Magic/Research

Right troops! We have work to do. First job is to classify magic. Then we can determine what types make sense and what types are clearly silly (very few if we play it right).

I proposed a breakdown into power source and casting methodology. Other categories may open up later. Justifications for decisions to be added only after the event to avoid ESP inhibition. The breakdown can be found at /Breakdown.

Next question: which are your favourite types of magic and why?

CorkScrew: basis-wise, I like etheric magic cos it is comparatively quantifiable or vital magic cos its effects sound realistic vis-a-vis electromagnetic fields and the possibility of unusual bodily control. Technomancy is my preferred casting method as it seems realistic that, if the human psyche can control anything remotely, it'll be minute electric pulses.

Naath:Methodologywise, I prefere ceremony over it's absence (comparable to High Church vs Carismatic services there is a divide between Ceremonial and happy clappy magics), I'm a total n00b at it but mostely, if you want to go look stuff up, agree with the OTO and the Golden Dawn (go read Crowley, or rather don't, his prose style is, uh, difficult). I believe it works because reality is what we perceive it as and if you change your perception you change reality - the act of observing changes the observed and the observer.

Requiem: I like an explanation of magic similar to WhiteWolf's Mage and Demon (please don't beat me... it's just where I got the idea...). Everything works because people believe it will. Someone practiced enough at applied belief can momentarily modify the rules of the universe to fit their will - hence why things are easier for professionals, even seemingly random things. But because the vast majority of people believe that 'impossible' things won't work, they don't. As for casting methodology - due to the very nature of belief-based magic, anything that people believe works, will work.