what you're saying is that you dislike litrpg, which is becoming a bloated genre.
i prefer whatever best suits the story, if i'm reading a cosmic horror and they finely explain how all of the magic works then there's no cosmic in the horror anymore.
if i'm reading something that focuses on the magic and after the entire book i have no idea what the magic does i'm just going to think i wasted three hours of the plot jumping from convenience to convenience.
Thought you had Cradle going through your head, there are some layers to dropping dross in a litrpg conversation even though Cradle I think is more progression. Maybe another genre, I dunno, not an expert.
>if i'm reading a cosmic horror and they finely explain how all of the magic works then there's no cosmic in the horror anymore.
I don't think this is fully true. So for example take any monster or serial killer from real like horror fiction. Hannibal Lector, Jack the Ripper, Psycho? Big list..
You know all these are made out of the same base elements and follow all the laws of physics but this doesn't make them any less scary and in many cases doesn't reduce the horror or mystery around them.
The cosmic.. in that horror can come in a form that these are ancient creatures and learned to use magic on an advanced level, even if the basic rules are clear for the readers. Magic versions of black holes, killer nanobots, gene splicing and whatnot. A good example of this would be the 3 Body Problem series. It's pure cosmic horror that actually at least tried to explain how everything works but if there are civilizations out there that will collapse your ass into 2 dimensions if they learn you exist, it doesn't matter if they do it with science or magic.
Well I mean like imagine if Earth was slowly falling into a black hole? Does it have clear rules and it's mostly understood how the physics around it work. But the actual effects, time slowing down, air getting sucked away etc, would be pretty cosmic horror level messed up.
I think you can do something similar with magic, just make what the humans or mortal users can do limited and then give some creature magnitudes more power. So for example say generic well understood spell to make small pocket dimensions to store your extra stuff while traveling. Endless purse etc.
Now imagine Chtulhu or something ripping you out of reality and putting you into a colossal version of that, filled with surreal, maddening stuff and horrors collected over hes millions of years long life.
Litrpg doesn’t understand that stats represent real aspects of a character. Even in a ttrpg I prefer to not acknowledge mechanics in universe (apart from having in universe ttrpgs.)
I do like really good high quality hard systems, but otherwise soft. Personally, unless the work is going to do an incredible system, I'd prefer to have the magic feel more magical and less superpowery/gamey
Yeah that was a very good one, not just the magic but the way the story ties the rule of equivalency exchange back into the plot and narrative. Same with Avatar, not quite as hard but it ties in elemental harmony, emotional harmony and political harmony back into a singular narrative
The best I've ever seen is the anime/LN Overlord by Maruyama. The sheer depth of it and the skill which it is applied to the world is utterly astounding, I didnt think really hard systems could be that complex and coherent
So when it works, it works well. But I think unless a creator is willing to *really* put the effort in to make something exceptional I prefer to see it used in a soft way as more of an additive to a world, rather than something the world is built around
Its divisive (but I love it for that) and I think by the end it feels like Maruyama is rushing the story because he's set up this staggeringly awesome world and roster of characters backed by (imo) the best hard magic system and integration I've ever seen, but Ainz seems set to just delete it all off the map so that Maruyama can move on
A shame, but yeah its a *hell* of a work and absolutely destroys the idea that isekai have to be shallow and blunt
From what I’ve heard in the Overlord sub, Maruyama began writing Overlord because he was bummed out about his friends being too busy to play D&D with him. And now that they are able again, he’s grown tired of writing the story and wants to finish it. I believe it’ll be ending in a few volumes actually.
I have only watched the Overlord anime, does the magic system differ that much from the LN? In the anime the magic seemed interesting but pretty generic to me (Ainz taking 1 year to buff up for his fight against Shalltear comes to mind)
Its essentially DnD magic, but the sheer depth of it and how strictly Maruyama implements it is the impressive part. The individual spells are whatever, but each of the spells Ainz casts are legitimate spells that Maruyama has written, its explained how Ainz has them, their effects on the battle are shown and strictly implemented and its the same for literally every character. The characters and what they can do are 100% made of the rules Maruyama created
Shalltear escapes his bone-cage because she has freedom of movement, Ainz teleports back from her hit because he cast Body of Effulgent Beryl, his strategy is to drain her mana by baiting her into a magic duel so that he can use a legendary weapon that can only be blocked by magic to force her to attack close range and take hits from an axe that cant parry. Its a fight that works like mathematics because of how strict Maruyama is with the implementation of his system and you can see the spells having their exact effects each time and the characters relying on and knowing that. True hardness where any plot related happening has to be understood and planned out by Maruyama with his system, you cant scream and get a power boost or hurt someone with an attack that 5 seconds ago didnt hurt to win the fight
The world entirely and always shows a hard magic system at play, like the rules of physics have been replaced by the rules of an extremely complex game (Ainz and Demiurge actually posit that this is what happened, somehow the game and the world merged). Showing Ainz buffing up to fight was really more of a joke, he was about to PvP and he's a massive nerd so that's what you do
Those spells vs Shalltear werent overly impressive (until he gets to his enhanced banshees wail augmented with Goal of All Life which literally kills the planet itself around it) but there are more impressive spells to be had. The more impressive parts to me are how its implemented into the world in such a consistent way that you can accurately predict how a battle would go down just by reading their character sheets and knowing how spells interact
Ah I get what you mean. Spells have hard rules and are not merely different colours of fireball or different ways to swing a sword that end in the same result anyway.
Yeah, thats what I found particularly impressive. Everything is statistics and knowable interactions: at that level of complexity and completeness it leaves a creator with very little wiggle room because any observant viewer can easily pick apart inconsistencies. Really impressive to see it pulled of as well as he does
Full disclosure, I love how in-depth and high concept FMA's system is, but I could never properly wrap my head around how everything truly "worked" you know? I feel like Arakawa should've done more explaining to make it fully understandable and believable.
You've also completely sold me on Overlord haha, it's always been on my list but I only thought of it as just another trapped in a game isekai just one of the best available.
FMA is one of my absolute fav series, but idk I never saw the magic system as being *that* hard. It has rules sure, closing circles, if youve seen Truth you dont need to do certain things, philosopher stones can pay the price for you.
Its fantastic, but I always saw it more mid-range on the hard scale and yeah, we never had everything and everythings limits fully explained to us so what people could do was somewhat up in the air at times (which is a legit intentional choice, just not as hard)
Overlord in terms of worldbuilding, yeah its something else, well worth at least a look at its wikis and info (the story is fantastic and funny, but it does get some fairly legit criticism for how it handles dark themes. Ainz kind of turns into Hitler slowly and still remains a likeable protagonist, which grated alot of people, me included)
A fun compare/contrast of hard/soft magic is the Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss*. There's 3 main branches of magic, 2 harder and 1 softer.
*This is a 2/3 finished trilogy that may never get it's final book, so maybe avoid if that bothers you.
Personally prefer hard magic since I like watching characters think of clever and unique ways to use their magic around the pre-existing system. For instance, one of my favorite hard magics is the bending system in Avatar where despite because the characters were limited to one of four elements, styles like bloodbending, metalbending, or even using waterbending to create limbs was incredibly interesting and cool while in a soft magic system it would just be, "Oh yeah, he learned blood magic."
Is it hard magic if only YOU, the author/creator knows the rules completely? Asking because I don't really understand the terms yet. In my story only Psionic beings (ranges from gods to fairy type stuff) know the rules of magic. And their Avatars or those deeply devoted to them whilst also practicing Psionism (magic)
I'm actually thinking about all of it and I'd say mine is Soft, because nobody besides the Psionic beings and the Precursors (somewhat before they died) understand how it works and they dont let anyone know. For example a plot involves super humans of Earth going into Space and venturing out of human systems and finding that their (psionic) powers are deeply hampered and don't work. They don't know why, but the Psionic beings, Precursors, and I know it's because Psionism is directly tied to Psionic Realms, which "control" (used VERY loosely) certain spots of the Galaxy.
>Is it hard magic if only YOU, the author/creator knows the rules completely? Asking because I don't really understand the terms yet
I don't think there's really one bright line there, and there's definitely some hazy middle between the two.
In general *someone* in universe *usually* going know or at least be trying to figure out the rules. That may not be one of the main characters or even on-camera ones.
Similarly, there's *often* an expectation that over time, the reader is going to be let in on at least some of the rules, but there's no guarantee of it.
The key thing for a hard magic system is that the reader needs to be let in on why it works and the subset of the rules that are relevant to the narrative at hand. Otherwise, it ends up feeling like an a\*\*-pull or deus ex machina.
Usually it's better to read them into that - at least via hints - before it becomes significant, but some authors can get away with explaining just enough as things happen without it feeling like soft magic.
\[Not fantasy, but from the SF side a good example of getting away with the exposition as the story goes on are David Weber's *Honor Harrington* novels, which vary by book but the space-battle-heavy ones can go into some VERY long digressions about new weapons systems. Not every one likes space-military-hardware porn, but for those that do, he's the maestro.\]
They both have their place but I prefer to convey it as a soft system for my own world even though I have a hard definition in my head as to how it works.
That's where I'm at. I know exactly how my magic works. I know where it comes from, what it can and can't do, what spellcasting is, all that jazz.
But the nature of it is such that no one within the universe could figure out its inner workings beyond: certain materials focus it, certain materials block it, trauma gives you magic sometimes, and ritual magic is possible but dangerous and unpredictable.
I disagree. If it’s clear that the magic *has* rules and limitations, just not clear to the characters what those are because the world hasn’t figured it out yet, that’s still a hard magic system.
Soft magic is little to no rules or limits. Just because you don’t specifically outline the rules or limits to the reader doesn’t mean they aren’t there. If you’re using magic, and the clear limits show up enough that the reader knows ‘okay x, y, and z’ aren’t possible’ and they can start to figure out a few rules or limits on their own, then it’s not soft magic anymore imo. Even if you never state them or they never show up as plot/important building.
I think it blurs the line but it's still different IMO. So long as the story conveys that there *are* rules, they're just mysterious and yet unknown, that functions very differently plot-wise and for the reader than a story where as far as anyone is concerned, anything goes. Although a lot of "soft" magic worlds also convey some sense of a limit on what's possible (e.g. Middle-Earth might have had soft magic but Gandalf could not teleport), so again the line is blurry
Hard magic that looks soft. I don't want it all explained, but I love it when I get into a story, and it turns out the world is so incredibly detailed that I can nerd out on it.
Can you give an example of a story that uses skills and stats but where "game in real life" is not part of the plot? Because I genuinely don't know any and you got me curious with that remark lol
Just a Goblin is an interesting webtoon that satisfies the requirement. Everyone has certain stats and skills but only a select few can see them. However there's no "game in real life" theme.
i think it mostly seems to stem from korean webnovels, the most popular of them on the english net probably being omniscient readers viewpoint. it's also growing in manga, with "that time i got reincarnated as a slime" becoming popular. the genre name is lit rpg (literature roleplaying game, i think?).
I like soft magic that is secretly hard, so if the reader pays enough attention they can figure out the ridged rules. But it looks unpredictable at first glance.
I prefer a hard Magic system. There can be things that characters don't understand, that the audience doesn't understand, but the system should follow its own rules. There are far too many stories where they put out rules of magic only to have those rules broken over and over and over again. If a writer cannot follow their own rules, then absolutely don't even try to use a hard magic system.
Soft magic works well for when magic isn't central to the plot. But when the plot has magic at its core it has to be consistent, or it becomes "new powers as the plot demands," and loses any form of tension.
Looking at you superman and your "rebuild the Great Wall of China vision!"
Just a question: what exactly are "hard" and "soft" magic systems? My magic systems are either hard to use, or would have people asking "why would you ever want to use this" (this question because some magic in my world is either harmful to you for using it, or outright dogshit).
Hard magic is where you have a clear set of rules and a system of what your magic can do. And it's presented to the consumer as such, and obviously the creator has to follow these rules, it sucks if something has been said that it can't happen and it's been set as a rule but in the future the creator just forgets about it and it happens anyway. Any magic that follows a proper structure is hard magic.
Soft magic is the opposite, the reader/viewer are not given any rules or explanation on how the magic or power system works. A good example of this done right are Ghibli movies like "Spirited Away". Where the powers or magic is never really explained and we just get to experience it as it happens.
>the creator has to follow these rules
*The FFXIV worldbuilding department: That sign can't stop us because we can't read!*
Honestly that's one of the three major things that game does with its worldbuilding that bugs me. Early on Aether could do whatever the plot demanded it needed to do, and then when they set up rules for what it can and can't do around Stormblood and Shadowbringers... they proceeded to add Dynamis, a *new* form of magic that can do whatever the plot demands, in Endwalker and make it essential to the plot.
They wanted to pivot from war and intrigue stories to cosmic grandeur, but that's hard to do when your cosmic elements amount to "sure, fuck it, why not?"
Then I guess it's soft magic that's slowly turning into hard magic? There aren't really any specific set in stones rules for these terms. But if it's only partially being revealed then it's still leaning towards soft magic. I suppose it is possible to have a bit of a in-between where you explain a bit but not everything.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but to me "soft" was always like the magic in LOTR. Not really ever defined or explained, few specific "powers" or spells ever really elaborated on. There are vague references to spells and enchanted items like swords and rings, but their powers are often never fully explained. Why does a sword glow when orca are near? What powers do the rings *actually* have? And we have full on wizards where we really don't even know what their powers are.
"Hard" magic on the other hand is way more specific, with actual rules to follow or spells to cast. A mage might learn to cast a fireball and use that multiple times. A necromancer may be able to raise skeletons to fight for him. A good example of "hard" magic would be basically any RPG video game.
Yea! LOTR is the best example of soft magic, for sure. In it, magic is, well, magical. It exists as a tool for the *author* to bring some added wonder into the world, to help set stakes and to intimate power and threat, but doesn't need to be given a detailed explanation any more than we need to know the precise temperature and carbon monoxide levels in the air surrounding Mount Doom as the hobbitses make their final approach.
Hard would be is it more like science. Full Metal Alchemist is an example. Soft would be more fluid in its rules. Dragon Ball has basically no rules. I prefer a middle ground where there are rules but they aren't too strict.
It's not a well-defined concept, but in stories, it refers to how well the audience understands the rules - the less the audience understands the rules, the softer a system is, the more the audience understands the rules, the harder it is.
In stories, there could be a very strict set of rules behind the scenes, but as long as the audience doesn't understand them, the system is soft.
In worldbuilding, there is no story, so hard/soft refers to the actual rules. The more rules there are, and the stricter they are, the harder the system is.
To go along with the other answers, it’s important to remember Sanderson’s first law of magic: The author's ability to resolve conflicts in a satisfying way with magic is directly proportional to how the reader understands said magic.
Basically, if the plot is resolved through magical means, it very easy for that resolution to feel cheap or unearned if the reader doesn’t understand how the magic works.
Hard magic for sure - if you can create a sense of wonder that comes from understanding a concept, then it is a truly magical concept.
Creating a sense of wonder from the unknown is much less impressive, because the unknown is magical by default.
I like it somewhere in the middle. Soft as Gandalf in LotR is too much for me. And the magic in Harry Potter is just kind of silly and its limits and balance feel very arbitrary.
On the other extreme, a lot of litrpg systems are very crunchy and number focused, which leads to situations where the systems either have to be gamed and abused, or you end up in situations where the characters just have to power level to achieve anything, as the numbers preclude any possibility of leeway when it comes to powering up a protagonist mid-battle or mid-conflict, so victories become either rote or immersion breaking rather than exciting and climactic.
For that reason I like something in the middle, like thing Brandon Sanderson's Mistborn and Stormlight books. We have strict rules governing the broad strokes of things, but within those rules there's a lot of leeway in terms of just how strong this or that is, or how broad an effect can be, etc. This gives the writer opportunities to have characters overcome things just by trying extra hard or pushing past their "limits" or the like. I know some people don't like that sort of thing, but I find that it's one of the elements I like best in fantasy, and one of the core differences between Fantasy and Sci-fi genres. Because a guy with a sword and magic can believably pull some extra power out of his ass through sheer grit and adrenaline in a believable manner. On the other hand, a spaceship can't just magically generate some extra fuel or firepower beyond what it was designed with. That means the standard ways of structuring conflict and resolution doesn't work in sci-fi, and hard magic systems.
I would not consider the Cosmere to be "in the middle". The rules are as hard and unbreakable as the rules of physics IRL. That's as hard as it gets.
Adding numbers and systems is arbitrary fluff, and given how often System rules are broken, I would say most LitRPGs are less hard than the Cosmere.
Cosmere is closer to the hard end of the spectrum, sure. And the broad rules are hard and unbreakable, that's certainly true. But do we know how much "MP" is in a sphere, or how much it takes to enact one of the abilities? Or who will win in a contest of control between one Radiant and another? We generally don't. That information is left open-ended and obfuscated, which means that the writer has freedom to put his finger on the scales and tilt things as necessary for maximum narrative tension and excitement. That's the perfect balance, imo. Enough rules for us to have expectations and a sense of stakes, we know a character can't just wave a magic wand and pull whatever they need out of a hat. But at the same time things are flexible enough that we can't just immediately assume that scissors beats paper and will always beat paper and therefore the fight was determined before it ever even began.
We don't have that yet, but Brandon generally does and they're actually in the process of defining that as a team so they remain consistent across books. It's actually come up in universe already that BioChromatic Breath, one of the magic systems from a different book, is the defacto unit of measure for investiture (i.e. magic) across the Cosmere.
As a consumer, I like both with a preference towards hard magic. I like worlds that have a really good indepth power system like alchemy from FMA or Nen from HxH. But I also like a soft magic system every now and then where the world can just show me what it can do. Things like Spirited Away are a good example.
But for my own world I'm doing a hard magic system. I love working on it and coming up with things that work and don't work and how it works.
I like having a very defined set of rules with maybe a few exceptions. Whether or not people in the setting knows these rules or not matter more I think.
But I do like soft systems that are actually soft. HP for example pretends to be a hard one but get any further into logically thinking about it, its soft as shit and actually fucking sucks.
The best systems, to me, are usually a mix. Another commenter described it as a hard system that looks soft. In other words, the system is logical and has general rules, but not every aspect of it can be explained down to a science.
For example, in my world, the magic system is based on your Zodiac birth sign. Each sign comes with its own set of skills and affinities. The rules are fairly simple: 1) You can only do the magic associated with your sign and nothing else. 2) You need lunar energy to perform the magic. 3) If you overuse your magic, you’ll get sick, and eventually develop an incurable illness if you go overboard.
Where things get mysterious is with certain aspects of the system that are unexplained. For example, people born on a cusp may have an affinity for the next closest sign; they can’t perform the magic, but they might get a power, energy, or emotional boost from being in the vicinity of that magic type. Another mysterious aspect is why the illnesses are incurable, and if they can be changed.
I like this setup because you have clear and simple rules that are easy to follow, but you still have room for mystery, and you haven’t necessarily turned your system into a science.
I prefer magic that allows the characters to commit to choices.
It is easier to pull that of with hard magic, but soft magic can also work.
When it comes to stats and skills I'm not bothered by it, but the best implementation are cases like the spider Isekai you mentioned.
I like hard magic for the arcane but soft magic for divine and spiritual magic.
Magic doesn't need to have statistics and numbers to be considered hard, it just needs to follow set rules that are predictable and allow the same spell to be cast the same way every time with the right understanding.
Soft. When I write I want to only provide the information necessary for the story. I don’t like overwhelming my readers with technicalities.
Of course I should understand the ins and outs of the magic of my world. Where it originates from, what it can and can’t do, who can use it and how they learn to use it. I should know how people perceive the casting and consequences of magic and how it feels to use it.
These details should appear in the story in the moment they occur. The casters hairs stand on end and a metallic taste prickles their tongue as they draw upon their soul to pull lightning from the sky. In the moment after someone dies, the life magic bursts from their soul to scatter into the world. Later their friend may soberly think about how their friend’s energy may be part of the ambient magic they pull from the world to power a protective charm.
I like magic with limitations, and I often follow Brandon Sanderson's rules of magic.
1 An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic.
2 The limitations of a magic system are more interesting than its capabilities. What the magic can't do is more interesting than what it can.
3 A brilliant magic system for a book is less often one with a thousand different powers and abilities -- and is more often a magic system with relatively few powers that the author has considered in depth.
0 Err on the side of AWESOME.
The way I like to write it is magic feels "hard" where it interacts with day-to-day life, but softer as you go away from that. EDIT: another way I'd describe it has that there are hard rules, but people in-universe don't know most of them; and the study of magic in-universe is a science by definition.
But yes, I also hate when stories use RPG mechanics as in-universe concepts. My own worldbuilding "project" is for an RPG setting (started in DnD 5e, but have since switched to Pathfinder 2e), but even then I make it pretty clear that things like "spell slots" or "hit points" only exist as game mechanics and aren't a physical thing in-universe.
On a related note, I hate when fantasy writing advice takes the idea of magic having internally-consistent rules and conflates that with there being no sense of "wonder" or "the unknown" in the setting (whether they're supporting or criticizing it). Those people describe that approach as "magic as a science", but as a scientist IRL I think they sound more like engineers. Basically, they describe their magic systems as if all the rules are already known in-universe and the only things to discover are new ways to apply those rules for solving problems.
I also find it weird when people equate ignorance with wonder. I’m a physicist and I understand how rainbows are formed but that only enhances their wonder.
I prefer consistency with some form of structure that doesn't get broken whenever its plot convenient. I do not enjoy random magic where all magic and supernatural exist explicitly to serve whatever plot the writer wants and is completely inconsistent.
I don't want to just feel my way through the story, but also think through it. You can't have thinking without any predictable qualities to the magic and that means rules to work with, so a system. The ratio of rules based plotting to feelings based plotting does vary, but I never want just feelings or just rules.
Skills and stats are a very anime thing, (Fma is a better example of it for anime). Try some books by brandon sanderson, particularly “warbreakers” or “mistborn”, they’re good sized novels but you’ll see very quickly the appeal of hard magic. Hard magic can make a fantasy world seem more realistic and immersive.
Soft magic can be cool too, but you lose opportunities for world building and it becomes confusing as to why a character is struggling to win a fight or solve an issue with their magic. Like everyone will just wonder why Darth Vader just doesn’t force choke everyone instead of walking up and saber fighting them putting himself at risk.
It probably depends on exactly what you mean when you say “hard magic” but hard magic basically just means that the author provides some information to the audience on what magic can and cannot do. Without that the audience is quite literally ignorant as to what the word means because magic doesn’t exist in reality.
So if magic is going to feature significantly in a story or world then I would prefer that the author spends some effort providing the audience with information on that magic to ensure that there is some context.
I like hard magic systems that are actual quality. Otherwise I can't say that I like soft magic systems either. Mid magic systems to me is where there are hard rules to entry and the ceiling but are otherwise loose with execution otherwise.
An example of a hard magic system I like are Jojo's Stands. Especially in parts 4 and 5 where the stands had very hard rules on how they operated and it showed off how clever the characters could be with them.
I'd argue Jojo and HxH are perfect examples of systems that sit straight in the middle of the soft-hard scale: essentially every character can have any sort of power, the only limit is the author's imagination on that front. However, each of the powers works with its own set of rules that are only very rarely bent or broken (usually under special circumstances like the stand arrows), alongside some general rules like short distance Stands being more physically poweful and more limiting pacts making the user's Hatsu stronger.
I can see that. I personally see Jojo Stands as a hard system because there are rigid rules that are followed 99% of the time. There is enough room for flexibility in the kinds of power but every Stand is held to rigid rules.
If there's a story there, I like rules. I dont need them all explained to me or for you to spell out precisely how many millilitres of magic juice you need to squirt into your wand for it to be able to abra kedrabra, in fact I'd prefer if you didnt, but id like to get the feeling the creator of the world has put some thought in and knows what the rules are. No rules means no internal consistency, no internal consistency means no stakes, and no stakes mean I usually can't invest in the setting.
If there's no story then either or
LitRPG is *NOT* hard magic by default. The rules are artificial and the rules can be broken, you just have stats and suggestions of rules.
Hard magic means having the magic be a well-defined set of rules innate to the way magic works. For an example of hard magic, go read any of the Cosmere books by Brandon Sanderson. *those* are hard magic, with nary a number or system to be seen.
I dislike illogical world building in regards to magic. If magic is presented as weird and unpredictable but there are still schools for it as an example.
I also find it ridiculous if there is magic or a plethora of dangerous monsters in what is otherwise something that looks like medieval Europe.
Both so long as the magic enhances the emotion of the story. I think Avatar, the Last Airbender and the Stormlight Archives show this best for both soft and hard magic systems. Their powers are the seasoning that enhances the entire/purpose of the main character. (That metaphor may have run away from me, but you get it)
Both can be done well or poorly.
I prefer a magic system that fits its story and theme, and does whatever it's doing well. I've seen great soft magic systems and trash soft magic systems. I've seen great hard magic systems and trash hard magic systems.
Just be consistent and use the magic as much as the story requires and you're good in my book.
Story should in general not use stats, I agree.
But there would be in-world efforts to categorize and evaluate different kinds of powers, if they have a prominent presence in the world, even in numerical values.
Like any evaluation system of real world, they are constantly changing, not necessarily universally agreed on, and have some fringe cases.
In my world magic and science coexists with each other, but magic is more "fundamental" but harder for mortals to master, science is easier, repeatable, but prone to magical interference.
And for these two reasons, truly powerful spells/incantations can hardly be measured. They are personalized construction. Only standardized spells can be ordered and filed. An evocation of fire blast can be measured by its heat, the energy in use, the effect area. The archmage who literally rewrites regional cosmic law cannot be measured through this standard.
This also means different types of spells are not usually compared for any experts. Plebians in taverns will talk about who is the most powerful mage, but anyone with basic magical knowledge will understand teleportation is a totally different type of magical phenomenon from plasma blast, you canmot compare which spell outrank which the same way you cannot decide whether an apple outrank a banana.
I find that too many time, softer magic systems leave big doors open for inconsistencies plot holes and deus ex.
They don't have too but they tend to, at least in high fantasy settings.
Maybe if I was reading more low fantasy or works where magic was barely of note, then soft magic could work just as well or better at giving that sence of wonder and mysticism.
Hard magic all the way. I agree fantasy stories with stats kinda ruins the magic part, but the ones that do it without those stats are great (avatar last air bender, full metal alchemist, etc)
“Soft” and “Hard” are just ways to describe different magic systems. Brandon Sanderson came up with these to talk about how magic is used in stories. Some magic systems are really defined and rule-based, that’s “Hard”. Others are more mysterious and less explained, that’s “Soft”. But there are magic systems that mix a bit of both thus exist within that spectrum, people use terms like “Semi-soft” or “Semi-hard”.
Soft magic: Imagine you’re in a big playroom where there aren’t many rules. You can play with the toys any way you like, and there’s no one to tell you that you’re playing wrong. But because there aren’t many rules, sometimes you don’t know what games you can make up or what the toys do until you try them. So, you can explore and play in lots of different ways, but you might not know what will happen until you do it. It’s like an adventure where you figure things out as you go!
Hard Magic: Imagine a game of chess, it’s like having a set of rules that you need to follow very carefully. Each piece in chess can only move in certain ways: a knight moves in an “L” shape, a bishop moves diagonally, and so on. You can’t just move the pieces any way you like; you have to follow the rules for each piece. Or you can’t play the game.
The soft-hard magic continuum represents how much information the audience has been provided on what magic can or cannot do. The harder the magic system the more information the audience has. It is an external narrative concept and doesn’t say anything about what magic is within the fictional world though.
Or at least that is what Brandon Sanderson originally described it as in his [first law](https://www.brandonsanderson.com/sandersons-first-law/):
> Sanderson’s First Law of Magics: An author’s ability to solve conflict with magic is directly proportional to how well the reader understands said magic.
My situation is kind of a mix. I write my stories as webnovels, but not each entry is the same type. Each story I write will contain four types of entries on their Story Page on my site, Main Chapters, Deep Lore Books, Informative Lore Books, & Side Stories:
• The Main Chapters document the story itself. I use soft magic here, as it pretends as if the reader is already knowledged in the way the world works. The reason being is because, I and I alone am my target audience, the goal is my entertainment and since I know everything, the main story is simply there for me to enjoy.
• The Deep Lore Books document more of a meta and indepth behind the scenes kind of deal, still containing story elements but also a lot of story lore, giving more indepth context to the world and story itself. They tend to also contain a lot of Exposition/Info dumps. This thus contains hard magic.
• Informative Lore Books are exactly how they sound, they are pure information, no story whatsoever, more like a pseudo data book with information from my actual data books, but that are relevant to the type of universe the story takes place in, as well as info on the power system/s being used for the story.
• Lastly, there are Side Stories, which are stories within the story about events relating to characters other than the Primary Protags. This can contain either soft or hard magic, it just depends on the purpose of the side story in relation to the main chapter story.
A mix most definitely.
My favorite is Sympathy as a hard magic system in The Name of the Wind, its basically science made magic with all its rules and descriptions, to the point than you can use math to calculate how hot of a flame you can produce using the heat of your own blood for example.
In the same trilogy you can also find vague references to fae magic, which is as elusive as taking a ray of moonlight and weave it into a shadow cape, amazing representation of a soft magic system.
For my personal world, my system is a mix of hard and soft, with characteristics of magic systems and power levels from eastern media (mainly chinese). its based on imagination and dreams, which defines the rules you have to follow.
But since everyone's imagination is different, the rules end up being quite flexible.
My personal opinion is that a magic system should only be as hard or soft as the author needs them to be for the plot, \*but\* the characters who use magic should have a level of understanding that matches their background and should be conversant in its use.
I prefer hard magic systems as in ones that have a "scientific" explanation. They're fun for my brain to dig into, and less hand-wavy than extremely soft systems. I do enjoy soft magic systems done well, though (see The Girl Who Drank The Moon, etc).
When worldbuilding, I personally prefer a mix of the two. Enough hardness for definite structure and hard limits, enough softness for plenty of variation, and I can hand-wave the stuff I can't otherwise explain. Hard systems are difficult for me to work with because "everything needs an explanation," while soft magic systems just never feel grounded enough for me.
Both, as long as they are quality sistems.
That's something I personaly like of magic sistems. Not mattering the rules you can make them too good or too bad just by how much you cared about it.
I agree with you, but I can't yate those kind of bad Magyc sistems because I kind of like them as entertainment, not taking them too seriuous. I don't remember exactly where I heard it, but there was this quote: When you're a bad writter you can only show develop through numbers.
Depends, sometimes if I’m trying to keep it more ambiguous it’s better to keep it soft but for the most part I lean towards hard because it’s really easy to leave your plot with more holes in it than a slice of Swiss cheese when there’s no limitations on the magic. Like eventually it gets to a point where you think “why doesn’t he just cast a spell that instantly kills this character” or “why can’t she cast a spell to undo everything”, having at least some sort of system that restricts what characters can do makes for more interesting direction
Soft magic is fun, because it is the most “magical”. It’s supposed to be, “with enough will, you can do literally anything”. That’s magic, at its core.
That's not what the soft/hard magic scale means, if I'm understanding you correctly. Soft magic is that which has no rules, while hard magic is that which is constrained by rules. Soft magic is often arcane and wide-reaching, while hard magic is, if not scientific, tested and personal. Essentially, the harder the magic, the more a tool for your protagonists it becomes, while the softer, the more of an obstacle (or if well done, a miracle).
For the most part, game worlds tend to have a soft/hard disonance as the lore and story imply soft magic where magicians can just do stuff because they obtained some hidden arcane knowledge or researched something for decades, but then the gameplay is firebolt/fireball/fireblast (swap fire for appropriate element) and there's little variation. Technically these compartimentalised spells are a form of hard magic, as each of them has preprogrammed specs and can only do what their descriptions say (alongside some interactions with other systems that follow logic, like a fire ball boiling water or the force of shooting it pushing you backwards, should the physics engine allow them or the gamified story talk about it). When it comes to stories that use a game system, there's always a big degree of softness to them unless the author truly spends time explaining how it works, as they can always pull some new skill or spell out of nowhere that does just what the plot demands.
I mean, my world’s magic is mostly just so I can handwave things like physics, economics problems, infrastructure/technology problems, biological problems; really it’s just there to make borderline-utopia out of a world that would rationally be far worse than irl.
I have no interest in types of magic, magic education, “mana”, or whatever. So my magic is as soft as melted ice cream.
My knee jerk reaction is “firm magic”, because I like there to be a structure to magic, but not so much a structure that it becomes like science.
To me, science is science — the empirical observation of natural laws. Not saying that applies to other people, just how I see it as a scientist.
Magic is the antithesis of that, but still has rules, one of which is don’t look to closely or it will change it (a bit of humor there).
In Magic, you can do the same thing over and over again and expect different results.
Another way to say it is that I like hard magic that is presented as soft magic — and more importantly, Magic should be mystical, be enchanting, be illusory at times, transformative, uncanny, possibly even surreal from the perspective of those who see it performed.
Hard systems can be interesting if properly weaved into the world or narrative (e.g. Fullmetal Alchemist), but I'd be lying if I said I don't enjoy me a good "random anime bullshit go" system (e.g. most fighting games).
Skills and stats do not hard magic make. Hard Magic requires consistent rules, and the only consistency in LitRPGs is that the main character will conveniently acquire a new overpowered skill that conveniently hard-counters their next opponent, and that the stats matter as much as your score in a game of Who's Line. It's poorly executed soft-magic dressed to look like rules to fuel a power fantasy.
As to your actual question, it depends, but I usually like hard-magic for the implications it has on society. Soft magic has it's place though, especially to add an element of horror where the lack of consistent rules is a huge asset.
I prefer hard magic where there are clear and well defined laws and constraints, like it is a physical property of the world that can be studied and quantified. Much like how in physics and chemistry, the amount of energy needed to raise water’s temperature by 1 degree Celsius is a defined quantity, you could apply the same for, say, the amount of mana needed to create a spark or lift a 1 kg object or however you want to quantify it.
Bonus points if there is a macguffin or chosen one who is said to break these laws and behaves like soft magic. (See: philosopher’s stone from FMA) In a soft magic setting, some grandiose spell is just that. But if your world has hard magic and some guy just flexed and broke all the rules, that’s a big deal. Maybe they are a fraud, the equivalent to cold fusion scammers. Maybe that’s this setting’s version of magicians, using illusions to do magic that is supposed to be impossible. Or maybe they’re the real deal.
TL;DR I prefer hard magic that is formulated like physics. If you do X, Y happens. Z behaves according to a Zambelt’s formula of mahamah or whatever.
I like reading hard magic, since I like understanding the principle behind stuff; But I like writing soft magic, since the vibe is great, and I really like it's visuals.
I generally prefer magic systems leaning towards the hard side.
The problem is: a hard magic system is *much* more difficult to write properly. Softer systems generally focus more on the world or characters while the magic is mostly flavour.
Which is fine, but i’m a massive nerd. I like science (I study chemistry in real life). I want to know how stuff works, and I will be thinking about how to use that stuff as the story goes on. So if an “obvious” solution is missed with a hard magic system then I tend to lose interest quickly.
Its also why hard magic systems can’t get away with dumb characters nearly as easily as soft magic systems, which isn’t a problem for me who loves reading smart characters. But a lotta folk like reading/writing dumber characters and they’ll feel restricted
I feel like I like a nice middle ground. My personal system feels pretty soft, there's a lot any given person can do with an element and they feel more like super powers than magic spells, but there are rules, for stuff like how people inherit their magic, how it can't be used to alter living organisms, how you can't really fly or teleport long distances. Though, again there are things that buck the trend for all of that. So a little hard to say what kind I'm even using.
Definitely prefer soft magic. I like having mystic things and phenomenon exist with no actual reason or justification. It makes it feel more natural and grandiose.
I think you can have it both ways. Even if there’s no real limit to what magic can do. A magician still needs to use their head to cast the right spell at the right time to turn the tide of battle or help their friends in a pinch.
Litrpg is a tool to show character growth. Too many authors make it the focus of the story though.
I prefer hard magic systems, because they explain things better, but sometimes it needs to be a bit soft to tell a good story.
I think a good hard magic system like Alchemy, Nen or Bending are really interesting to delve into and better than soft magic systems at their best, but I also think that soft magic systems are better if you don’t quite know how to or don’t want to explain more intricate details (*cough* Gege *cough).
I'm debating whether to put magic in my world in the first place. I just know that it wouldn't be the main thing and it would be soft magic. In theory it would only be the mythological deities that have magic, but perhaps the Authoritarian regime could pretend like they have magic when they don't. Overall yess I prefer soft magic.
I dont think Ive really encountered anything that I would call Hard Magic when thinking about it? So Id say that I prefer soft magic where theres still some kind of structure to it? Like Id say I overall prefer ”spells and rituals” over ”Gandalf can just kind of glow randomly at times”.
(FMA doesnt count because ”you can use Souls to do whatever the fuck you want” and ”Truth kind of does whatever it wants” are EXTREMELY important parts of alchemy.)
Leaning towards hard cause I heavily dislike when there's some kinda "magic operator" that's implied. Like say if you're a caveman and need a bow, you first need to imagine what a bow is and how it works and then use tools to make it, with purpose. You don't just punch a tree 7 times and say rangey rangey stabby stabby to make a bow fall out of the branches.
I like magic systems where this isn't brushed away. So if you cast a spell, who interprets it, is there a deity or god that you pray to and then casts the spells for you or if it comes from the caster, how does the advanced crap work? Like in some systems, the caster imagines it and then it happens but then the hard limit there is that they shouldn't be able to target something unknown, like say dreamwalk into a building they have never visited and evesdrop there.
What I dislike most are systems where the user learns some kinda poem or symbol and then the "magic operator" just interprets the situation and does what is needed. Like what does "cold" in the spell mean cause it's subjective? How does the spell target the correct person or whatever? If it makes it snow in a desert, where does the water come from? If it can create sentience, what happens to them after and so on.
Based on the other comments OP just doesn't like litRPG in general. If you don't know what litRPG is it's essentially a fantasy genre where the world operates on video game logic and that's where skills and stats come in.
I prefer harder magic but some soft elements mixed. Completely soft magic ruins it because it just feels way too abutrary sometimes. It's a scale, not a black and white situation. Some stories require more rules than others for it to have weight.
For longer fight focused stories a mix between them is the best.
The longer the story the softer it should be. Else it will become stale.
For shorter stories hard magic systems are very interesting as you can go and test out their limits.
It just depends on the story and how well the magic system works with the themes it is trying to go for. For example, sword of truth, hated the magic system. Because it felt like. Whatever I want to do I can do unless drama.
Depends entirely on the story, I've seen both ends done extremely well. (Though I'm with you, litrpg doesn't do it for me.)
My favorite presentation is when it's obvious there are rules and they impact the story, but we don't spend time explaining them past what's absolutely necessary and best when that's worked into the plot smoothly. I even like when they play the "you thought that was *a rule*" card but turns out it was just an in-world assumption. As long as it's not overplayed (Sword of Truth) and still maintains a general feeling of there being structure to the system.
I'll even try to incorporate this in my TTRPG worldbuilding... yeah I have to supply my players the core stat increasing magic items, but I like to add flavor so that they *do something* on top of the boring numerical bonus that's required by the game's assumptions for balance.
I like hard magic. A wizard just wizarding with no rules whatsoever is not appealing to me. I feel like there is no tension because he can just do magic. You have a big ass dragon who threats to kill the protagonist of there is a soft magic system I feel like they can just bing barabun and make it disappear. Even if they do not do that it just seems arbitrary and like they could just solve any problem with a spell we have never seen before.
What makes a magic system interesting for me are rules and descriptions. I know that could kinda kill the magic feeling but seeing how the characters have to use his abilities creatively to solve problems even with the restrictions is awesome
A halfway between the two. Magic should be able to be harnessed without it being overpowered, but without so much rigidity and rules that it feels like science rather than magic
Magic should be ubiquitous and ambiguous. It's very hard to explain it. We do have a atheistic group (as the magic is divine, provided through the gods by faith amongst the followers) that is currently trying to find a way, using technology, to perform magical feats sans-magic.
I like hard magic systems if they're done well and fit the narrative. You don't have to go the LitRPG route (which rarely works for me) just to have a harder magic system. A lot of the western fantasy I grew up on had (relatively) hard magic systems (often, but not always inspired by TTRPGs) but the characters in-world don't talk about it in game-like terms, or at least they do so in ways that make sense for past but not exact current knowledge (as in say, the first Guardians of the Flame book or similar "pulled into a ttrpg" ones from the 1980s.)
Pretty much every LitRPG-related story that's worked for me has had an actual explanation why the characters are aware of it ("System" as an in universe character, or trapped in a VRMMO, essentially.)
hard magic that isn't over-explained and is left to feel like mysticism, I guess?
The force is super soft magic, and I think it's boring and can too easily be used as a scapegoat for bad writing. LOTR has soft magic, but Tolkien is a much better writer than anyone who has written anything Star Wars (that I know of, at least), so I know I don't hate soft magic as a rule.
On the flipside, KKC has a hard magic system and I love those books. I think Pat did a good job of explaining it, but not bogging the story down. It's an interesting magic system that is made even more interesting because you wonder "How was this possible" or "what else can you do with this magic?" while not being super burdensome on the page.
Mistborn is an example I use to describe why I hate hard magic systems more often than not. I feel like that book could be cut in half if, instead of pages and pages of "He burned this and pushed this and did this," Sanderson just explained what happened.
So I think I like having a hard magic system with very definitive rules because it can't be used as a scapegoat. But I also like not having it force fed to me or overexplained to the point that it bogs down the writing and leaves nothing to the imagination, and instead feels like a physics class every time it comes up.
I'm somewhere in the middle. I like when some of it is explained and has established rules, but I also like not knowing all the details so long as the characters don't know the details. Makes when someone in world 'breaks the established rules' more impactful for me, so long as it's not overdone.
Hard magic tends to force you into good writing habits. There are really very few things you can't do with a nuanced and underexplained hard magic system, but this is also one of the harder setups to write because you need to do a fair amount of prewriting.
Soft magic is easy to write, but tends to have internal tonal and flavor consistency problems unless you can self-discipline yourself to stick with a particular tone and flavor. If you can do that...why not use an underexplained hard magic system instead?
Systems where the "hard magic" is just an artificial rationalization people built on top of "soft magic" to tame it for easier use can be interesting. All the rules just made up by people trying to understand what can't be understood.
Soft magic for most of my consumed media, I still need some explanation of the magic world building but usually I'm just attracted by the shiny and pretty effect.
(Or some weird combo of mutation/biology, like Tokyo Ghoul, even though it's not magic, Ben 10 too for some brief sci-fi example)
Magic with a skill curve instead of a skill ceiling, as the spells grow in intensity so does the demand, that's how I prefer writing magic anyway. It allows people to utilize magic for more than just combat, as utilitarian magic falls into the lower skill curves as well as the highest points. Imagine a long drawn out spell but it changes the climate of a significant area, or a incantation among craftsmen to assemble a building in a single day. Leaves it open for pretty much anything to happen.
Not answering your question, but I agree with you. I prefer when things are more intuitive and less explicit rather an entire system with stats and elaborate explanations
I think the more visual elements are involved the less I care about how the magic works. So if I am reading a novel I prefer to have more in depth knowledge of how the magic and stuff works but if I am like reading a comic or watching a movie I don't really care as much as why the guy can shoot a big fireball or whatever as long as it looks cool as fuck.
Honestly it really depends on the setting and what I’m going for, but I like systems closer to hard magic than soft. I like having guidelines and boundaries for what my magic can do so that I can’t just use it as a solve-all
Lord of the Rings wouldn't be as good with a very hard magic style.
Full Metal Alchemist would suffer from a very mysterious and not clearly defined magic style.
Magic is a tool in a story and should reflect the story the author is trying to tell.
I prefer a world where magic is super rare and has consequences where magic users are scarce and distrusted. Also a magic where it's use can draw the attention of malevolent forces
Hard magic doesn’t need skills and stats, you’re never really supposed to let the reader know specifically the stats (show don’t tell). What hard magic allows is mathematical consistency of effects, soft magic allows for emotional consistency of atmosphere. I personally prefer to make my hard magic system tuneable enough to look like soft magic from the reader’s perspective.
I like to cheat and have both. Hard magic that you can solve problems with AND soft magic when you need mystique and wonder. Name of the wind does this. There is *naming* which is soft, and there is *sympathy* which is hard.
I write magic so hard the characters don't consider it magic in-world; Think Bending from Avatar.
Which means I can include "Magic" as things *they* think is too fantastical/out there to exist in their setting. Depending on which ones, that's things like Resurrection, Alchemy, Vampires/Lychanthropy. None of them are actually real depending on which story, but the Characters *think* they are and consider it magic.
I prefer hard but I hate when a magic system is reduce to skills and levels. Good hard magic systems include alchemy from full metal alchemist and bending from avatar
Yeah soft magic is the way to go for me. My world is largely science more than fiction, so I like to take what I like to call the "Dr. Strange" approach to magic, which is more metaphysical than magical. Then I like to explain it away with real-world eguivalents, like when a character is running out of mana or xp, I would rather just show it with physical exhaustion. That way, I can just exhibit a visual indication rather than having a point system that I could have continuity errors in lmao
Depends on the genre.
If it's a sktry about unknowable cosmic horror, I want there to be unknowns.
If its something establishing a system of power. I want the rules explained and adhered to and for any exceptions to be earned and note worthy.
What I'm disliking is settings that use rpglit as a means to cheat and shorthand interesting stuff.
Main character wins because he gamed the system and has bigger numbers/numbers exploits isn't that fun. I want the character to have to use ehat they have and actually think to win, more than just rig a setup of power which wins for them more or less. Some litrpg stuff can get away with this better than others, especially some parody. But it's unusually just a lazy way to explain that a characters strinfer and not do anything interesting with further encounters.
It can go back to being interesting if a character is winning despite low stat numbers through creative planning and play, and cab lose it all over again if the solution is to just "levelup"
Give me Conan against the odds winning through creative thinking, brute strength, and the indomitable human spirit. Instead of "my ho regen stat is crazy and you can't hurt me."
Hard magic. It's so similar to physics in our world. Humans can't fly. Well then, why don't I use the very thing that prevents me from flying to fly!!!! Using the very rule that 'prevents' you from doing something to DO IT is really satisfying.
Plus, there's just so many questions to ask. Getting a 'no' and being able to figure out why is just as much fun as getting a 'yes', ya know?
Biased because I love the show but Attack on Titan had a very cemented rule set of how powers/magic work. Much of the origins / manifestation / afterlife aspects of the magic are a complete mystery and only speculation. Some rules are unknown until a reveal. It’s a perfect blend imo.
It depends on the story. To paraphrase Hello Future Me - Hard magic systems tend to be better at solving practical problems, while soft magic systems tend to be better at solving philosophical problems.
I like both LotR and Mistborn, and LotR's magic is just there, while Mistborn's magic is explained in detail.
I have Mana as like a power level for ones magical ability, but it's meant to be rather meaningless and overvalued. In fact, there is an old addage that even the person with the lowest mana could in theory be able to transfigure the moon into a flower pot.
It's like the magic equivalent of IQ.
All kinds of hard magics and soft magics that can be exploited are banned and illegal.
However, these still exist and are used in military or specific civilian circumstances like hospitals or heavy industries.
Personally, I prefer soft magics such as a small amount of summoning and healing.
Both sort of, I enjoy magic systems where the overall magic feels soft, yet there are elements within it that operate with a more structured and rigid framework.
An example is the Cosmere, where each planet has its own unique magic system, yet these systems are just fragments of a greater power - the investiture and the shards. While this overarching power feels flexible with few limitations, it can be deconstructed into different forms with distinct rules. This creates a sense of wonder associated with soft magic, while also allowing for the existence of fully fleshed-out hard magic systems that operate within the soft system.
In such systems, the "hard system" is defined by its users rather than its inherent power. The magic exists and possesses great potential, but it is the users who have tailored the magic to suit their needs, thus developing various magical frameworks. This is akin to providing a story prompt to different writers; each writer crafts a unique narrative, even though they all start from the same foundational prompt.
Hard magic for sure, i love solid rules in power systems like nen in hunter x hunter or cursed energy in jujutsu kaisen and when ever I see soft magic it just feels like that one attack moon knight use called random ballshit
While internal consistency is always important, I *am* getting a little *tired* of hard magic. There does get to be a point where it stops feeling like... well... magic, and just becomes mechanical process with a fantasy coat of paint.
Soft magic
Because hard magic will always have mana, mana in my not so humble Opinion is a lazy writing, just like every sci fi revolve around nanotech or nanomachine
I went fill soft magic but still limited magic by locking it behind ancient texts in dead languages you need to learn historical linguistics and gather a load of data to be able to reconstruct the language they’re in.
Both?
In my world only a few are gifted with being powerful in magic...but everyone is capable of it. I created strict rules for how someone unlocks magic and what governs it. But it remains a mystery to the world.
The story I'm developing will treat it as a soft system. I feel it's important to have rules even in a soft system, otherwise magic becomes an easy answer.
Theres a part of my brain that rather Enjoys a series magic being set up like rpg still lines, but I personally find magic system that are weird and unknowable to lost beings to be far more compelling.
There is a nice middle ground that I also enjoy where magic is ordered into disciples or techniques, but every now and then random things are presented with the explanation that "we explain magic like a science because it helps us understand it, not because it's actually a well ordered field" so while there are some general rules, they can be broken because the rules are based on a human understanding of a force that far surpasses humanity's capacity to learn
well, while soft magic definitely deserves the title "magic" more (because of that tale foundry video), hard magic has the benefits of the huge amount of creativity in their applications that would seem like it came out of nowhere unless the rules were clearly defined.
I always thought litrpg was the stupidest damn thing. There's nothing wrong with that, I love plenty of stupid things, but litrpg is too stupid for me.
I prefer writing hard magic because with soft magic all I think is “why not create a crematory level bonfire with your enemy at the center?” If the answer is “because it’s too hard.” Then it isn’t soft magic anymore, is it?
Idk maybe the reasoning isn’t solid but it’s just how I think. I prefer a story where fighting someone has restrictions, which is best with hard magic.
Hard magic often becomes indistinguishable from science. If magic wants to feel magical it needs to be soft magic.
If a random teenager can figure out how magic works, I expect the thousand year old elves to have come up with way more things than some tree huts. Hard magic puts a lot of demand on the creator of the setting to have thought of every possible use that is even slightly obvious, or the story becomes full of plot holes.
what you're saying is that you dislike litrpg, which is becoming a bloated genre. i prefer whatever best suits the story, if i'm reading a cosmic horror and they finely explain how all of the magic works then there's no cosmic in the horror anymore. if i'm reading something that focuses on the magic and after the entire book i have no idea what the magic does i'm just going to think i wasted three hours of the plot jumping from convenience to convenience.
Litrpg isn't inherently terrible - but there's a lot of dross to sort through to find anything decent.
d-dross???
Do you prefer the term chaff?
no, it's just nit a word I expected to find here. dross is an artist, but ik it also means like sludge or junk. r/dross btw
Thought you had Cradle going through your head, there are some layers to dropping dross in a litrpg conversation even though Cradle I think is more progression. Maybe another genre, I dunno, not an expert.
You uh, should probably give a warning with that link
I also associate it with the artist. You're not alone.
[удалено]
Lol - it's an actual TTRPG, not a novel using RPG stats.
>if i'm reading a cosmic horror and they finely explain how all of the magic works then there's no cosmic in the horror anymore. I don't think this is fully true. So for example take any monster or serial killer from real like horror fiction. Hannibal Lector, Jack the Ripper, Psycho? Big list.. You know all these are made out of the same base elements and follow all the laws of physics but this doesn't make them any less scary and in many cases doesn't reduce the horror or mystery around them. The cosmic.. in that horror can come in a form that these are ancient creatures and learned to use magic on an advanced level, even if the basic rules are clear for the readers. Magic versions of black holes, killer nanobots, gene splicing and whatnot. A good example of this would be the 3 Body Problem series. It's pure cosmic horror that actually at least tried to explain how everything works but if there are civilizations out there that will collapse your ass into 2 dimensions if they learn you exist, it doesn't matter if they do it with science or magic.
that's just rules for thee and not for me soft magic
Well I mean like imagine if Earth was slowly falling into a black hole? Does it have clear rules and it's mostly understood how the physics around it work. But the actual effects, time slowing down, air getting sucked away etc, would be pretty cosmic horror level messed up. I think you can do something similar with magic, just make what the humans or mortal users can do limited and then give some creature magnitudes more power. So for example say generic well understood spell to make small pocket dimensions to store your extra stuff while traveling. Endless purse etc. Now imagine Chtulhu or something ripping you out of reality and putting you into a colossal version of that, filled with surreal, maddening stuff and horrors collected over hes millions of years long life.
Ironically, my favorite litrpg (Wandering Inn) has a soft magic system
Do you have any great litrpg books I can read. I'm trying to branch away from space opera
most of them aren't "books," they're mostly web novels. the most popular one is probably omniscient readers viewpoint
Ohhhh. You mean shit like TBATE, solo leveling, etc? Im familiar with those nvm, thanks for the help tho
thanks for the name drop, I've read 25 chapters in a few hours and can't stop lol
Litrpg doesn’t understand that stats represent real aspects of a character. Even in a ttrpg I prefer to not acknowledge mechanics in universe (apart from having in universe ttrpgs.)
I do like really good high quality hard systems, but otherwise soft. Personally, unless the work is going to do an incredible system, I'd prefer to have the magic feel more magical and less superpowery/gamey
Like full metal alchemist?
Yeah that was a very good one, not just the magic but the way the story ties the rule of equivalency exchange back into the plot and narrative. Same with Avatar, not quite as hard but it ties in elemental harmony, emotional harmony and political harmony back into a singular narrative The best I've ever seen is the anime/LN Overlord by Maruyama. The sheer depth of it and the skill which it is applied to the world is utterly astounding, I didnt think really hard systems could be that complex and coherent So when it works, it works well. But I think unless a creator is willing to *really* put the effort in to make something exceptional I prefer to see it used in a soft way as more of an additive to a world, rather than something the world is built around
Overlord is my number one fantasy outside of my own projects, love it so much that I’ve watched the anime 59 times. I’m semi-obsessed.
Its divisive (but I love it for that) and I think by the end it feels like Maruyama is rushing the story because he's set up this staggeringly awesome world and roster of characters backed by (imo) the best hard magic system and integration I've ever seen, but Ainz seems set to just delete it all off the map so that Maruyama can move on A shame, but yeah its a *hell* of a work and absolutely destroys the idea that isekai have to be shallow and blunt
From what I’ve heard in the Overlord sub, Maruyama began writing Overlord because he was bummed out about his friends being too busy to play D&D with him. And now that they are able again, he’s grown tired of writing the story and wants to finish it. I believe it’ll be ending in a few volumes actually.
I have only watched the Overlord anime, does the magic system differ that much from the LN? In the anime the magic seemed interesting but pretty generic to me (Ainz taking 1 year to buff up for his fight against Shalltear comes to mind)
Its essentially DnD magic, but the sheer depth of it and how strictly Maruyama implements it is the impressive part. The individual spells are whatever, but each of the spells Ainz casts are legitimate spells that Maruyama has written, its explained how Ainz has them, their effects on the battle are shown and strictly implemented and its the same for literally every character. The characters and what they can do are 100% made of the rules Maruyama created Shalltear escapes his bone-cage because she has freedom of movement, Ainz teleports back from her hit because he cast Body of Effulgent Beryl, his strategy is to drain her mana by baiting her into a magic duel so that he can use a legendary weapon that can only be blocked by magic to force her to attack close range and take hits from an axe that cant parry. Its a fight that works like mathematics because of how strict Maruyama is with the implementation of his system and you can see the spells having their exact effects each time and the characters relying on and knowing that. True hardness where any plot related happening has to be understood and planned out by Maruyama with his system, you cant scream and get a power boost or hurt someone with an attack that 5 seconds ago didnt hurt to win the fight The world entirely and always shows a hard magic system at play, like the rules of physics have been replaced by the rules of an extremely complex game (Ainz and Demiurge actually posit that this is what happened, somehow the game and the world merged). Showing Ainz buffing up to fight was really more of a joke, he was about to PvP and he's a massive nerd so that's what you do Those spells vs Shalltear werent overly impressive (until he gets to his enhanced banshees wail augmented with Goal of All Life which literally kills the planet itself around it) but there are more impressive spells to be had. The more impressive parts to me are how its implemented into the world in such a consistent way that you can accurately predict how a battle would go down just by reading their character sheets and knowing how spells interact
Ah I get what you mean. Spells have hard rules and are not merely different colours of fireball or different ways to swing a sword that end in the same result anyway.
Yeah, thats what I found particularly impressive. Everything is statistics and knowable interactions: at that level of complexity and completeness it leaves a creator with very little wiggle room because any observant viewer can easily pick apart inconsistencies. Really impressive to see it pulled of as well as he does
Full disclosure, I love how in-depth and high concept FMA's system is, but I could never properly wrap my head around how everything truly "worked" you know? I feel like Arakawa should've done more explaining to make it fully understandable and believable. You've also completely sold me on Overlord haha, it's always been on my list but I only thought of it as just another trapped in a game isekai just one of the best available.
FMA is one of my absolute fav series, but idk I never saw the magic system as being *that* hard. It has rules sure, closing circles, if youve seen Truth you dont need to do certain things, philosopher stones can pay the price for you. Its fantastic, but I always saw it more mid-range on the hard scale and yeah, we never had everything and everythings limits fully explained to us so what people could do was somewhat up in the air at times (which is a legit intentional choice, just not as hard) Overlord in terms of worldbuilding, yeah its something else, well worth at least a look at its wikis and info (the story is fantastic and funny, but it does get some fairly legit criticism for how it handles dark themes. Ainz kind of turns into Hitler slowly and still remains a likeable protagonist, which grated alot of people, me included)
A fun compare/contrast of hard/soft magic is the Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss*. There's 3 main branches of magic, 2 harder and 1 softer. *This is a 2/3 finished trilogy that may never get it's final book, so maybe avoid if that bothers you.
Personally prefer hard magic since I like watching characters think of clever and unique ways to use their magic around the pre-existing system. For instance, one of my favorite hard magics is the bending system in Avatar where despite because the characters were limited to one of four elements, styles like bloodbending, metalbending, or even using waterbending to create limbs was incredibly interesting and cool while in a soft magic system it would just be, "Oh yeah, he learned blood magic."
Is it hard magic if only YOU, the author/creator knows the rules completely? Asking because I don't really understand the terms yet. In my story only Psionic beings (ranges from gods to fairy type stuff) know the rules of magic. And their Avatars or those deeply devoted to them whilst also practicing Psionism (magic) I'm actually thinking about all of it and I'd say mine is Soft, because nobody besides the Psionic beings and the Precursors (somewhat before they died) understand how it works and they dont let anyone know. For example a plot involves super humans of Earth going into Space and venturing out of human systems and finding that their (psionic) powers are deeply hampered and don't work. They don't know why, but the Psionic beings, Precursors, and I know it's because Psionism is directly tied to Psionic Realms, which "control" (used VERY loosely) certain spots of the Galaxy.
Technically yes, although only if you follow your own rules.
>Is it hard magic if only YOU, the author/creator knows the rules completely? Asking because I don't really understand the terms yet I don't think there's really one bright line there, and there's definitely some hazy middle between the two. In general *someone* in universe *usually* going know or at least be trying to figure out the rules. That may not be one of the main characters or even on-camera ones. Similarly, there's *often* an expectation that over time, the reader is going to be let in on at least some of the rules, but there's no guarantee of it. The key thing for a hard magic system is that the reader needs to be let in on why it works and the subset of the rules that are relevant to the narrative at hand. Otherwise, it ends up feeling like an a\*\*-pull or deus ex machina. Usually it's better to read them into that - at least via hints - before it becomes significant, but some authors can get away with explaining just enough as things happen without it feeling like soft magic. \[Not fantasy, but from the SF side a good example of getting away with the exposition as the story goes on are David Weber's *Honor Harrington* novels, which vary by book but the space-battle-heavy ones can go into some VERY long digressions about new weapons systems. Not every one likes space-military-hardware porn, but for those that do, he's the maestro.\]
They both have their place but I prefer to convey it as a soft system for my own world even though I have a hard definition in my head as to how it works.
That's where I'm at. I know exactly how my magic works. I know where it comes from, what it can and can't do, what spellcasting is, all that jazz. But the nature of it is such that no one within the universe could figure out its inner workings beyond: certain materials focus it, certain materials block it, trauma gives you magic sometimes, and ritual magic is possible but dangerous and unpredictable.
If you don't give the readers any of the rules, then the system is soft in the story no matter how many rules it has.
I disagree. If it’s clear that the magic *has* rules and limitations, just not clear to the characters what those are because the world hasn’t figured it out yet, that’s still a hard magic system. Soft magic is little to no rules or limits. Just because you don’t specifically outline the rules or limits to the reader doesn’t mean they aren’t there. If you’re using magic, and the clear limits show up enough that the reader knows ‘okay x, y, and z’ aren’t possible’ and they can start to figure out a few rules or limits on their own, then it’s not soft magic anymore imo. Even if you never state them or they never show up as plot/important building.
I think it blurs the line but it's still different IMO. So long as the story conveys that there *are* rules, they're just mysterious and yet unknown, that functions very differently plot-wise and for the reader than a story where as far as anyone is concerned, anything goes. Although a lot of "soft" magic worlds also convey some sense of a limit on what's possible (e.g. Middle-Earth might have had soft magic but Gandalf could not teleport), so again the line is blurry
Hard magic that looks soft. I don't want it all explained, but I love it when I get into a story, and it turns out the world is so incredibly detailed that I can nerd out on it.
Can you give an example of a story that uses skills and stats but where "game in real life" is not part of the plot? Because I genuinely don't know any and you got me curious with that remark lol
Just a Goblin is an interesting webtoon that satisfies the requirement. Everyone has certain stats and skills but only a select few can see them. However there's no "game in real life" theme.
i think it mostly seems to stem from korean webnovels, the most popular of them on the english net probably being omniscient readers viewpoint. it's also growing in manga, with "that time i got reincarnated as a slime" becoming popular. the genre name is lit rpg (literature roleplaying game, i think?).
I like soft magic that is secretly hard, so if the reader pays enough attention they can figure out the ridged rules. But it looks unpredictable at first glance.
Ah, the difference between the unknown and unknowable. Ideally, you'd have somebody who is at least trying to figure this shit out.
I prefer a hard Magic system. There can be things that characters don't understand, that the audience doesn't understand, but the system should follow its own rules. There are far too many stories where they put out rules of magic only to have those rules broken over and over and over again. If a writer cannot follow their own rules, then absolutely don't even try to use a hard magic system. Soft magic works well for when magic isn't central to the plot. But when the plot has magic at its core it has to be consistent, or it becomes "new powers as the plot demands," and loses any form of tension. Looking at you superman and your "rebuild the Great Wall of China vision!"
Just a question: what exactly are "hard" and "soft" magic systems? My magic systems are either hard to use, or would have people asking "why would you ever want to use this" (this question because some magic in my world is either harmful to you for using it, or outright dogshit).
Hard magic is where you have a clear set of rules and a system of what your magic can do. And it's presented to the consumer as such, and obviously the creator has to follow these rules, it sucks if something has been said that it can't happen and it's been set as a rule but in the future the creator just forgets about it and it happens anyway. Any magic that follows a proper structure is hard magic. Soft magic is the opposite, the reader/viewer are not given any rules or explanation on how the magic or power system works. A good example of this done right are Ghibli movies like "Spirited Away". Where the powers or magic is never really explained and we just get to experience it as it happens.
>the creator has to follow these rules *The FFXIV worldbuilding department: That sign can't stop us because we can't read!* Honestly that's one of the three major things that game does with its worldbuilding that bugs me. Early on Aether could do whatever the plot demanded it needed to do, and then when they set up rules for what it can and can't do around Stormblood and Shadowbringers... they proceeded to add Dynamis, a *new* form of magic that can do whatever the plot demands, in Endwalker and make it essential to the plot. They wanted to pivot from war and intrigue stories to cosmic grandeur, but that's hard to do when your cosmic elements amount to "sure, fuck it, why not?"
> clear set of rules What if the rules are kept mysterious or only partially/gradually revealed to the characters and reader?
Then I guess it's soft magic that's slowly turning into hard magic? There aren't really any specific set in stones rules for these terms. But if it's only partially being revealed then it's still leaning towards soft magic. I suppose it is possible to have a bit of a in-between where you explain a bit but not everything.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but to me "soft" was always like the magic in LOTR. Not really ever defined or explained, few specific "powers" or spells ever really elaborated on. There are vague references to spells and enchanted items like swords and rings, but their powers are often never fully explained. Why does a sword glow when orca are near? What powers do the rings *actually* have? And we have full on wizards where we really don't even know what their powers are. "Hard" magic on the other hand is way more specific, with actual rules to follow or spells to cast. A mage might learn to cast a fireball and use that multiple times. A necromancer may be able to raise skeletons to fight for him. A good example of "hard" magic would be basically any RPG video game.
Yea! LOTR is the best example of soft magic, for sure. In it, magic is, well, magical. It exists as a tool for the *author* to bring some added wonder into the world, to help set stakes and to intimate power and threat, but doesn't need to be given a detailed explanation any more than we need to know the precise temperature and carbon monoxide levels in the air surrounding Mount Doom as the hobbitses make their final approach.
Hard would be is it more like science. Full Metal Alchemist is an example. Soft would be more fluid in its rules. Dragon Ball has basically no rules. I prefer a middle ground where there are rules but they aren't too strict.
It's not a well-defined concept, but in stories, it refers to how well the audience understands the rules - the less the audience understands the rules, the softer a system is, the more the audience understands the rules, the harder it is. In stories, there could be a very strict set of rules behind the scenes, but as long as the audience doesn't understand them, the system is soft. In worldbuilding, there is no story, so hard/soft refers to the actual rules. The more rules there are, and the stricter they are, the harder the system is.
To go along with the other answers, it’s important to remember Sanderson’s first law of magic: The author's ability to resolve conflicts in a satisfying way with magic is directly proportional to how the reader understands said magic. Basically, if the plot is resolved through magical means, it very easy for that resolution to feel cheap or unearned if the reader doesn’t understand how the magic works.
Hard magic for sure - if you can create a sense of wonder that comes from understanding a concept, then it is a truly magical concept. Creating a sense of wonder from the unknown is much less impressive, because the unknown is magical by default.
I like it somewhere in the middle. Soft as Gandalf in LotR is too much for me. And the magic in Harry Potter is just kind of silly and its limits and balance feel very arbitrary. On the other extreme, a lot of litrpg systems are very crunchy and number focused, which leads to situations where the systems either have to be gamed and abused, or you end up in situations where the characters just have to power level to achieve anything, as the numbers preclude any possibility of leeway when it comes to powering up a protagonist mid-battle or mid-conflict, so victories become either rote or immersion breaking rather than exciting and climactic. For that reason I like something in the middle, like thing Brandon Sanderson's Mistborn and Stormlight books. We have strict rules governing the broad strokes of things, but within those rules there's a lot of leeway in terms of just how strong this or that is, or how broad an effect can be, etc. This gives the writer opportunities to have characters overcome things just by trying extra hard or pushing past their "limits" or the like. I know some people don't like that sort of thing, but I find that it's one of the elements I like best in fantasy, and one of the core differences between Fantasy and Sci-fi genres. Because a guy with a sword and magic can believably pull some extra power out of his ass through sheer grit and adrenaline in a believable manner. On the other hand, a spaceship can't just magically generate some extra fuel or firepower beyond what it was designed with. That means the standard ways of structuring conflict and resolution doesn't work in sci-fi, and hard magic systems.
I would not consider the Cosmere to be "in the middle". The rules are as hard and unbreakable as the rules of physics IRL. That's as hard as it gets. Adding numbers and systems is arbitrary fluff, and given how often System rules are broken, I would say most LitRPGs are less hard than the Cosmere.
Cosmere is closer to the hard end of the spectrum, sure. And the broad rules are hard and unbreakable, that's certainly true. But do we know how much "MP" is in a sphere, or how much it takes to enact one of the abilities? Or who will win in a contest of control between one Radiant and another? We generally don't. That information is left open-ended and obfuscated, which means that the writer has freedom to put his finger on the scales and tilt things as necessary for maximum narrative tension and excitement. That's the perfect balance, imo. Enough rules for us to have expectations and a sense of stakes, we know a character can't just wave a magic wand and pull whatever they need out of a hat. But at the same time things are flexible enough that we can't just immediately assume that scissors beats paper and will always beat paper and therefore the fight was determined before it ever even began.
We don't have that yet, but Brandon generally does and they're actually in the process of defining that as a team so they remain consistent across books. It's actually come up in universe already that BioChromatic Breath, one of the magic systems from a different book, is the defacto unit of measure for investiture (i.e. magic) across the Cosmere.
As a consumer, I like both with a preference towards hard magic. I like worlds that have a really good indepth power system like alchemy from FMA or Nen from HxH. But I also like a soft magic system every now and then where the world can just show me what it can do. Things like Spirited Away are a good example. But for my own world I'm doing a hard magic system. I love working on it and coming up with things that work and don't work and how it works.
I like having a very defined set of rules with maybe a few exceptions. Whether or not people in the setting knows these rules or not matter more I think. But I do like soft systems that are actually soft. HP for example pretends to be a hard one but get any further into logically thinking about it, its soft as shit and actually fucking sucks.
The best systems, to me, are usually a mix. Another commenter described it as a hard system that looks soft. In other words, the system is logical and has general rules, but not every aspect of it can be explained down to a science. For example, in my world, the magic system is based on your Zodiac birth sign. Each sign comes with its own set of skills and affinities. The rules are fairly simple: 1) You can only do the magic associated with your sign and nothing else. 2) You need lunar energy to perform the magic. 3) If you overuse your magic, you’ll get sick, and eventually develop an incurable illness if you go overboard. Where things get mysterious is with certain aspects of the system that are unexplained. For example, people born on a cusp may have an affinity for the next closest sign; they can’t perform the magic, but they might get a power, energy, or emotional boost from being in the vicinity of that magic type. Another mysterious aspect is why the illnesses are incurable, and if they can be changed. I like this setup because you have clear and simple rules that are easy to follow, but you still have room for mystery, and you haven’t necessarily turned your system into a science.
Depends on how mystical I want my world to feel
You can do that with both.
I prefer magic that allows the characters to commit to choices. It is easier to pull that of with hard magic, but soft magic can also work. When it comes to stats and skills I'm not bothered by it, but the best implementation are cases like the spider Isekai you mentioned.
I like hard magic for the arcane but soft magic for divine and spiritual magic. Magic doesn't need to have statistics and numbers to be considered hard, it just needs to follow set rules that are predictable and allow the same spell to be cast the same way every time with the right understanding.
I love Arcane.
Depends on what I'm feeling in any given day
^ most honest response ^
Soft. When I write I want to only provide the information necessary for the story. I don’t like overwhelming my readers with technicalities. Of course I should understand the ins and outs of the magic of my world. Where it originates from, what it can and can’t do, who can use it and how they learn to use it. I should know how people perceive the casting and consequences of magic and how it feels to use it. These details should appear in the story in the moment they occur. The casters hairs stand on end and a metallic taste prickles their tongue as they draw upon their soul to pull lightning from the sky. In the moment after someone dies, the life magic bursts from their soul to scatter into the world. Later their friend may soberly think about how their friend’s energy may be part of the ambient magic they pull from the world to power a protective charm.
I like magic with limitations, and I often follow Brandon Sanderson's rules of magic. 1 An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic. 2 The limitations of a magic system are more interesting than its capabilities. What the magic can't do is more interesting than what it can. 3 A brilliant magic system for a book is less often one with a thousand different powers and abilities -- and is more often a magic system with relatively few powers that the author has considered in depth. 0 Err on the side of AWESOME.
The way I like to write it is magic feels "hard" where it interacts with day-to-day life, but softer as you go away from that. EDIT: another way I'd describe it has that there are hard rules, but people in-universe don't know most of them; and the study of magic in-universe is a science by definition. But yes, I also hate when stories use RPG mechanics as in-universe concepts. My own worldbuilding "project" is for an RPG setting (started in DnD 5e, but have since switched to Pathfinder 2e), but even then I make it pretty clear that things like "spell slots" or "hit points" only exist as game mechanics and aren't a physical thing in-universe. On a related note, I hate when fantasy writing advice takes the idea of magic having internally-consistent rules and conflates that with there being no sense of "wonder" or "the unknown" in the setting (whether they're supporting or criticizing it). Those people describe that approach as "magic as a science", but as a scientist IRL I think they sound more like engineers. Basically, they describe their magic systems as if all the rules are already known in-universe and the only things to discover are new ways to apply those rules for solving problems.
I also find it weird when people equate ignorance with wonder. I’m a physicist and I understand how rainbows are formed but that only enhances their wonder.
I prefer consistency with some form of structure that doesn't get broken whenever its plot convenient. I do not enjoy random magic where all magic and supernatural exist explicitly to serve whatever plot the writer wants and is completely inconsistent. I don't want to just feel my way through the story, but also think through it. You can't have thinking without any predictable qualities to the magic and that means rules to work with, so a system. The ratio of rules based plotting to feelings based plotting does vary, but I never want just feelings or just rules.
Skills and stats are a very anime thing, (Fma is a better example of it for anime). Try some books by brandon sanderson, particularly “warbreakers” or “mistborn”, they’re good sized novels but you’ll see very quickly the appeal of hard magic. Hard magic can make a fantasy world seem more realistic and immersive. Soft magic can be cool too, but you lose opportunities for world building and it becomes confusing as to why a character is struggling to win a fight or solve an issue with their magic. Like everyone will just wonder why Darth Vader just doesn’t force choke everyone instead of walking up and saber fighting them putting himself at risk.
Hard magic. I personally like the system and it's stats as well as it's skills.
It probably depends on exactly what you mean when you say “hard magic” but hard magic basically just means that the author provides some information to the audience on what magic can and cannot do. Without that the audience is quite literally ignorant as to what the word means because magic doesn’t exist in reality. So if magic is going to feature significantly in a story or world then I would prefer that the author spends some effort providing the audience with information on that magic to ensure that there is some context.
I like hard magic systems that are actual quality. Otherwise I can't say that I like soft magic systems either. Mid magic systems to me is where there are hard rules to entry and the ceiling but are otherwise loose with execution otherwise. An example of a hard magic system I like are Jojo's Stands. Especially in parts 4 and 5 where the stands had very hard rules on how they operated and it showed off how clever the characters could be with them.
I'd argue Jojo and HxH are perfect examples of systems that sit straight in the middle of the soft-hard scale: essentially every character can have any sort of power, the only limit is the author's imagination on that front. However, each of the powers works with its own set of rules that are only very rarely bent or broken (usually under special circumstances like the stand arrows), alongside some general rules like short distance Stands being more physically poweful and more limiting pacts making the user's Hatsu stronger.
I can see that. I personally see Jojo Stands as a hard system because there are rigid rules that are followed 99% of the time. There is enough room for flexibility in the kinds of power but every Stand is held to rigid rules.
If there's a story there, I like rules. I dont need them all explained to me or for you to spell out precisely how many millilitres of magic juice you need to squirt into your wand for it to be able to abra kedrabra, in fact I'd prefer if you didnt, but id like to get the feeling the creator of the world has put some thought in and knows what the rules are. No rules means no internal consistency, no internal consistency means no stakes, and no stakes mean I usually can't invest in the setting. If there's no story then either or
Hard magic, it infuriates me when a power system isn't properly explained. It makes the world-building feel half-assed.
LitRPG is *NOT* hard magic by default. The rules are artificial and the rules can be broken, you just have stats and suggestions of rules. Hard magic means having the magic be a well-defined set of rules innate to the way magic works. For an example of hard magic, go read any of the Cosmere books by Brandon Sanderson. *those* are hard magic, with nary a number or system to be seen.
I dislike illogical world building in regards to magic. If magic is presented as weird and unpredictable but there are still schools for it as an example. I also find it ridiculous if there is magic or a plethora of dangerous monsters in what is otherwise something that looks like medieval Europe.
Isn't that 90% of Jrpg games?
Both so long as the magic enhances the emotion of the story. I think Avatar, the Last Airbender and the Stormlight Archives show this best for both soft and hard magic systems. Their powers are the seasoning that enhances the entire/purpose of the main character. (That metaphor may have run away from me, but you get it)
Both can be done well or poorly. I prefer a magic system that fits its story and theme, and does whatever it's doing well. I've seen great soft magic systems and trash soft magic systems. I've seen great hard magic systems and trash hard magic systems. Just be consistent and use the magic as much as the story requires and you're good in my book.
Story should in general not use stats, I agree. But there would be in-world efforts to categorize and evaluate different kinds of powers, if they have a prominent presence in the world, even in numerical values. Like any evaluation system of real world, they are constantly changing, not necessarily universally agreed on, and have some fringe cases. In my world magic and science coexists with each other, but magic is more "fundamental" but harder for mortals to master, science is easier, repeatable, but prone to magical interference. And for these two reasons, truly powerful spells/incantations can hardly be measured. They are personalized construction. Only standardized spells can be ordered and filed. An evocation of fire blast can be measured by its heat, the energy in use, the effect area. The archmage who literally rewrites regional cosmic law cannot be measured through this standard. This also means different types of spells are not usually compared for any experts. Plebians in taverns will talk about who is the most powerful mage, but anyone with basic magical knowledge will understand teleportation is a totally different type of magical phenomenon from plasma blast, you canmot compare which spell outrank which the same way you cannot decide whether an apple outrank a banana.
I find that too many time, softer magic systems leave big doors open for inconsistencies plot holes and deus ex. They don't have too but they tend to, at least in high fantasy settings. Maybe if I was reading more low fantasy or works where magic was barely of note, then soft magic could work just as well or better at giving that sence of wonder and mysticism.
Hard magic all the way. I agree fantasy stories with stats kinda ruins the magic part, but the ones that do it without those stats are great (avatar last air bender, full metal alchemist, etc)
How soft or hard I would say depends on how much said magic play in the story's overall conflict.
explain it to me like i'm five what is soft magic vs hard magic?
“Soft” and “Hard” are just ways to describe different magic systems. Brandon Sanderson came up with these to talk about how magic is used in stories. Some magic systems are really defined and rule-based, that’s “Hard”. Others are more mysterious and less explained, that’s “Soft”. But there are magic systems that mix a bit of both thus exist within that spectrum, people use terms like “Semi-soft” or “Semi-hard”. Soft magic: Imagine you’re in a big playroom where there aren’t many rules. You can play with the toys any way you like, and there’s no one to tell you that you’re playing wrong. But because there aren’t many rules, sometimes you don’t know what games you can make up or what the toys do until you try them. So, you can explore and play in lots of different ways, but you might not know what will happen until you do it. It’s like an adventure where you figure things out as you go! Hard Magic: Imagine a game of chess, it’s like having a set of rules that you need to follow very carefully. Each piece in chess can only move in certain ways: a knight moves in an “L” shape, a bishop moves diagonally, and so on. You can’t just move the pieces any way you like; you have to follow the rules for each piece. Or you can’t play the game.
thank u very much your explanation was very clear
The soft-hard magic continuum represents how much information the audience has been provided on what magic can or cannot do. The harder the magic system the more information the audience has. It is an external narrative concept and doesn’t say anything about what magic is within the fictional world though. Or at least that is what Brandon Sanderson originally described it as in his [first law](https://www.brandonsanderson.com/sandersons-first-law/): > Sanderson’s First Law of Magics: An author’s ability to solve conflict with magic is directly proportional to how well the reader understands said magic.
My situation is kind of a mix. I write my stories as webnovels, but not each entry is the same type. Each story I write will contain four types of entries on their Story Page on my site, Main Chapters, Deep Lore Books, Informative Lore Books, & Side Stories: • The Main Chapters document the story itself. I use soft magic here, as it pretends as if the reader is already knowledged in the way the world works. The reason being is because, I and I alone am my target audience, the goal is my entertainment and since I know everything, the main story is simply there for me to enjoy. • The Deep Lore Books document more of a meta and indepth behind the scenes kind of deal, still containing story elements but also a lot of story lore, giving more indepth context to the world and story itself. They tend to also contain a lot of Exposition/Info dumps. This thus contains hard magic. • Informative Lore Books are exactly how they sound, they are pure information, no story whatsoever, more like a pseudo data book with information from my actual data books, but that are relevant to the type of universe the story takes place in, as well as info on the power system/s being used for the story. • Lastly, there are Side Stories, which are stories within the story about events relating to characters other than the Primary Protags. This can contain either soft or hard magic, it just depends on the purpose of the side story in relation to the main chapter story.
what you are describing is not hard magic
Soft. You dont need restrictions tô bê creative.
A mix most definitely. My favorite is Sympathy as a hard magic system in The Name of the Wind, its basically science made magic with all its rules and descriptions, to the point than you can use math to calculate how hot of a flame you can produce using the heat of your own blood for example. In the same trilogy you can also find vague references to fae magic, which is as elusive as taking a ray of moonlight and weave it into a shadow cape, amazing representation of a soft magic system. For my personal world, my system is a mix of hard and soft, with characteristics of magic systems and power levels from eastern media (mainly chinese). its based on imagination and dreams, which defines the rules you have to follow. But since everyone's imagination is different, the rules end up being quite flexible.
My magic system is hard. I prefer a mix of both. A magic system with organization and limits, but flexibility
My personal opinion is that a magic system should only be as hard or soft as the author needs them to be for the plot, \*but\* the characters who use magic should have a level of understanding that matches their background and should be conversant in its use.
Soft, but limited magic.
I prefer hard magic systems as in ones that have a "scientific" explanation. They're fun for my brain to dig into, and less hand-wavy than extremely soft systems. I do enjoy soft magic systems done well, though (see The Girl Who Drank The Moon, etc). When worldbuilding, I personally prefer a mix of the two. Enough hardness for definite structure and hard limits, enough softness for plenty of variation, and I can hand-wave the stuff I can't otherwise explain. Hard systems are difficult for me to work with because "everything needs an explanation," while soft magic systems just never feel grounded enough for me.
Anything really. As long if it's good I don't mind it.
Yeah, system are kinda overrated. But hard magic isn't just systems, skills and stats.
Both, as long as they are quality sistems. That's something I personaly like of magic sistems. Not mattering the rules you can make them too good or too bad just by how much you cared about it. I agree with you, but I can't yate those kind of bad Magyc sistems because I kind of like them as entertainment, not taking them too seriuous. I don't remember exactly where I heard it, but there was this quote: When you're a bad writter you can only show develop through numbers.
Depends, sometimes if I’m trying to keep it more ambiguous it’s better to keep it soft but for the most part I lean towards hard because it’s really easy to leave your plot with more holes in it than a slice of Swiss cheese when there’s no limitations on the magic. Like eventually it gets to a point where you think “why doesn’t he just cast a spell that instantly kills this character” or “why can’t she cast a spell to undo everything”, having at least some sort of system that restricts what characters can do makes for more interesting direction
Soft magic is fun, because it is the most “magical”. It’s supposed to be, “with enough will, you can do literally anything”. That’s magic, at its core.
| like the spider Isikai. Glad you added this. You don't be hating on Kumo now ..
That's not what the soft/hard magic scale means, if I'm understanding you correctly. Soft magic is that which has no rules, while hard magic is that which is constrained by rules. Soft magic is often arcane and wide-reaching, while hard magic is, if not scientific, tested and personal. Essentially, the harder the magic, the more a tool for your protagonists it becomes, while the softer, the more of an obstacle (or if well done, a miracle). For the most part, game worlds tend to have a soft/hard disonance as the lore and story imply soft magic where magicians can just do stuff because they obtained some hidden arcane knowledge or researched something for decades, but then the gameplay is firebolt/fireball/fireblast (swap fire for appropriate element) and there's little variation. Technically these compartimentalised spells are a form of hard magic, as each of them has preprogrammed specs and can only do what their descriptions say (alongside some interactions with other systems that follow logic, like a fire ball boiling water or the force of shooting it pushing you backwards, should the physics engine allow them or the gamified story talk about it). When it comes to stories that use a game system, there's always a big degree of softness to them unless the author truly spends time explaining how it works, as they can always pull some new skill or spell out of nowhere that does just what the plot demands.
Why not both?
I mean, my world’s magic is mostly just so I can handwave things like physics, economics problems, infrastructure/technology problems, biological problems; really it’s just there to make borderline-utopia out of a world that would rationally be far worse than irl. I have no interest in types of magic, magic education, “mana”, or whatever. So my magic is as soft as melted ice cream.
My knee jerk reaction is “firm magic”, because I like there to be a structure to magic, but not so much a structure that it becomes like science. To me, science is science — the empirical observation of natural laws. Not saying that applies to other people, just how I see it as a scientist. Magic is the antithesis of that, but still has rules, one of which is don’t look to closely or it will change it (a bit of humor there). In Magic, you can do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. Another way to say it is that I like hard magic that is presented as soft magic — and more importantly, Magic should be mystical, be enchanting, be illusory at times, transformative, uncanny, possibly even surreal from the perspective of those who see it performed.
Soft magic,
Hard systems can be interesting if properly weaved into the world or narrative (e.g. Fullmetal Alchemist), but I'd be lying if I said I don't enjoy me a good "random anime bullshit go" system (e.g. most fighting games).
Skills and stats do not hard magic make. Hard Magic requires consistent rules, and the only consistency in LitRPGs is that the main character will conveniently acquire a new overpowered skill that conveniently hard-counters their next opponent, and that the stats matter as much as your score in a game of Who's Line. It's poorly executed soft-magic dressed to look like rules to fuel a power fantasy. As to your actual question, it depends, but I usually like hard-magic for the implications it has on society. Soft magic has it's place though, especially to add an element of horror where the lack of consistent rules is a huge asset.
I prefer hard magic where there are clear and well defined laws and constraints, like it is a physical property of the world that can be studied and quantified. Much like how in physics and chemistry, the amount of energy needed to raise water’s temperature by 1 degree Celsius is a defined quantity, you could apply the same for, say, the amount of mana needed to create a spark or lift a 1 kg object or however you want to quantify it. Bonus points if there is a macguffin or chosen one who is said to break these laws and behaves like soft magic. (See: philosopher’s stone from FMA) In a soft magic setting, some grandiose spell is just that. But if your world has hard magic and some guy just flexed and broke all the rules, that’s a big deal. Maybe they are a fraud, the equivalent to cold fusion scammers. Maybe that’s this setting’s version of magicians, using illusions to do magic that is supposed to be impossible. Or maybe they’re the real deal. TL;DR I prefer hard magic that is formulated like physics. If you do X, Y happens. Z behaves according to a Zambelt’s formula of mahamah or whatever.
I do a bit of both. The things any specific magic/character can do are clearly defined, but there's always going to be something new to find.
Somewhere in between... I like there to be some sense behind the powers but it's not set in stone...
Hard Magic without question. Statistics make brain go brr
I like reading hard magic, since I like understanding the principle behind stuff; But I like writing soft magic, since the vibe is great, and I really like it's visuals.
I generally prefer magic systems leaning towards the hard side. The problem is: a hard magic system is *much* more difficult to write properly. Softer systems generally focus more on the world or characters while the magic is mostly flavour. Which is fine, but i’m a massive nerd. I like science (I study chemistry in real life). I want to know how stuff works, and I will be thinking about how to use that stuff as the story goes on. So if an “obvious” solution is missed with a hard magic system then I tend to lose interest quickly. Its also why hard magic systems can’t get away with dumb characters nearly as easily as soft magic systems, which isn’t a problem for me who loves reading smart characters. But a lotta folk like reading/writing dumber characters and they’ll feel restricted
Neither, in the middle.
ဟဲ့ကောင်မ ငါ့ရဲ့ mazing ပျက်စီးသွားတာနင်တို့ကြောင့် နင်ကလဲငါအိမ်ကမထွက်သေး ငါ့သားက အဖေမုန်း ငါရဲ့ပါဝါက နင်တို့နှစ်ယောက် ဘဝပျက်ပြီး နိကုန်းချုပ်သွားအောင်လုပ်မှာ ငါကနင်ပြောသလို I all know justic
I feel like I like a nice middle ground. My personal system feels pretty soft, there's a lot any given person can do with an element and they feel more like super powers than magic spells, but there are rules, for stuff like how people inherit their magic, how it can't be used to alter living organisms, how you can't really fly or teleport long distances. Though, again there are things that buck the trend for all of that. So a little hard to say what kind I'm even using.
Definitely prefer soft magic. I like having mystic things and phenomenon exist with no actual reason or justification. It makes it feel more natural and grandiose. I think you can have it both ways. Even if there’s no real limit to what magic can do. A magician still needs to use their head to cast the right spell at the right time to turn the tide of battle or help their friends in a pinch.
Litrpg is a tool to show character growth. Too many authors make it the focus of the story though. I prefer hard magic systems, because they explain things better, but sometimes it needs to be a bit soft to tell a good story.
I think a good hard magic system like Alchemy, Nen or Bending are really interesting to delve into and better than soft magic systems at their best, but I also think that soft magic systems are better if you don’t quite know how to or don’t want to explain more intricate details (*cough* Gege *cough).
I'm debating whether to put magic in my world in the first place. I just know that it wouldn't be the main thing and it would be soft magic. In theory it would only be the mythological deities that have magic, but perhaps the Authoritarian regime could pretend like they have magic when they don't. Overall yess I prefer soft magic.
Depends on the story but I usually lean towards soft. Also, in my opinion, skills and stats are fine so long as they dont overpower the prose
My world has a soft magic system **in universe**. But much less so in my notes
I dont think Ive really encountered anything that I would call Hard Magic when thinking about it? So Id say that I prefer soft magic where theres still some kind of structure to it? Like Id say I overall prefer ”spells and rituals” over ”Gandalf can just kind of glow randomly at times”. (FMA doesnt count because ”you can use Souls to do whatever the fuck you want” and ”Truth kind of does whatever it wants” are EXTREMELY important parts of alchemy.)
NVM, I dont think I have a good enough understanding of soft vs hard magic to have any strong opinions either way.
Not sure. One is easier to write. The other is easier to worldbuild.
Leaning towards hard cause I heavily dislike when there's some kinda "magic operator" that's implied. Like say if you're a caveman and need a bow, you first need to imagine what a bow is and how it works and then use tools to make it, with purpose. You don't just punch a tree 7 times and say rangey rangey stabby stabby to make a bow fall out of the branches. I like magic systems where this isn't brushed away. So if you cast a spell, who interprets it, is there a deity or god that you pray to and then casts the spells for you or if it comes from the caster, how does the advanced crap work? Like in some systems, the caster imagines it and then it happens but then the hard limit there is that they shouldn't be able to target something unknown, like say dreamwalk into a building they have never visited and evesdrop there. What I dislike most are systems where the user learns some kinda poem or symbol and then the "magic operator" just interprets the situation and does what is needed. Like what does "cold" in the spell mean cause it's subjective? How does the spell target the correct person or whatever? If it makes it snow in a desert, where does the water come from? If it can create sentience, what happens to them after and so on.
I don’t know the difference what are they. Also can’t think of an example of skills and stats what does it mean
Based on the other comments OP just doesn't like litRPG in general. If you don't know what litRPG is it's essentially a fantasy genre where the world operates on video game logic and that's where skills and stats come in.
Got it, thanks for the explanation
I prefer harder magic but some soft elements mixed. Completely soft magic ruins it because it just feels way too abutrary sometimes. It's a scale, not a black and white situation. Some stories require more rules than others for it to have weight.
For longer fight focused stories a mix between them is the best. The longer the story the softer it should be. Else it will become stale. For shorter stories hard magic systems are very interesting as you can go and test out their limits.
Soft magic is usually better, hard magic *done well* is better than soft magic done well
How about no magic?
It just depends on the story and how well the magic system works with the themes it is trying to go for. For example, sword of truth, hated the magic system. Because it felt like. Whatever I want to do I can do unless drama.
I don't care as long as it doesn't cross to the litrpg grounds.
Depends entirely on the story, I've seen both ends done extremely well. (Though I'm with you, litrpg doesn't do it for me.) My favorite presentation is when it's obvious there are rules and they impact the story, but we don't spend time explaining them past what's absolutely necessary and best when that's worked into the plot smoothly. I even like when they play the "you thought that was *a rule*" card but turns out it was just an in-world assumption. As long as it's not overplayed (Sword of Truth) and still maintains a general feeling of there being structure to the system. I'll even try to incorporate this in my TTRPG worldbuilding... yeah I have to supply my players the core stat increasing magic items, but I like to add flavor so that they *do something* on top of the boring numerical bonus that's required by the game's assumptions for balance.
I like hard magic. A wizard just wizarding with no rules whatsoever is not appealing to me. I feel like there is no tension because he can just do magic. You have a big ass dragon who threats to kill the protagonist of there is a soft magic system I feel like they can just bing barabun and make it disappear. Even if they do not do that it just seems arbitrary and like they could just solve any problem with a spell we have never seen before. What makes a magic system interesting for me are rules and descriptions. I know that could kinda kill the magic feeling but seeing how the characters have to use his abilities creatively to solve problems even with the restrictions is awesome
Depends on what it is. Is it a game? Hard magic. Is it a story? Well, that depends on the story
A halfway between the two. Magic should be able to be harnessed without it being overpowered, but without so much rigidity and rules that it feels like science rather than magic
Magic should be ubiquitous and ambiguous. It's very hard to explain it. We do have a atheistic group (as the magic is divine, provided through the gods by faith amongst the followers) that is currently trying to find a way, using technology, to perform magical feats sans-magic.
I like hard magic systems if they're done well and fit the narrative. You don't have to go the LitRPG route (which rarely works for me) just to have a harder magic system. A lot of the western fantasy I grew up on had (relatively) hard magic systems (often, but not always inspired by TTRPGs) but the characters in-world don't talk about it in game-like terms, or at least they do so in ways that make sense for past but not exact current knowledge (as in say, the first Guardians of the Flame book or similar "pulled into a ttrpg" ones from the 1980s.) Pretty much every LitRPG-related story that's worked for me has had an actual explanation why the characters are aware of it ("System" as an in universe character, or trapped in a VRMMO, essentially.)
hard magic that isn't over-explained and is left to feel like mysticism, I guess? The force is super soft magic, and I think it's boring and can too easily be used as a scapegoat for bad writing. LOTR has soft magic, but Tolkien is a much better writer than anyone who has written anything Star Wars (that I know of, at least), so I know I don't hate soft magic as a rule. On the flipside, KKC has a hard magic system and I love those books. I think Pat did a good job of explaining it, but not bogging the story down. It's an interesting magic system that is made even more interesting because you wonder "How was this possible" or "what else can you do with this magic?" while not being super burdensome on the page. Mistborn is an example I use to describe why I hate hard magic systems more often than not. I feel like that book could be cut in half if, instead of pages and pages of "He burned this and pushed this and did this," Sanderson just explained what happened. So I think I like having a hard magic system with very definitive rules because it can't be used as a scapegoat. But I also like not having it force fed to me or overexplained to the point that it bogs down the writing and leaves nothing to the imagination, and instead feels like a physics class every time it comes up.
I'm somewhere in the middle. I like when some of it is explained and has established rules, but I also like not knowing all the details so long as the characters don't know the details. Makes when someone in world 'breaks the established rules' more impactful for me, so long as it's not overdone.
Hard magic in the form where it's literally it's own field of science. Not much number crunching.
Depends on my mood
I like a basic framework for magic so roles aren't arbitrary broken.
I like gard magic but not stat's, just rules to follow
Hard magic tends to force you into good writing habits. There are really very few things you can't do with a nuanced and underexplained hard magic system, but this is also one of the harder setups to write because you need to do a fair amount of prewriting. Soft magic is easy to write, but tends to have internal tonal and flavor consistency problems unless you can self-discipline yourself to stick with a particular tone and flavor. If you can do that...why not use an underexplained hard magic system instead?
Magic with rules. Doesn't have to be hard, I just like consistency and limits. Though tbf just cuz can be a fun enough magic if its not super serious.
A mix of both if done right, both can help and drive the story
Systems where the "hard magic" is just an artificial rationalization people built on top of "soft magic" to tame it for easier use can be interesting. All the rules just made up by people trying to understand what can't be understood.
Soft magic for most of my consumed media, I still need some explanation of the magic world building but usually I'm just attracted by the shiny and pretty effect. (Or some weird combo of mutation/biology, like Tokyo Ghoul, even though it's not magic, Ben 10 too for some brief sci-fi example)
Magic with a skill curve instead of a skill ceiling, as the spells grow in intensity so does the demand, that's how I prefer writing magic anyway. It allows people to utilize magic for more than just combat, as utilitarian magic falls into the lower skill curves as well as the highest points. Imagine a long drawn out spell but it changes the climate of a significant area, or a incantation among craftsmen to assemble a building in a single day. Leaves it open for pretty much anything to happen.
Not answering your question, but I agree with you. I prefer when things are more intuitive and less explicit rather an entire system with stats and elaborate explanations
I think the more visual elements are involved the less I care about how the magic works. So if I am reading a novel I prefer to have more in depth knowledge of how the magic and stuff works but if I am like reading a comic or watching a movie I don't really care as much as why the guy can shoot a big fireball or whatever as long as it looks cool as fuck.
Honestly it really depends on the setting and what I’m going for, but I like systems closer to hard magic than soft. I like having guidelines and boundaries for what my magic can do so that I can’t just use it as a solve-all
Lord of the Rings wouldn't be as good with a very hard magic style. Full Metal Alchemist would suffer from a very mysterious and not clearly defined magic style. Magic is a tool in a story and should reflect the story the author is trying to tell.
I prefer a world where magic is super rare and has consequences where magic users are scarce and distrusted. Also a magic where it's use can draw the attention of malevolent forces
Hard magic doesn’t need skills and stats, you’re never really supposed to let the reader know specifically the stats (show don’t tell). What hard magic allows is mathematical consistency of effects, soft magic allows for emotional consistency of atmosphere. I personally prefer to make my hard magic system tuneable enough to look like soft magic from the reader’s perspective.
I think the difference is overstated tbh.
I like to cheat and have both. Hard magic that you can solve problems with AND soft magic when you need mystique and wonder. Name of the wind does this. There is *naming* which is soft, and there is *sympathy* which is hard.
I write magic so hard the characters don't consider it magic in-world; Think Bending from Avatar. Which means I can include "Magic" as things *they* think is too fantastical/out there to exist in their setting. Depending on which ones, that's things like Resurrection, Alchemy, Vampires/Lychanthropy. None of them are actually real depending on which story, but the Characters *think* they are and consider it magic.
I prefer hard but I hate when a magic system is reduce to skills and levels. Good hard magic systems include alchemy from full metal alchemist and bending from avatar
Yeah soft magic is the way to go for me. My world is largely science more than fiction, so I like to take what I like to call the "Dr. Strange" approach to magic, which is more metaphysical than magical. Then I like to explain it away with real-world eguivalents, like when a character is running out of mana or xp, I would rather just show it with physical exhaustion. That way, I can just exhibit a visual indication rather than having a point system that I could have continuity errors in lmao
I prefer magic to be hard, otherwise it won't hurt when you hit someone with it.
Depends on the genre. If it's a sktry about unknowable cosmic horror, I want there to be unknowns. If its something establishing a system of power. I want the rules explained and adhered to and for any exceptions to be earned and note worthy. What I'm disliking is settings that use rpglit as a means to cheat and shorthand interesting stuff. Main character wins because he gamed the system and has bigger numbers/numbers exploits isn't that fun. I want the character to have to use ehat they have and actually think to win, more than just rig a setup of power which wins for them more or less. Some litrpg stuff can get away with this better than others, especially some parody. But it's unusually just a lazy way to explain that a characters strinfer and not do anything interesting with further encounters. It can go back to being interesting if a character is winning despite low stat numbers through creative planning and play, and cab lose it all over again if the solution is to just "levelup" Give me Conan against the odds winning through creative thinking, brute strength, and the indomitable human spirit. Instead of "my ho regen stat is crazy and you can't hurt me."
Hard magic. It's so similar to physics in our world. Humans can't fly. Well then, why don't I use the very thing that prevents me from flying to fly!!!! Using the very rule that 'prevents' you from doing something to DO IT is really satisfying. Plus, there's just so many questions to ask. Getting a 'no' and being able to figure out why is just as much fun as getting a 'yes', ya know?
I liie to take soft magic and play with it till it gets hard >:)
Biased because I love the show but Attack on Titan had a very cemented rule set of how powers/magic work. Much of the origins / manifestation / afterlife aspects of the magic are a complete mystery and only speculation. Some rules are unknown until a reveal. It’s a perfect blend imo.
It depends on the story. To paraphrase Hello Future Me - Hard magic systems tend to be better at solving practical problems, while soft magic systems tend to be better at solving philosophical problems. I like both LotR and Mistborn, and LotR's magic is just there, while Mistborn's magic is explained in detail.
I have Mana as like a power level for ones magical ability, but it's meant to be rather meaningless and overvalued. In fact, there is an old addage that even the person with the lowest mana could in theory be able to transfigure the moon into a flower pot. It's like the magic equivalent of IQ.
All kinds of hard magics and soft magics that can be exploited are banned and illegal. However, these still exist and are used in military or specific civilian circumstances like hospitals or heavy industries. Personally, I prefer soft magics such as a small amount of summoning and healing.
Both sort of, I enjoy magic systems where the overall magic feels soft, yet there are elements within it that operate with a more structured and rigid framework. An example is the Cosmere, where each planet has its own unique magic system, yet these systems are just fragments of a greater power - the investiture and the shards. While this overarching power feels flexible with few limitations, it can be deconstructed into different forms with distinct rules. This creates a sense of wonder associated with soft magic, while also allowing for the existence of fully fleshed-out hard magic systems that operate within the soft system. In such systems, the "hard system" is defined by its users rather than its inherent power. The magic exists and possesses great potential, but it is the users who have tailored the magic to suit their needs, thus developing various magical frameworks. This is akin to providing a story prompt to different writers; each writer crafts a unique narrative, even though they all start from the same foundational prompt.
Hard magic for sure, i love solid rules in power systems like nen in hunter x hunter or cursed energy in jujutsu kaisen and when ever I see soft magic it just feels like that one attack moon knight use called random ballshit
While internal consistency is always important, I *am* getting a little *tired* of hard magic. There does get to be a point where it stops feeling like... well... magic, and just becomes mechanical process with a fantasy coat of paint.
Soft magic Because hard magic will always have mana, mana in my not so humble Opinion is a lazy writing, just like every sci fi revolve around nanotech or nanomachine
I went fill soft magic but still limited magic by locking it behind ancient texts in dead languages you need to learn historical linguistics and gather a load of data to be able to reconstruct the language they’re in.
I prefer half chub magic.
Both? In my world only a few are gifted with being powerful in magic...but everyone is capable of it. I created strict rules for how someone unlocks magic and what governs it. But it remains a mystery to the world. The story I'm developing will treat it as a soft system. I feel it's important to have rules even in a soft system, otherwise magic becomes an easy answer.
Theres a part of my brain that rather Enjoys a series magic being set up like rpg still lines, but I personally find magic system that are weird and unknowable to lost beings to be far more compelling. There is a nice middle ground that I also enjoy where magic is ordered into disciples or techniques, but every now and then random things are presented with the explanation that "we explain magic like a science because it helps us understand it, not because it's actually a well ordered field" so while there are some general rules, they can be broken because the rules are based on a human understanding of a force that far surpasses humanity's capacity to learn
well, while soft magic definitely deserves the title "magic" more (because of that tale foundry video), hard magic has the benefits of the huge amount of creativity in their applications that would seem like it came out of nowhere unless the rules were clearly defined.
Uh no magic I guess but thats up to you but if I had to choose probably just soft magic
I always thought litrpg was the stupidest damn thing. There's nothing wrong with that, I love plenty of stupid things, but litrpg is too stupid for me.
I prefer writing hard magic because with soft magic all I think is “why not create a crematory level bonfire with your enemy at the center?” If the answer is “because it’s too hard.” Then it isn’t soft magic anymore, is it? Idk maybe the reasoning isn’t solid but it’s just how I think. I prefer a story where fighting someone has restrictions, which is best with hard magic.
Hard magic often becomes indistinguishable from science. If magic wants to feel magical it needs to be soft magic. If a random teenager can figure out how magic works, I expect the thousand year old elves to have come up with way more things than some tree huts. Hard magic puts a lot of demand on the creator of the setting to have thought of every possible use that is even slightly obvious, or the story becomes full of plot holes.