Magic in Middle-earth

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by blantyr

When the Fellowship was in Lorien, Galadriel looks into the eyes of each of the Fellowship in turn, and learns something of their motives and intent. AQ has labeled this ability a 'spell'. That you do not like the word 'spell' does not imply that the scene isn't in the book.

Well, perhaps it was meant as a different meaning of "spell" - not an incantation, but as in "a spell of rain" or something like that. But I still don't like the word - it sound like the person has to force it, and that it's temporary. I don't want to press this matter further, because I've said all that I have to say about it.

Similarly, after the wedding of Eowyn and Faramir, as the Rivendell party and the Lorien parties are about to each go their own way, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond and others looked into each others eyes and communicated directly mind to mind. AQ defines this ability as a spell as well.

The people you list are high Elves and a Maia. They have these innate abilities.

If I remember Gandalf's description correctly, it allows one to step into a world of spirits. You can see them. They can see you. A Morgul knife does this too. When one is in this world of spirits, Glorfindel radiates magic in much the way you describe, while others in the living realm are much less visible.

You step into a realm of wraiths, not of magic. Glorfindel was clearly seen because he was born in Aman - he's one of the special cases.

Thinking of a counter example, Frodo briefly wears the Ring in the presence of Tom Bombadil. There is no mention of Tom's appearance changing, or of Sam, Merry and Pippin's appearance changing. Tom is clearly very powerful. Does Tom not radiate a magical aura?

Sure he does. Part of his magic and power is that the evilness of the Ring has less strength in hs realm.

Moreover, do you remember how Frodo, and then he other hobbits started singing in imitation of Tom shortly after coming into his house? That is what I'd call the effects of his magical presence/radiance.

Is his magic different from Glofindel's?

Quite. His strength lies in happiness.

[quote]Does the Ring have no power or hold over Tom?[/qote]

Evidently no, seeing as he doesn't become invisible when he puts it on.

Arguably, you could say that it would tempt him, if he could possibly be tempted with anything. However, he's one truly happy and carefree person; he doesn't need or want anything else. He has all that he wants. He's hopelessly uncorruptable.

Plus, he's an enigma that was meant to be left as such. If you put too many details about someone he stops being an enigma.

But that's an entirely different thing altogether.

Was Tolkien more interested in telling a good tale than keeping his magic system 100% consistent? I don't know. I don't know that anyone knows for certain. If we really wanted to, we could string out such questions indefinitely.

100% consistent? I think it is. It's his book, and unlike Rowling he didn't put any specific limitations on "what could be done with magic". There is different magic.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Well, that one's basically mental telepathy (Tolkien did actually lay down rules for how it worked, though the essay in question was unknown until a few years ago). And note that this, and the ability to sense another's power, were already cited by G55 as examples of "subtle magic"!

Now, I can quite understand AQ classing them as "spells" for convenience, and I appreciate that you're just using the word for want of a better. In fact, I believe the only reason anyone is nitpicking about it is that it looks like the word "spell" is causing a bit of a definition-creep in your own mind– as your Elf-character is, apparently habitually, doing something much closer to the traditional definition of "casting a spell":

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Well, perhaps it was meant as a different meaning of "spell" - not an incantation, but as in "a spell of rain" or something like that. But I still don't like the word - it sound like the person has to force it, and that it's temporary. I don't want to press this matter further, because I've said all that I have to say about it.

The people you list are high Elves and a Maia. They have these innate abilities.

I like the word 'abilities'. This might be used in place of the S word. I shall note that AQ has separate categories for skills, spells, talents and edges. All might be described as abilities. There are reasons an ability might be placed in one category or another, but I won't go into that.

I am going to go into AQ game mechanics more than I like, below, not because they are perfect and canon, but because they provide a clear framework to answer the questions raised above.

If one has three appropriate skill levels, one can use the ability 'sense power,' but one must use both incantations and gestures to make it work. If one has six skill levels, one needs only use incantations or gestures. If one has nine skill levels, one need use neither incantations or gestures. If one has thirteen skill levels, one can use the ability 'at will'. One need not spend time thinking about it, one need not roll dice, and using the ability does not make one tired.

The game master of Goldie's off line game and I are stretching the character advancement system a bit to get her nine skill levels. Neither one of us think elves using the Art for minor subtle things should be performing incantations or waving their arms around. Both of us want use of such abilities to be subtle.

Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel would have at least 13 skill levels in that telepathic ability. They would be using that ability 'at will' or as an 'innate ability.' It seems plausible that lesser beings might use the same ability, but not so easily.

Uglub the Black Corsair of Umbar and dabbler in sorcery might well have very few skill levels. He might have to incant and wave like a Hogwart graduate to do anything.

Gandalf in breaking Saurman's staff used words. Gandalf in lighting the fire in the pass above Moria used a gesture. Gandalf describing to Gimli how he cast a spell to lock the door against the balrog said such things take time. It follows that not everything Gandalf does is 'at will' or is an 'innate ability.' Not everything is effortless, even for him. There ought to be some signs that using some abilities is not trivial, that sometimes he has to work at it.

I also note that Tolkien uses very high level, very powerful characters. Gandalf the wizard, Aragorn heir to kings, Boromir heir to stewards, Legolas son of kings, Thorin head of house... We thus see magic and weapons use at the most potent level. If one is writing fan fiction or creating a role playing environment, unless one is using Tolkien's characters, one often wants to down power things. We have lots of examples about how things work at the most potent level, but nothing about more moderate adventures.

As neither Uglub the Black Corsair or anyone like him has appeared in Tolkien's works, it would be valid to say there are no low level folk that can use only minor magics, and only with a struggle. This might be a valid approach to writing fan fiction close to canon. Take it too far though, and one ends up with Tolkien without magic. The option of extrapolating down from the greater magics into something less seems a valid choice, though it could easily cause purists to itch.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Now, again, as a practical consideration, that probably about as subtle as you could make magic use in a game of that type– but again I have to ask, how relevant is it?

Goldie -- Aerlinn Maltheniel -- perceives the world through other senses. She shapes the world using other tools. She isn't just a pretty girl who will live a long time. Her personality, world view and values have been shaped by her culture and her abilities. In any given scene, the chances of her wanting to use an ability in a way any other character would notice might be near nil. That isn't relevant.

That she is not living in the world that shaped her could be problematic, though. What she would see as important, and what she would do to respond to something she sees as important, might seem entirely off base.

I go a bit nuts with my non-human characters. In a series of Star Trek games, I created and played the Joy Class Androids. They fed six laws of robotics through an Asimov Processor and then into an emotion chip. The Joys could generally pass as human, but they lacked free will and were in some ways highly predictable. Most of the time they would be obedient followers of orders, but every once in a while they would run into a situation where their programming would throw a curve into a plot line. (When the Prime Directive is Priority One, while obeying orders is Priority Three, there can occasionally be a problem.)

Goldie might be like that too in her own way. She might not have an asimov processor, but she will sometimes respond to situations in unexpected ways. As the Joys had problems in games that stepped away from the spirit of Roddenberry, Goldie too might have problems. I'd like to think this could be a feature, but to others it might easily be a bug.

[Galadriel55]

I can see why the RPG classified "abilities" (if you like that word) and strengths and etc. However, in the legendarium, there is no such classification, and the categories blantyr lists are often linked and interrelated. As Nerwen said before, you can't apply the AQ rules to Tolkien.

[Morthoron]

This thread is becoming one long spam advertising an RPG.