I'm tired of the phrase 'magic system'

Look, I'm guilty of overusing a phrase, but I'm a little tired of our instance that everything is a "magic system". As a huge Sanderson fan, I'm a FAN of the hard magic systems, but I think we've gone a little overboard in trying to define all our fantasy. Sometimes it just is, ya know? Let me know your thoughts on this topic below!

Chapters
00:00 - Intro
01:54 - Where the term started
03:43- The definition of "magic system"
6:36 - The point

Socials

[NonAnonD]

"Harry Potter reading nook under our stairs." Holy moly your kids are eating.

[NonAnonD]

"My theory is that Brandon Sanderson-" YES, I was going to say I think it's attributable to him as well. He has hard magic systems and talks about how he defines them, he has extremely accessibly lectures talking about writing (magic systems and other aspects of storytelling), he's part incredibly popular fantasy author and part influencer, and his fans often take what he's talking about and proliferate it across the internet.

[gabrielvega]

I could not agree more. Not every fantasy book requires a super established magic system. It works in some books, and not in others.
Personally, despite liking Sanderson books, the magic in his worlds feels more like physics to me due to the limitations, the consequences it has and how well it’s understood by most of the characters of his worlds.
I like magic more when it’s something we don’t fully understand, because it’s magical. I know it’s sounds reiterative, but it’a my main argument for it haha. Once we are able to understand magic, it’s not magic any longer but something that can be understood by the scientific method.
And coming from a country were some types of “magic” and chamanism (I’m not a believer of these things, but I respect different points of view) are still practiced, I can relate a bit more to the type where not everything is intended as in a super solid and well explained system.
Hopefully the language barrier does not affect what I have tried to say, with all due respect to everyone reading this, it’s just a matter of taste, and I believe no one is right or wrong.
Excellent video!

[jorgerapalo]

The first books where I found a rationally detailed system of structured magic were the EARTHSEA books by Ursula Le Guin, that started back in the 60s. You had a magic school with detailed specializations all working on a core definition of magic as the formalized access to the ur-essence of things by the knowledge of their True Names, combining (the obvious) Plato with American indigenous beliefs. It is from the 60s yet it holds up really well. And it does more than just lay out rules and limits, it also explores the moral implications of magic just as well as the epistemological and metaphysical trappings.

[TDWIG]

100% agree that not every fantasy book that includes magic also needs to have it's "magic system" described and labeled up front since more often than not there is no system. It's a useful term when it's useful, when describing actual systems/structures of magic included in stories, but definitely seems to be generally overused on fantasy-book related social media platforms.

[thomasvikingpoetcolvin]

My goodness, Thank You! This is exactly what I've been thinking for years. As someone who once seriously pursued becoming an author, I was bogged-down-stressed trying to "keep up" with the popular heavy hitters in creating a detailed "magic system."

[mil_enrama]

My favorite short story ever is "Silver or Gold" by Emma Bull, about the young apprentice of a wise woman, where the *characters* believe in a well defined magic system, but the main character keeps questioning it and her rejection of the system is key to the end of the story. I also love how, in the story, things that we see as magic are seen together with regular real life medicine and gardening and farm labor as the same kind of wisdom.

[jameson]

Thank you for touching on this topic as it’s been kinda bugging me for a bit. I think my frustration with magic systems is that they change the nature of how you engage as a reader from a story to a puzzle. That with enough understanding of the system itself you can sort of logic your way through a scenario or speculate about how future scenarios or hypothetical scenarios would play out given these set of rules. And so you get to looking up resources and seeking out explanations from a neckbeard with a decoder ring and all the sudden I’m not engaging with the story anymore. I’m just focusing on the power system and how well crafted and considered it is. If the power system is not informing character journeys and relationships, but is just a tool to explain how magic works and how conflicts play out…I have a hard time investing.

[Hellsing]

I don't care whether or not there is a magic system in a fantasy book. I just want a good story.

[titansfan]

Before you even said his name I was thinking I never even heard the term magic system till I started reading Sanderson books lol.

Also I feel like more modern authors (say last 20 years) use more hardcore magic systems (Sanderson, weeks, McClellan). While books that are over 20 years (Rowling, Martin, Tolkien) just have magic and don’t have as many rules.

[nooder_]

From someone who reads more manga than novels I feel like a lot of the discourse might come from people who tend to read both. Since fights are often at the forefront of many manga we tend to want very defined "power systems" so that the fights can feel fair and compelling. In fantasy novels magic tends to be more esoteric since it drives the plot a lot more than just being used as a framework for fights. It's why I even find Sanderson's magic systems to be pretty loosely defined compared to most manga I've read.

[matthewschwoebel]

There was quite an overlap between RPGs and fantasy novels in the '80's. Like Weis & Hickman's Dragonlance novels, which were firmly based on D&D including the magic system. The Forgotten Realms novels like Salvatore's as well. Perhaps Sanderson popularized it for novels, but I wouldn't credit him with the concept itself for novels.

[EricKing]

I don't remember when I first heard the actual term "magic system" as related to fantasy fiction, but I definitely remember talking about magic systems long, long before Brandon Sanderson. My introduction to systematical magic in fantasy fiction was when I read "Master of the Five Magics" by Lyndon Hardy in the early 1980s (it was released in 1980 when Sanderson was 4 years old). It went on to influence novels like The Kingkiller Chronicles and even games like Magic: The Gathering. I spent the entire decade of the '80s discussing fantasy novels' magic systems with my book-reading friends. I was constantly looking for stories that had more systematic magic than the loosey-goosey Tolkien style, so I guess even then it mattered to me. I think perhaps over time the discussion around "magic systems" has itself become more systematic, but I'm not really involved much any more in the scene, lol. You, @bookborn, are one of a handful of creators I actually enjoy listening to, so it's interesting to me to hear your perspective.

[jeremyvanneman]

100%! I've considered writing fantasy, and I got so bogged down with creating a detailed magic system that I gave up months in without even figuring out what the world and characters were like, and without writing a single page.

I do like Sanderson, but there's too much structure for me - too much interconnectedness - it starts to feel like work after a while, which is why I stopped reading stormlight archive even though I thought it was going to be my favorite series after Wheel of Time after reading the first book.

I've turned toward more soft magic books - Dresden Files, Kingkiller Chronicles, ASoIaF, Zodiac Academy, and most recently started on A Court of Thorns and Roses - to get back to enjoying the genre

[dustinseth]

If it’s a system it’s not really magic. It’s that world’s physics and chemistry. Their natural laws.

[Cecil_Harvey]

As an ASoIaF fanatic I’ll agree that it does not have a “magic system” but it is still interesting to try to figure out the “rules” for the magic.

For instance skinchanging is partially explained diagetically. As readers we don’t hear the full “rules”, nor do we know for sure whether what we hear is accurate or just mistaken lore by the in-world characters. So we have to try to figure out essentially all the rules from scratch based on what we actually see characters witness or do themselves, with their actions often not even intentional.

For me this is far more interesting than a “magic system” where rules are laid out and then frequently broken for a dramatic twist.

Does the Wall block magic or enhance it? Does it depend what kind of magic it is or who is “casting” it? Since there is conflicting evidence it is fun to think of the various competing possibilities and keep them in mind on rereads or when we get new scenes with the next book.

[mcina]

While I do like internal story consistency when it comes to magic, variety is the spice of life! If all fantasy books had a “hard” Sanderson-like magic system, I think I would feel cheated. LotR, ASOIAF, and even WoT have wonderful “soft” magic systems that bring the wonder of possibility and mystery to the reader. On the other hand, pretty much all of Sanderson’s works reflect meticulous planning, something that a reader can admire and rules one can use to try to predict future events in the story.

[Aldrad]

Y E S. He is the proponent of this, and created this whole "concept" himself. Being consistent can be important, but I'd point to the proliferation of "rules" based magic/magic systems to the D&D generation becoming authors (not to besmirch the actual D&D authors of the 80's either!) This has obviously led to "progression fantasy" as a genre, and I really think it could be argued that Stormlight falls into progression fantasy in its own way too... but it need not apply everywhere. Great video, per usual!

[NonAnonD]

I don't know if I see people overly concerned with magic systems personally, but I also don't hang out in spaces where Brandon Sanderson is like, people's #1 favorite author too much. I see people completely fine with either "soft" or "hard" magic to define stories. Sometimes people highlight if a magic system is particularly cool (Will of the Many has gotten a lot of shouts recently) but that's about it on my end

[justinwalsh]

A reader asking a fellow reader about a new book or series “what’s the magic system” is *really* specific. I believe that people ask that, but in my anecdotal experience I usually get asked about how well characters are developed or how well the world and lore is developed. Maybe I’m just talking to a different set of people about sci fi and fantasy!