[Magic] Colleges And Prerequisites: What Are They?

[scc]

Now I'm not talking about those for any given spell or group of spells, but rather the concepts in general. Specifically are they human concepts to put spells into like groups and result in well rounded mages? Or are they simply how magic works?

The One College Only limitation that can be applied to Magery would suggest the later, while Magical Styles and the prerequisites and colleges of some spells would suggest the former.

SO what are peoples thoughts on the situation?

[Anaraxes]

Are you asking about the game mechanics, in real life? Or are you after some sort of in-setting flavor text that justifies the existence of colleges and prereqs?

Neither seem like a stretch to me. Most concepts have related concepts, and more distantly related concepts. Similarly, lots of ideas build upon simpler ones. Does magic follow those real-world trends?

If you like, you could have all magic just be innate functions of imagination and wishing. But fantasy often has magic that's studied as a quasi-technical body of knowledge, and it often has categories of related magic, so it's sensible to say of a mage, "he's good at fire magic" or "he's a necromancer".

[Railstar]

As I see it, going from memory, Fireball has Create Fire & Shape Fire as prerequisites, because (for argument sake, if I have exact prerequisites wrong that is beside the point) to throw fireballs you need to be able to create the fire and force it to hold a shape in order to serve as a weapon. Essentially prerequisites are usually the building blocks that form the spell.

Magical styles or One-College Magery is finding a different set of building blocks to get to the same general result.

[Kromm]

GURPS Thaumatology: Magical Styles permits variants on One College Only (it's even mentioned in the introduction on p. 3!) and Limited Colleges for styles. To paraphrase several rules:

Style has up to 35 spells: One College Only, -40%.
Style has 36-70 spells: Limited Colleges, -30%.
Style has 71-105 spells: Limited Colleges, -20%.
Style has 106-140 spells: Limited Colleges, -10%.
Style has 141+ spells: No limitation.

Thus, one can be talented at just one "traditional" GURPS Magic college (standard One College Only), from two to four such colleges (standard Limited Colleges), or a style that's roughly equivalent to one of those cases in scope (variant One College Only or Limited Colleges). Any arbitrary "slicing up" of the overall spell list admits the possibility of people who are talented at only certain slices.

How prerequisites work is a different matter. That's how understanding of the structure of magic is achieved, and it's a function of approach, not the structure itself – epistemology, not ontology. You'll have to learn roughly the same amount of basic stuff to cast the advanced stuff no matter what path to enlightenment you pursue, but there are different paths.

It's not unlike saying, "You can run for president because you have Wealth and can afford to do it, because you're a war hero with Military Rank and Reputation, because you have Administrative Rank and worked hard at lower levels of government first, or because you're super-popular owing to high Charisma." Or saying, "A martial-arts style can eventually lead to Power Blow and chi powers no matter what mundane skills it teaches." You have to have a certain je ne sais quoi, but there's latitude.

What's most important is that those who are talented at a particular approach will gravitate to it . . . and that any such approach is likely to be the creation of those with suitable talent. The upshot is that a totally manmade style with a strange potpourri of spells is a valid way to learn greater magic after mastering lesser magic, was most likely invented by someone to whom that path to power seemed "natural," and will attract other people who are similarly talented.

Of course, in some settings, Magery is learned and/or improvable, not inborn or at least not always inborn. In those worlds, Magery might well be something you develop by studying magic. In that case, studying a particular style is likely to make you talented at that style.

[The Colonel]

Also, note that the colleges are a suggestion - they're simply groups of thematically linked spells, ordered in a rational progression which makes sense in terms of first mastering simple concepts and then building on those to work more complex effects. Magic in any given setting may not work like that - Thaumatology has a variety of other approaches.

[scc]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Or are you after some sort of in-setting flavor text that justifies the existence of colleges and prereqs?

This.

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

Neither seem like a stretch to me. Most concepts have related concepts, and more distantly related concepts. Similarly, lots of ideas build upon simpler ones. Does magic follow those real-world trends?

If you like, you could have all magic just be innate functions of imagination and wishing. But fantasy often has magic that's studied as a quasi-technical body of knowledge, and it often has categories of related magic, so it's sensible to say of a mage, "he's good at fire magic" or "he's a necromancer".

The best way to put it is: How can someone have College limited Magery if the College's aren't a part of Magic itself? If Colleges are simply something humans developed how can Magery be limited by them? At least without Megery itself being a human creation.

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Also, note that the colleges are a suggestion - they're simply groups of thematically linked spells, ordered in a rational progression which makes sense in terms of first mastering simple concepts and then building on those to work more complex effects. Magic in any given setting may not work like that - Thaumatology has a variety of other approaches.

Not relevant, even if you change the Colleges, they still exist.

Originally Posted by Kromm

GURPS Thaumatology: Magical Styles permits variants on One College Only (it's even mentioned in the introduction on p. 3!) and Limited Colleges for styles. To paraphrase several rules:

Style has up to 35 spells: One College Only, -40%.
Style has 36-70 spells: Limited Colleges, -30%.
Style has 71-105 spells: Limited Colleges, -20%.
Style has 106-140 spells: Limited Colleges, -10%.
Style has 141+ spells: No limitation.

Thus, one can be talented at just one "traditional" GURPS Magic college (standard One College Only), from two to four such colleges (standard Limited Colleges), or a style that's roughly equivalent to one of those cases in scope (variant One College Only or Limited Colleges). Any arbitrary "slicing up" of the overall spell list admits the possibility of people who are talented at only certain slices.

This doesn't really improve things, and unless there's a good thematic link between all the spells in a style it's conspicuously convenient.

Originally Posted by Kromm

How prerequisites work is a different matter. That's how understanding of the structure of magic is achieved, and it's a function of approach, not the structure itself – epistemology, not ontology. You'll have to learn roughly the same amount of basic stuff to cast the advanced stuff no matter what path to enlightenment you pursue, but there are different paths.

It's not unlike saying, "You can run for president because you have Wealth and can afford to do it, because you're a war hero with Military Rank and Reputation, because you have Administrative Rank and worked hard at lower levels of government first, or because you're super-popular owing to high Charisma." Or saying, "A martial-arts style can eventually lead to Power Blow and chi powers no matter what mundane skills it teaches." You have to have a certain je ne sais quoi, but there's latitude.

What's most important is that those who are talented at a particular approach will gravitate to it . . . and that any such approach is likely to be the creation of those with suitable talent. The upshot is that a totally manmade style with a strange potpourri of spells is a valid way to learn greater magic after mastering lesser magic, was most likely invented by someone to whom that path to power seemed "natural," and will attract other people who are similarly talented.

Of course, in some settings, Magery is learned and/or improvable, not inborn or at least not always inborn. In those worlds, Magery might well be something you develop by studying magic. In that case, studying a particular style is likely to make you talented at that style.

Ah, now this is useful. So at some level requirements represent magical knowledge you must know to learn a spell? I'm guessing there's a LOT of flexibility but. In fact it sounds like some prerequisites should be marked as required no matter what, after all someone able to cast Fireball but not create a campfire is a bit hard to believe.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by scc

Now I'm not talking about those for any given spell or group of spells, but rather the concepts in general. Specifically are they human concepts to put spells into like groups and result in well rounded mages? Or are they simply how magic works?

While I don't wish to dispute what has been said about this previously, I do want to note that the idea of a distinction between "human concepts" and "how magic works"—or, as Kromm puts it, between epistemology and ontology—may in itself be the expression of a rationalistic and objectivistic worldview that foreign to magic. Or at least to a view of magic that makes it something other than an odd sort of technology. If magic really works then the subjective human perception of how things are may actually influence how things are.

[The Colonel]

Suddenly I'm amused by the idea of a magic system where you can attempt what you like, but the misfire table is the universe's default response and improved skill is all about modifying or avoiding the misfire. One up on the Cthulhu idea of "summon what you like ... did you figure out how to ward or bind it?"

[Culture20]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Suddenly I'm amused by the idea of a magic system where you can attempt what you like, but the misfire table is the universe's default response and improved skill is all about modifying or avoiding the misfire. One up on the Cthulhu idea of "summon what you like ... did you figure out how to ward or bind it?"

That Other Game had “Wild Mages” in its second edition. They would often result in a misfire, but could control their position on the “Wild Surge” table by the amount of their class level. There was even a (popular at my table) first level spell which always created a wild surge. Their biggest advantage was in being able to control random magic items like Wands of Wonder or Decks of Many Things with 50% chance per each activation.