19 KiB
[deleted by user]
-
Author: u/None *
-
URL:
-
Score: 18
-
Created: 2018-02-12T21:39:31
Post:
[removed]
Comments:
u/RynnisOne [+25] (8 hours later)
They lost me at Fullmetal Alchemist and Harry Potter being hard magic systems. Missing how the entire concept of Equivalent Exchange was wrong didn't help their case.
Still, the basic idea behind it is a good one to contemplate.
u/daytodave [+11] an altruistic conversion of calories to hedons (21 hours later)
He also uses Harry Potter as an example in his video on soft magic.
I think a fair summary of this guy's take is that the Rowlingverse has a soft magic system because J.K. is pretty liberal about making up new spells and creature powers when the plot needs it; but the Harry Potter books have elements of hard magic because the reader is following along as Harry learns new spells and finds new items, so we have a pretty good idea of what he's capable of at any given point in the story.
Also, this particular Overton window is probably pretty skewed within the community of /r/rational readers. I can totally see putting HP magic in the harder half of a scale that has LOTR and Narnia on the softer end.
u/RynnisOne [+5] (a day later)
In that case, he doesn't know the difference between hard and soft magic.
Harry learns some magic, but he almost always relies on his old "Expelliarmus" (sp) standby. Why a disarm spell has such a stupidly long command word is beyond me, you figure if wizards have to battle with magic, they'd be using the least amount of speaking and flourishes possible to get the job done. As it is, you could replace his wand with a M9 and he'd be more effective.
Saying its "similar" to hard magic doesn't hold up well when comparing it to other systems. LotR has far less magic than Harry Potter. Only the really powerful, unique supernatural creatures can even use magic. Gandalf isn't an old man with a long beard and funny robes, he's the functional equivalent of an Archangel in his universe. The Rings themselves are basically Artifacts crafted by demigods. We don't see the rules detailed too well because the magic system is limited to very plot-specific side characters and it's not something used by the main characters unless it's in the form of an enhancement to an item they carry. There's no real "system" or set of rules because there doesn't need to be, the story follows people who don't have access to it and aren't usually fighting with or against it.
u/wren42 [+8] (a day later)
As it is, you could replace his wand with a M9 and he'd be more effective.
except he's not trying to kill people in most cases =D
u/RynnisOne [+4] (4 days later)
K, he uses those rubber riot rounds, then. Once they're hurt enough, they won't be fighting back.
u/JulianWyvern [+9] Wayward Wanderer (19 hours later)
From the example titles I was expecting the episode to be entirely about soft magic...
u/Ereithial [+5] (4 days later)
Hey! I'm the guy who posted the video. Thanks to whoever shared it - it was really cool to come across it here. I wanted to respond to the first comment. Harry Potter is only referenced in an example of a magic system having limitations and costs like that potions require ingredients or generally wizards require a wand, but as explained far more in-depth in the second video - Rowling actually has a relatively soft system on the whole. It was my mistake for letting it be misleading, but it was just an example I felt everybody would be familiar with. I think having the full context would give you a better understanding of what I said. As for Fullmetal Alchemist and Equivalent Exchange, it DID work. If you remember from the series, the entire story revolved around attempting to bypass it. The whole point was that it DID work and the Philosopher's Stone they wanted didn't exist.
u/RynnisOne [+9] (4 days later)
Neat! So, my original comment then? Alright, let's get to it.
A hard magic system, on the other hand, has clearly defined rules, consequences, and limitations that govern what one can or cannot do with magic.
That's a quote from your video. Harry Potter does not meet this criteria. The only limitation seems to be whether or not you need a wand to cast. There is no detail as to where the energy comes from or what 'cost' is paid to use it. Some wizards can kill with a word. Some can mindwipe you with a phrase. Some can do some terrible things with your nerves. There are weird, spells that have almost no use outside some ridiculously specific situations ("Serpentsortia" creates or conjures a snake. OK, but why? Even if you can talk to it and tell it to attack, it's useless in combat against a wizard. Might be good for extracting venom, though). There's potions that affect luck, of all random things. There's no rhyme or reason behind it, it's all mysterious, because it's meant to make one have a sense of wonder. It's specifically soft to keep most poor Muggle readers on their toes. But when you look at it in detail, it all falls apart, because it's incredibly Soft. Having a single limitation doesn't change this.
As for Fullmetal Alchemist, you have to decide whether you want an in-universe statement or one obtained by rational thinking.
If you want the former, go watch the end of Brotherhood again. Specifically the last episode. In it, Edward straight up states that the concept of Equivalent Exchange is wrong.
If you want the latter, however (and since this is the Rational subreddit, you'd best expect it), I will break it down for you.
EE can be deconstructed on the simple level by attempting to answer what is defining the value. It specifically states that something of equal value must be given. It's certainly not subjective, because if the person valued what they were giving up as much as they value what they were getting, they'd never make the exchange in the first place. The problem with "value" is that it is entirely relative. A man lost in a desert values water more than a man in a city. So who, or what, is the judge of the 'value'?
EE can be deconstructed on the more complex level due to the fact that many effects in Alchemy require some outside intelligence to function. IE: They're not transmuting concrete substances, but abstractions.
The easiest example of the above is at the 2 minute mark in your video, where Al transmutes a broken radio. Does Al know how to make radios? Does he know the intricate details of their circuitry, the careful balance of voltage and amperage? Does he understand the concept of electrical length in antennas or the concept of reflected voltage when transmitting? On the more practical level, does he know exactly which direction every diode faces? No. He just slaps his hands on the ground with the transmutation circle and the radio is magically repaired.
Read that: Without any knowledge of how they work, he rebuilds one using Alchemy (magic). How does the magic 'know' where all the parts go? Every part, in detail? I could believe it if it was, say, a single broken metal rod, or maybe even something with a hinge. But the complexity of a radio restored to functionality by a person with no experience in them? Even if he did, he'd have to keep the entire schematic in his mind as well as the physical shapes and positions of all the parts. Either the writing is bad or some outside intelligence is doing the work.
This isn't the only time this happens. In one of them (can't remember if Brotherhood or the original), Scar has a bunch of torn up papers with code. The Elric brothers figured it out the hard way, but Scar just slaps his hands down and it makes an orb that decrypts the code for him. He doesn't possess this ability naturally.
Every time one of the alchemists creates a complex machine, this effect sticks out like a sore thumb. It's even worse when it comes to Winry complaining about Ed making weapons out of his Automail. He doesn't know how to make the stuff, but given what Al did with the radio, he should be able to repair it at any time!
Finally, EE can be deconstructed by the fact that it is self contradictory. Namely, it brazenly and shamelessly breaks physics while claiming to be a 'law' of their universe.
One of the best examples, slightly spoilerified, is in FMA when Colonel Mustang, a man who generates "fire" (oh ho ho, try explaining that one) by snapping his fingers, gets into a fight with a living construct. This living construct has a power source made from the condensed soul energy of hundreds of human beings. Each time he burns parts of it away, it quickly regenerates.
Now this man continues to snap his fingers and create so much 'fire', over and over again, that he burns out a power source that should have at least 100x more power than he does. He looks exhausted after the fact, but as he was critically wounded at the time he did this, it's kind of a tossup as to which was making him more tired.
Tell me... what did this series of attacks cost him? What 'price' did he pay aside from snapping his fingers over and over?
The fact is that EE seems to apply only vaguely to matter, and not at all to energy or abstract concepts. It's applications are arbitrary and poorly explained, and at the end of the main series in which it is used one of the most experienced practitioners of that magic system calls it out as being false.
Fullmetal Alchemist, while having neat application of its magic system, is a Soft magic system, not a hard one.
u/Ereithial [+5] (4 days later)
You're totally right. Harry Potter does not meet that criteria, and the video never states that it does? It merely used HP as an example for what constitutes a limit or cost. If you watched the second video, you'd see I explicitly say HP has a soft magic system.
As for EE - I prefer in-universe statements and was speaking about such. The principle of EE is only broken in regards to human transmutation (where relativity of value comes into play a little). Ed wasn't commenting on the rules otherwise. All magic systems sit somewhere on the spectrum, and FMAB is definitely far towards the harder end.
u/RynnisOne [+6] (5 days later)
It's hardly a limit when you admit in the video that the limit can be removed. Also, I shouldn't have to watch a second video to evaluate the validity of the first. Perhaps if it was created as "Part 1 of X" then that might be the case, but if it can't stand on its own don't try to defend it by saying "Well, somewhere else it makes sense!"
As for EE, I gave you an in-universe example of a statement, and several in-universe examples of it failing in application.
In your own words, you state: "A hard magic system, on the other hand, has clearly defined rules, consequences, and limitations that govern what one can or cannot do with magic."
There is only one "rule" in FMA, and more like a mythical guideline--EE. There is nothing else. There's no system for the characters to use, abuse, or get tripped up by. When they pull off things that make no sense, it is simply handwaived away. Sure, it's one step more Hard than Harry Potter (because at least it tried to establish a rule), but it's still firmly on the Soft side of the scale.
Claiming otherwise and failing to back it up with examples doesn't change that. If it was "far toward the harder end" you'd be able to give more examples of such than a constantly restated false statement within the series.
u/Pokiwar [+1] (5 months later)
Actually, the subjectivity of value only comes into play with Human Transmutation, where the 'cost' is determined by God/Truth, in a poetic sense (Ed looses his leg, which he stands on, and without his brother or his mother he has noone to rely on anymore - he can't stand up to God anymore, because he dared to do so by doing Human Transmutation, Mustang loses his vision for daring to look idealistically to the future, Izumu loses her womb, so she can never create life again etc.) These are the softer parts, but they hold very interesting messages. I think it's perfectly fine to sacrifice a bit of the rigid consistency of a totally hard magic system for the sake of a powerful message.
Re the technology point you made, that is a very reasonable assertion. But you answer it yourself - Ed can't transmute his auto-mail back into shape, because he doesn't understand it. He can put Al back together because he knows where all the metal goes. With Al and the radio, maybe he does know where all the parts go and their exact nature (plus it's just broken, it wasn't as if it was a pile of atoms, so he likely didn't need to know the directions of all the diodes etc, since they were probably still intact), but even if he doesn't, that's more on poor writing, than an inherent flaw in the magic system.
Equivalent exchange works as such - you can only transmute one object into another, if you preserve their elemental composition. It is why he can't turn metal into water, but why he can coat his steel with a layer of graphene/diamond, due to it's diamond content. With the radio, it was showing us that he didn't create a new radio from thin air, or from dirt, he created it from the same materials - in fact pre-existing parts, so an even less complex transmutation. You also see that in the freezing alchemist in the first episode. He can order the H2O molecules to either be very rigidly ordered, turning it to ice, or giving them kinetic energy, turning it to steam. Each specific transmutation requires it's own circle (At least in Amestrian Alchemy). In alkahestry, they work on broader concepts of deconstruction and reconstruction, but they still need to understand the materials behind it - which is why Scar's broad deconstruction alchemy requires him to know the material before he deconstructs something.
In addition, what you mentioned regarding Scar in what was the 2003 adaptation - the rules for Alchemy were a lot softer in that version; equivalent exchange truly didn't exist. It's bad to point to that Anime as I would say that was a soft magic system that put on the facade of a hard magic system in universe : as in everyone thought it was a science, but in the reality of that story, it wasn't.
Colonel Mustang doesn't generate fire - you misunderstand his power, although reasonably so as it was only explained in the Manga and the 2003 version, not the 2009 adaptation. His powers work like this: His gloves are made of a material called spark-cloth, when he snaps his fingers, he generates a spark (which is why without his gloves, he used a lighter instead). Then, using his transmutation circle, he alters the position and concentrations of Oxygen and Hydrogen in the air to create currents through which the spark can travel. He doesn't generate fire, he controls the 'direction' of burning. In the same episode, he was able to completely disassociate the hydrogen from oxygen in a puddle of water to create hydrogen and oxygen gas, without having to create a different transmutation circle - this shows us the transmutation circle on his glove is specifically designed for hydrogen and oxygen, not for fire, or plasma, or other flammable materials.
Thus, he didn't need to generate 100 souls or whatever to kill Lust (you also forget Lust has likely had to use up some of her stone when previously fighting mustang, and getting shot repeatedly by Hawkeye), he just needed to direct all that energy towards her.
Soul's are the only things to don't directly abide by equivalent exchange, because they are intangible, ethereal, subjective things. But they still have a limit - you can't constantly avoid Equivalent Exchange off of one soul. With Father Cornello, when his stone was running out - he tried to make something that was out of the realm of the Stone's power now, so it tried to use part of him in the reaction - turning him into that horrid fusion. Lust can only heal of her wounds so many times before her stone runs out of juice so to speak. They still abide by the rules, it's just that the value of soul isn't explicitly defined, because no mortal could truly comprehend the value of a soul - only God/Truth can,
u/alexanderwales [+18] Time flies like an arrow (20 hours later)
I found this video a little annoying, in part because it's not really talking about hard or soft magic systems, it's talking about rules in the general sense. You could break these into different categories:
- The rules are known to the characters, and to the readers
- The rules are known to the characters, but not the readers
- The rules are not known to the characters or the readers
- The rules are not known to the characters, but known to the readers
I'm not sure that I've ever seen an example of 4, but it's included here for the sake of completeness.
I think there are two reason that Harry Potter gets lumped in with "hard magic".
- In-universe, magic is largely a known quantity; it's taught in schools without much mysticism, there are rules that you have to follow, there are "laws" that are referenced, and people have a general understanding of what is and is not possible. It slots pretty neatly into a bureaucratic framework.
- Individual pieces of the magic have established narrative-level rules to them. Throughout the books, a spell/potion/item will be defined in the first act, then used in the third act. In this sense, the magic can feel hard.
Fullmetal Alchemist would be another example of a magic system that I think people confuse as being a "hard" magic system (or where definitions get tricky), because while the series tells us all the time that it's a complex and precise magic, we don't really know any of the rules that govern it, and a lot of the characters have a technique or ability that sets up a "rule" no different from how a lot of superheroes have their own unique powers, and which doesn't naturally derive from what we know about the magic system those powers are supposedly built from.
(This is aside from the question of whether a show/book actually keeps to their rules, or whether the author knew the rules as they were writing, which are different questions.)
u/ArgentStonecutter [+9] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (18 hours later)
Words words words...
The original "hard magic" stories would be The Incomplete Enchanter by L. Sprague de Camp and Fletcher Pratt. In each of these stories the hero, one Harold Shea, journeys to a different fantastic world and has to work out how magic differs in that universe. In one world magic requires poetry, in another it's powered by gods and their relics.
The other influential early hard magic series is the Lord Darcy series by Randall Garret. Darcy is a royal investigator aided by his loquaciously pedagogical assistant the forensic sorceror Sean O'Lochlainn. Magic is the science and technology of the Angevin Empire of Darcy's world, and Sean never fails to explain how scientific magic works as he provides the critical clues for Lord Darcy to solve each puzzle.