How many magic systems are there in the legend?

Magic systems and how to classify them often vary greatly according to different settings. Although there are certain patterns and routines, many settings still regard this part as an important aspect of their own characteristics to create or modify the original system, and many are still radical. But I have to say that some settings are too simple and vague, and some places are too far-fetched. Below, based on how to make the classification of magic as systematic as possible and explain as many situations as possible, we will explain it on the basis of synthesizing various primitive magic systems.

First of all, in my opinion, a single classification standard cannot be used to divide the magic system. Personally, I think three different standards are needed to form a complete system. The following are explained separately.

The first classification standard is based on the different sources of supernatural powers. For example, the most typical magic is divided into four elements: water, fire, wind and earth (such as magic door series games), or white magic, black magic, and sometimes elf magic (such as the animation "Watchman"). One of the most direct problems encountered by this classification method is that many magics cannot be classified reasonably. For example, Magic Gate, all magic with lightning effect belongs to wind attribute, all magic with acid effect and magic with freezing effect belongs to water attribute, and even more outrageous, magic with acceleration belongs to fire attribute. This is obviously far-fetched. According to this classification standard, I think it needs to be divided into at least five categories: elemental magic, energy magic, white magic, dark magic and natural magic. Then each category is divided into specific categories. For example, as mentioned above, elemental magic is divided into four elemental systems: water, fire, wind and earth. It should be mentioned here that the magic of creating high heat is not equal to fire, and the magic of creating cold is not equal to ice, nor can it be simply attributed to water. This is the reason why elemental magic is different from energy magic, and it is also a good attribution of lightning magic. However, even if it is so divided, you will find that there are still many problems after a little consideration. First of all, not all magic comes from a single source of power. For example, someone created a small storm with the help of divine power. Should this magic be considered as white magic (because there is divine power involved)? Or black magic (because it is destructive)? Or elemental magic (because it involves elements such as water and wind)? Or natural magic (storms are the result of natural forces)? It's hard to tell. Second, the power source of many types of magic is not obvious. One of the most direct examples is the widely used "portal" magic. It's hard to say which element it comes from, or some magical power (obviously many unbelievers also use this magic). The above two situations are almost insurmountable as far as the first classification standard is concerned. Although there are some compromise methods (such as introducing fusion magic and attribute-free magic, etc. ), these methods are either too messy or too far-fetched to solve the problem fundamentally. This is why there is a second classification standard. One more thing. Actually, there's another problem. This classification standard makes magic have its limits. If a caster can completely control the power of the fire element and even assimilate it, what is the difference between "fireball" and "fireball"? This can't be said to be the defect of this classification method, but it also limits the tension of the system objectively, which is unfavorable from the point of view of setting.

Perhaps for many people, the classification of magic is the first classification standard mentioned above. In fact, this second classification standard is the most systematic and inclusive one. The so-called second classification standard is to classify magic according to the effect of magic action. This seems very abstract. Let me give you an example that everyone can understand. The mind system in the comic book The Hunter is actually divided according to this standard. In this system, mental users can be divided into six categories: changing system, strengthening system, operating system, releasing system, embodying system and idiosyncratic system. "Changing the system" means changing the nature of Qi; "Strengthening the system" is to strengthen the original function of the article; "Operating system" is to manipulate substances or organisms; The "release system" releases gas by shooting; "Materialization system" is the materialization of qi; "Characteristic system" refers to other special gases that are not classified. Take Pakunoda of the brigade as an example. She belongs to the specialty department, and her main reading ability is "memory exploration". She can read their memories by touching people or objects. These memories can be turned into "memory bombs" and shot into other people's brains with her gun, so that these people can have memories. Generally speaking, the division of this system among hunters is still relatively rough. The following is the authoritative classification method of the rules of "Dungeons and Dragons" in European and American fantasy. It divides magic into the following schools: protection system, curse system, prophecy system, enchantment system, plastic energy system, illusion system, necromancer system and change system. Limited to space, I won't explain the specific reference of each department here. Let's give a simple example to illustrate how they work. We can define a magic, and name it "Flame Shield". Its function is to create a physical shield, to protect the caster from flame damage, and to make the attacker suffer certain flame damage (this magic is different from the "flame shield" in the rules of Dungeons and Dragons, just to illustrate the problem). This magic can be seen as the result of the joint action of the following schools: curse law system (creating a solid shield), protection system (protecting the caster from flame damage), and plastic energy system (making the attacker suffer certain flame damage). It is not difficult to see that no matter how complicated a magic is, no matter how amazing its effect is, theoretically, its final effect can be regarded as the superposition of many magic schools. It's just that the more complicated the magic is, the more difficult it is to make a correct analysis of the magic effect, and the more difficult it is to achieve such an effect accordingly. Because the mechanism of every "sub-effect" can be identified, it can be said that every magical mechanism can be identified in this way.

So in theory, this magic system is perfect, almost perfect. But theoretical perfection does not mean that all practical problems can be solved. This is why there is a third classification standard.

In fact, the third classification standard is not like a self-contained system, but like a supplement to the second classification standard, so that I can't give a simple and clear definition (or it may be a problem of my ability). First of all, we should see the shortcomings of the second classification, and then look at what the third classification is. Give two examples to illustrate. Example 1: The great elvish magic "Somy Enchantment" is mentioned in many fantasy works. It is a large enchantment created by a large group of elf wizards after long-term preparation (it is said that the casting process itself takes several weeks), which can surround an entire city. Its function is not only as simple as protection, and even it is generally believed that the enchantment itself is alive (the terrible consequences caused by the failure of magic are also described in the game "Ice Wind Valley"), which can be said to be the real masterpiece of magic created by elves. What I want to say is not magic itself, because although its effect can be said to be quite amazing, it can still be explained by the second classification. What I want to say is that if a mage can recite a spell in just a few minutes to achieve the same effect (in fact, this has happened). This is a problem, because for the second classification method, to cast a spell, you must know every "sub-effect" and the mechanism of each part of the cast, so that it is possible. In this way, the greater the magic effect, the more complicated the casting process. So many large-scale magic can't be done by one person, so it's difficult to use it in actual combat. Example 2: A magic called "Fog of Destiny". It appeared in the book "Road to Dawn" written by R.A.Salvatore in the four-part "Elf bloodline". The effect of this magic is to "take the caster to the place indicated by fate for him or them". I'm afraid it's hard to explain this magic from the second classification method. Because the effect itself is not clear, there are also vague words such as "fate". Some people may say that this magic itself has gone beyond the scope of fantasy and belongs to magic. I won't discuss whether it is appropriate to add such magic to the settings for the time being, but in the rules of Dungeons and Dragons, "wishing" is also defined as "general magic", which I think is also based on the same reason. For example, in The Watchman, the magic "Broken Chop" is powerful enough to involve the existence essence of that world, and there are some special magic forces that have been inherited from the family lineage (an inappropriate example is "sharingan" in Naruto). One common feature of these magic is that its mechanism of action cannot be explained, but it is realized through some other connecting means, such as a contract with a powerful creature, blood inheritance and so on. And this is the so-called third classification standard. It can be said that it is divided according to the connection mode and magic effect of the caster. However, because this method is so diverse and almost irregular, it is difficult to form a certain theoretical system.

In fact, this part of the research has ended in this place. The following parts are used to illustrate its practical role and some specific practices in setting. So many opinions may be very personal.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, the starting point of this article is "how to make the classification of magic as systematic as possible and explain various situations as reasonably as possible". If you just want the classification system to be complete and reasonable, the second classification method is actually very good. Even if there are still shortcomings, we can make up for them through some improved means. For example, the reference to "universal magic" in the aforementioned "Dungeons and Dragons" rule, or directly interpreted as the function of some divine powers, and so on. There are many ways. However, such an approach is very unfavorable for a setting, especially from the perspective of the richness and diversity of the setting content. The caster under the second classification method naturally gives people the feeling of being a scholar, just like the method itself. And it is difficult to highlight the caster's personality (you can't see a pure necromancer or a pure druid, and you can't see a real care mercenary). At this point, the first classification method is the best. In addition, the system is too perfect and lacks mystery and tension, so it is impossible to make some special cases to make your story more special without violating the ceiling (you can't see a mage hero burst into mysterious and unknowable power at a critical moment, nor can you see an evil wizard suddenly pull out some dark magic that can destroy the whole city). At this point, the third classification method is the best. This is why the three classification methods must exist at the same time. They can complement each other and learn from each other.

But how can they coexist without contradiction? In fact, it is very simple to unify these three classification systems with completely different starting points into one setting. Because the world is diverse, people are always looking for different solutions to problems, so magic is naturally the same. They may occur at different times. From the order of thinking from simple to complex, they should be produced at the first, second and third time, all the way down (so we can call the first classification method "classical magic system"). The third method should focus on the second one, the first one is mainly used in actual combat, the third one is a new category and a development direction (so we can call the second classification "classical magic system", the magic under this method "academic magic" and the magic under the third classification "new magic"). We can even assume that in the history of academic magic, the great ancient elf wizards played the most important role in promoting it, and their achievements have not been achieved by human beings so far, so they are also called "elf magic". Or to put it another way, consider the contradictions and conflicts between schools. At the beginning of the birth of "new magic", it was obviously opposed by many traditional spellcasters, especially those scholars who admired ancient "elf magic" and had an authoritative position in the world at that time. Because "new magic" has impacted the theoretical basis of the original magic system, many "conservatives" will prove that the original theoretical system is correct through various methods, including studying the effects of some "new magic" and then trying to reproduce this effect with the principle of "classic magic system" to prove that the past theory is still perfect. Such an approach may have some effect, but it is obviously impossible to succeed all the time. Just like the example of "Somi Enchantment" mentioned above, even though the effect may be the same, the process is completely different. Further "new magic" is likely to be banned or considered evil because of its amazing effect and instability. This can also explain why the "classic magic system" is still dominant. This also leaves a lot of room for the possible contribution of human beings in the development of this system. ..... I'm afraid it's endless to think like this, but it's exciting to think about the impact these may have on the whole setting.

Finally, explain In fact, this article is only a general discussion as a whole, and many detailed work has not been carried out in detail. I'm afraid it's beyond the scope of this essay if you really want to do it. In addition, many ideas are really personal, and it is inevitable that there will be extremes or even mistakes. I hope you will kindly correct me.