iogic I’ve seen the spiritual warfare camp demonstrate is “Because God says so!”

 

[RaphaelJ]

About magic, magic in a fantasy world may be different from how we define magic. Magic could be defined as a force that denies God’s omnipotence by us using supernatural means. Also, it was historically associated with demon worship. In a fantasy world, magic could be defined in more ways. There could be magic originating from one’s life energy being channeled or the life energy of nature. There could be magic as it is known: occult magic that draws on demons or we can have religious magic which draws power from God and is manifested in holy rites. Of course, technically religious magic should have restrictions…

 

[ialsop]

When your immediate reaction to fantastical wonders (be it fictional or non-fictional) is to brand it as usurpation of God’s power, you are indeed anti-scientific. Any logic shared with you would be wasted. Any experiment performed before your eyes would only incite the sign of the cross followed by a call to torches and pitchforks.

Then again, the only Iogic I’ve seen the spiritual warfare camp demonstrate is “Because God says so!”

You havent proved, though, that what you claim to do is actually science and not some hocus pocus bs…you say its science, lets hear it…

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

You havent proved, though, that what you claim to do is actually science and not some hocus pocus bs…you say its science, lets hear it…

I don’t know how many times I have to repeat this common concept to you:

In fantasy, ‘Hocus pocus bs’ IS science. Here’s another example, if you spoke to a 15th century peasant about the possibility of self-moving carriages, they’d think you a sorcerer.

From this, imagine a future where a mere tattoo can allow you to move things merely by thought. This fits every definition of magic (or what you call ‘hocus pocus bs’). But despite that, it is rendered possible simply because people worked tirelessly to perfect the technology behind it.

Using your previously demonstrated logic, I am usurping God simply because I figured out a way to manipulate science to a greater level.

So, still don’t see yourself as anti-scientific?