Story_Marc
Share your fun!
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2022
- Messages
- 613
- Points
- 133
So, this is my working theory right now on why so many gravitate to hard fantasy. Which can help inform stuff for people too.
Seeing things through to their logical conclusion, exploring edge cases, display of a resulting mindset. I agree in that I think it's a big part of why I read/enjoy fantasy. But I don't think that's the single thing that carries the genre.
Hard magic makes it easier to facilitate suspension of disbelief. The idea of magic is neutral, so it rarely triggers direct rejection, but with it you can make what you want. And since they fit into an overarching system, the details you then choose to populate that system with will be easier to buy into.
Why is that character unbeatable or extremely charismatic?
Magic. Or maybe they're just really great.
Which sounds as handwaived as it is. (Ultimately everything written is "handwaived", obviously, but what matters is how it appears)
But we could elaborate that every person gets to collect skills based on obscure conditions, and they just managed to get the really powerful ones.
Thus the hard magic became a tool to support an entirely different aspect of the story, used in the same way that a sudden inheritance trope might be used in a non-magical setting. The rules themselves don't matter, the sense of plausibility they create does.
This.Since you brought up LitRPG, I would like to point out that these do not automatically have a hard magic system, just because there are numbers attached to stuff.
The author can still decide to pull the numbers out of their behind or make up new abilities to resolve situations they have written themselves into.
And in reverse, a magic system doesn't have to be explained in detail to the reader to be a hard magic system. The important thing is that the author puts in the effort to establish the rules early on and sticks to them in their writing.
I agree that it does, but to me "being more" is not an appeal of only hard magic, but magic in general.Also, that sense of plausibility still touches into the idea of being more that I mentioned as the big appeal.
That sounds more like a badly executed hard magic system. Soft magic systems, as far as I understand them, have few rules to break in the first place, especially regarding generalization.And soft magic systems always run the risk of introducing stuff (that was supposedly always there), without taking into account what implications that may have on previous stories.
More or less the same point as above: Universality/replicability is a hard aspect, even if the magic system as a whole might lean on the soft side.Now that I think about it, I'm actually not sure if it's a draw towards hard magic systems, maybe it's more an aversion to badly executed soft magic systems.
You know, the cases where authors introduce stuff with wide-ranging consequences on the setting, and instead of picking an easy answer for why these things are not as widely used or can't be used to solve future issues as easily, they go and make up convoluted explanations or try to handwayve it, but introduce new contradictions.
I agree that it does, but to me "being more" is not an appeal of only hard magic, but magic in general.
As tempting as soft magic can be, from readers perspective it can be perceived as "anything goes".Now that I think about it, I'm actually not sure if it's a draw towards hard magic systems, maybe it's more an aversion to badly executed soft magic systems.
I was more thinking in terms of narrative implications, rather than implications on the magic systen.I agree that it does, but to me "being more" is not an appeal of only hard magic, but magic in general.
That sounds more like a badly executed hard magic system. Soft magic systems, as far as I understand them, have few rules to break in the first place, especially regarding generalization.
More or less the same point as above: Universality/replicability is a hard aspect, even if the magic system as a whole might lean on the soft side.