this changed my perspective on WRITING MAGIC!

Summary

This video script explores the concept of 'hard' and 'soft' magic in storytelling, challenging the binary classification and suggesting a spectrum approach. The speaker advocates for considering the function of magic in a narrative, whether it's to evoke wonder or solve plot problems. Using humor, like the 'metaphysical taco' for superpowers, the script illustrates how magic systems can be more fluid and engaging when their rules and revelations are tailored to the story's needs, rather than strictly adhering to predefined hard or soft categories.

Takeaways

• 🧙 The concept of 'hard' and 'soft' magic systems is discussed, suggesting that these terms may not be as useful as focusing on the function of magic within a story.
• 🌟 A magic system's primary functions are to either look cool and immersive or to solve problems within the narrative.
• 🌮 The 'metaphysical taco' is used as a humorous example to illustrate how a magic system can appear 'hard' with clear rules but still be 'soft' in practice due to its open-ended nature.
• 📚 The speaker argues that magic systems exist on a spectrum from 'hard' to 'soft', determined by their function and the level of detail revealed to the reader.
• 🎭 The magic system's classification as 'hard' or 'soft' is influenced by the perspective of the audience, the writer's understanding, and the characters within the story.
• 🌈 Magic systems that serve to create a sense of wonder tend to be on the 'soft' side, as they are more about world immersion and less about specific rules or problem-solving.
• 🔍 Conversely, magic systems designed to solve problems are often 'harder', requiring internal logic and consistency that the audience can understand and anticipate.
• 📉 The level of detail about a magic system often increases with the stakes of the problems it's used to solve, to avoid the perception of a Deus ex Machina.
• 💡 The speaker emphasizes that writing about magic systems is subjective and encourages writers to experiment with different approaches to find what works best for their story.
• 📖 References to works like 'The Lord of the Rings', 'The Name of the Wind', 'Avatar', and 'One Piece' are used to illustrate different magic system functions and their classifications.

Q & A

What is the main point the speaker is trying to make about magic systems in storytelling?

The speaker argues that the classification of magic systems as 'hard' or 'soft' is not as important as understanding their function within a story. They emphasize that the purpose of a magic system should be to either create a sense of wonder or to solve problems within the narrative.

What does the speaker mean by 'metaphysical taco'?

The 'metaphysical taco' is a humorous and fictional example used by the speaker to illustrate how a magic system could be both 'hard' (having clear rules) and 'soft' (being loose and unrestricted) at the same time. Eating a taco grants superpowers, but the specifics of what powers and how they work are left open to interpretation.

How does the speaker differentiate between 'hard' and 'soft' magic systems?

The speaker suggests that 'hard' magic systems have clear, defined rules, akin to a science, while 'soft' magic systems are mystical, loose, and unrestricted. However, they also propose that the distinction is not binary and that magic systems exist on a spectrum between these two extremes.

What is the significance of the speaker's mention of Gandalf from 'The Lord of the Rings'?

The speaker uses Gandalf to illustrate the concept of 'soft' magic, where the character can perform magical acts without a clear explanation of how or why. This approach leaves more to the imagination and contributes to a sense of wonder.

How does the speaker relate the function of magic in storytelling to the concept of 'Deus ex Machina'?

The speaker warns against using magic to solve problems in a way that feels unearned or unexplained, which can lead to a 'Deus ex Machina' scenario. This term refers to a sudden, unexpected resolution to a plot that feels contrived or unmotivated.

What role does the audience's perspective play in determining whether a magic system is perceived as 'hard' or 'soft'?

The speaker suggests that the audience's perception of a magic system's hardness or softness is influenced by how much they understand about the system and the rules governing it. If the audience knows few details, the system may seem softer, whereas more information can make it appear harder.

Why does the speaker argue that magic systems should not be solely focused on problem-solving?

The speaker believes that while magic can be used to solve problems in a story, it should also serve to create a sense of wonder and immerse the reader in the world. A balance between these functions can lead to a more engaging and dynamic narrative.

What does the speaker mean when they say that magic systems can 'integrate themselves with the world'?

The speaker is suggesting that when magic is deeply intertwined with the world's lore and setting, it becomes more than just a tool for characters. It contributes to the atmosphere and wonder of the story, often leading to a 'softer' magic system where the specifics are less important.

How does the speaker view the role of character knowledge in the perception of a magic system?

The speaker points out that characters within a story may perceive the magic as 'hard' if they understand its rules and mechanisms, while the audience may still perceive it as 'soft' if they are not privy to the same level of detail.

What advice does the speaker give regarding the creation of magic systems in stories?

The speaker advises writers to consider the function of magic in their story, whether it's to create a sense of wonder or to solve problems, and to find a balance that works for their narrative. They also encourage experimentation and adaptation of concepts like 'hard' and 'soft' magic to suit the individual story's needs.

Outlines

00:00

🧙‍♂️ Magic Systems and Their Storytelling Functions

The paragraph discusses the concept of 'hard' and 'soft' magic in storytelling, suggesting that these classifications are not as important as understanding the function of magic within a narrative. The speaker proposes that magic systems should be evaluated based on their purpose in the story, such as creating a sense of wonder or solving problems. The paragraph introduces the idea of a 'metaphysical taco' as a humorous example of a magic system that, despite having a clear rule, can still be quite loose and open to interpretation, thus illustrating the spectrum between hard and soft magic.

05:01

🌮 The Spectrum of Magic: From Hard to Soft

This section delves deeper into the spectrum of magic systems, using the 'taco magic' analogy to explain how a seemingly hard system can still be soft in practice. It discusses how the function of magic in a story determines its classification on this spectrum. The speaker contrasts this with examples from 'Lord of the Rings' and 'The Name of the Wind,' where certain aspects of magic are more defined (hard) while others are more mysterious (soft). The paragraph also touches on the importance of perspective, suggesting that what is hard or soft magic can vary depending on the character's and audience's understanding of the magic system.

10:05

📜 Adapting Magic Systems to Storytelling Needs

The final paragraph emphasizes the subjective nature of writing and magic systems. It suggests that writers should feel free to adapt or discard any guidelines, including the concept of hard and soft magic, if they do not serve their story. The speaker uses the example of 'Arcane' to show how characters' perceptions of magic can differ from the audience's, and how this can influence the storytelling. The paragraph concludes by encouraging writers to experiment with magic systems to find what best fits their narrative, aligning with the theme that writing is a personal and flexible process.

Keywords

💡Hard and Soft Magic

Hard and soft magic are terms used to describe the nature of magic systems in fiction. Hard magic refers to systems with clear, defined rules, often likened to a science, while soft magic is more mystical, loose, and unrestricted. In the script, the speaker challenges the binary nature of these classifications, suggesting that magic systems exist on a spectrum and are better understood through their function in storytelling, such as creating a sense of wonder or solving narrative problems.

💡Function

Function, in the context of the video, refers to the purpose or role that a magic system serves within a story. The speaker emphasizes that the function of magic is more important than whether it is classified as hard or soft. For example, the magic system might be designed to look cool and immersive or to solve problems faced by characters, and this function can lead to a more interesting and nuanced magic system.

💡Metaphysical Taco

The 'metaphysical taco' is a humorous and fictional example used by the speaker to illustrate the concept of magic systems. Eating a taco supposedly grants superpowers, which on the surface seems like a 'hard' magic system due to its defined rule. However, the speaker uses it to show that even with a simple rule, there can be many unknowns, making it feel 'soft'. This example is used to discuss the spectrum between hard and soft magic.

💡Spectrum

The term 'spectrum' is used to describe the range of possibilities between hard and soft magic. The speaker argues that magic systems do not fit neatly into one category or the other but exist along a spectrum, determined by their function and the level of detail and rules associated with them. This concept is central to the speaker's argument against the hard/soft dichotomy.

💡Wonder

Wonder is a feeling of amazement and admiration inspired by the magic system in a story. The speaker mentions that one of the key functions of magic can be to create a sense of wonder, immersing the reader in the world and making the magic seem awe-inspiring. This function often leads to a softer magic system where the specifics are less important than the overall effect.

💡Problem-Solving

Problem-solving refers to the use of magic in stories to address and overcome challenges faced by characters. The speaker suggests that magic systems can be designed to be more about providing solutions to narrative problems, which often results in a harder magic system with more internal logic and consistency that readers can understand and engage with.

💡Deus ex Machina

Deus ex machina is a literary device where a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected external force. In the context of the video, the speaker warns against using magic in a way that feels like a deus ex machina, as it can lead to unsatisfying resolutions and a lack of narrative tension.

💡Internal Logic

Internal logic refers to the consistency and rules that govern a magic system within a story. The speaker argues that even in soft magic systems, there needs to be some level of internal logic for the magic to be believable and for it to serve its function in problem-solving or creating wonder.

💡Worldbuilding

Worldbuilding is the process of constructing an imaginary world, often including its history, geography, culture, and magic systems. The speaker discusses how magic systems can be integrated into worldbuilding, serving to enhance the setting and contribute to the overall atmosphere and themes of the story.

💡Perspective

Perspective, in this video, refers to the viewpoint from which the magic system is understood or perceived. The speaker notes that what constitutes hard or soft magic can vary depending on who is looking at it—the writer, the characters, or the readers. This perspective influences how the magic system is developed and how it is presented in the story.

Highlights

The concept of 'hard' and 'soft' magic is introduced and then set aside to focus on the function of magic systems in storytelling.

The importance of understanding the purpose of a magic system within a narrative is emphasized.

A humorous example of a 'metaphysical taco' magic system is presented to illustrate the discussion.

The idea that magic systems can be a spectrum from 'hard' to 'soft' is introduced.

The concept of 'hard' magic is exemplified by a rule-based system like Mexican food granting magic.

The discussion on how even 'hard' magic systems can feel 'soft' due to the ambiguity of outcomes.

The Lord of the Rings is used as an example of a 'soft' magic system with Gandalf's undefined powers.

The contrast between Gandalf's magic and the 'hard' magic system of the One Ring is highlighted.

The notion that magic systems are never purely at one end of the spectrum is discussed.

The two primary functions of magic in storytelling are identified: to look cool and to solve problems.

The idea that magic should integrate with the world rather than just be a tool is presented.

The impact of a magic system on reader immersion and the creation of a sense of wonder is discussed.

The perspective of characters within a story and how they perceive magic is considered.

The concept of 'Deus ex Machina' is introduced as a potential pitfall of magic systems used for problem-solving.

The importance of internal logic and consistency in magic systems for problem-solving is emphasized.

The role of stakes and cost in the use of magic to solve problems within a narrative is discussed.

The talk concludes by addressing the subjective nature of writing and the importance of adapting ideas to one's own needs.

Transcripts

You’ve probably heard the term hard and soft  magic floating around. And if you haven’t,  

that’s fantastic as well, because let’s  disregard that almost in its entirety, for now. 

I believe when it comes to magic systems whether  it be spell slinging wizards, shamans accessing  

the pantheon, surgebinders inhaling copious  amounts of stormlight I see you Kaladin,  

flying high above the clouds. But there is one  question that needs to be asked above all else. 

What is the goal? What is this magic  

system trying to do in this story? Why does it even exist in this world? 

And when I say that, I’m not talking about it  from a lore perspective. No I mean this purely  

from a storytelling standpoint. What is the function? 

Which is why my favourite system involves  eating a metaphysical taco to gain  

superpowers. Totally did not just make that up. Before we get to the taco though, the thought  

might have occurred to you that that is a very  open ended question, and if it did, you’re not  

wrong, magic can serve a myriad of functions for  storytelling. A staggering amount of use cases. 

But why then are there supposedly only  two classifications. Magic with clear,  

defined rules, something of a science. The  other mystical, loose and unrestricted. 

And don’t get me wrong, writing is incredibly  subjective, if hard and soft is how you  

internalise developing magic systems, then by all  means, I’m not here to disrupt your process. But I  

think there is a way to wrap your head around it  that can lead to much more interesting outcomes,  

at least it does for me. It goes back to function … and  

a certain metaphysical taco. I lied. I did make it up,  

but lets say that’s actually how the magic in  our world works … for some reason. Eat a taco,  

superpowers. If we were to classify that as hard  or soft. On the surface, it would look like a hard  

system, because the rule is set that Mexican food  gives you magic. And an extension of that is the  

opposite, no taco, no magic. Okay now I’m hungry. 

But if this magic system still feels loose and  unrestricted despite it being classified as hard,  

that is because it is. Taco gives you  superpowers, but what superpowers? What  

are you capable of doing? How powerful can you be?  Does it stop when you’ve fully digested? Is it the  

taco as a whole or a specific ingredient?  When is a taco a taco then? Do different  

fillings have different effects? I could literally go on for hours. 

The point I’m trying to make is that it is a  spectrum from hard to soft, not just one end  

or the other. A spectrum determined by  function which I will get to in a bit. 

But our taco magic system would actually probably  end up around here. Quite a ways into soft. 

Something like the Lord of the Rings sits  well into soft, because Gandalf can just  

do stuff and it’s never really explained.  Like screw you I’m magic, deal with it. 

But the ring on its own is actually a  pretty hard magic system. You put it  

on and you go invisible, but now you have  a creepy stalker ex named Sauron and you  

start to lose your marbles. Clear, simple rules. However notice how things are never at the very  

end of the spectrum and always somewhere along the  line. Yeah Gandy’s magic is never truly explained,  

but he can’t just magic away a balrog. So there are some rules somewhere, we the  

audience just don’t know them. I’ve actually  seen a decent amount of systems that try to do  

both. They have separate aspects that focus on  either side of the spectrum. It’s the Lord of  

the Rings example I just gave. Its sympathetic  magic and naming magic in The Name of the Wind,  

it’s bending and spirituality from  Avatar. The good one not blue people. 

And it all comes back to function. When I’m writing a magic system,  

there are two umbrella functions that  I’m trying to achieve in the story. 

1. Look really cool, cause you know it’s  magic, it’s supposed to be dope stuff. 

2. Solve problems in the story. Protagonist in  trouble, they eat a taco, wiz bang, they’re good. 

Oh my god I can’t get over that  stupid taco why am I doing this. 

These two are never mutually exclusive.  Yeah it’s another arbitrary sliding scale,  

but this completely changes the mindset. Hard and soft become results of the function. 

When I say “look really cool,” I  don’t mean just be flashy. I mean,  

I imagine most of your are writing prose,  nothing is really flashing at you. But  

it’s magic that’s intended to create a sense of  wonder. Intended to completely immerse the reader  

in it’s setting. It just grabs them and smothers  them in its depths with its sheer awesomeness. 

Yeah it can be used to solve problems  because, once again, it’s a spectrum,  

but it mostly isn’t used that way. I usually separate magic from worldbuilding,  

even though they’re very interconnected,  it’s just how I internalise it. But here  

is where they start to merge. Because it’s serving the purpose  

of being absolutely fricking cool, it becomes  less about what the character can do with it,  

it integrates itself with the world as opposed  to being more of a tool. Which means the reader  

doesn’t need as much of an understanding as they  would have otherwise. It’s also a lot easier to  

bend this magic to the themes of the story. Align  the system to character arcs. That sort of thing. 

It’s Alice in Wonderland, pretty much every  Studio Ghibli film. Game of Thrones. Where  

the character is rarely ever slinging  spells to get them out of a situation. 

And this function usually leads to a soft  system, but there can definitely be a system  

with a lot of rules that is there mostly to add  a sense of wonder to the world. It’s just going  

to be an uphill battle because knowing and  understanding everything demystifies it and  

mystique is a huge part of sense of wonder. But another thing I want to touch on is  

perspective. Every system is hard and soft  magic all at once, it all depends on where  

you’re looking at it from. There are always rules,  whether the audience and the readers know about  

them is a different story. Whether the writer  knows the rules is a different one all together. 

The magic works somehow, how deep the writer gets  into the specifics determines how hard or soft it  

is to them, and how much they reveal to the reader  guides the function while determining how hard or  

soft the reader perceives the system to be. I might have just made absolutely no sense. 

Hi it’s me, I’m editing, there’s another layer  this idiot forgot to add, which is the characters.  

Arcane is a perfect example of when the  characters perceive the magic as hard, yet  

the audience perceives it as a softer one. Jayce,  Viktor, and Jinx are sciencing it up, yet we don’t  

know what a single rune does. Cool gauntles do  the cool punch thing. Alright back to the idiot. 

But Allomancy from Mistborn would be a lot softer  of a system if you didn’t know how it worked. You  

don’t see Vin swallow some steel or throw a  coin on the ground and she just takes off into  

the sky. You probably think, “Why she flying.” It’s the million questions we were asking about  

our taco, whether filling makes a difference, or  how powerful can you be? This freaking taco, man. 

ALL HAIL THE TACO But the more the writer chooses  

to know about the ins and outs of … magic Mexican  food, the more they can choose to show the reader. 

But it also means, the easier it becomes  to make the function a problem-solving one. 

The other side of the coin, is where it starts to  get a bit complicated. Like cool-looking magic,  

this is eliciting a reaction from the readers,  but instead of awe, it’s tickling the part  

of their brain that likes solving problems.  The part that looks at a situation and goes,  

“How can I use what I already know to  get out of this.” Almost like a mystery. 

This magic starts to carve itself from the  world and enters the hand of the characters. 

But I wanna focus on the phrase I just said  which is “use what I already know.” There is  

an inherent acquisition of knowledge that comes  with this function. I’ve found it doesn’t have  

to be a hard leaning magic system, it usually  is, just like cool-looking is usually soft. 

But we just need a little smidgen, a tiny  sprinkling of internal logic and consistency,  

a perspective of higher understand  that is not zero and the rest can  

go wherever the heck it wants too. Now you certainly can write a story  

where the readers know absolutely nothing about  the magic system yet it’s used to solve problems  

the characters are facing. It’s just that  it would be considered a Deus ex Machina. 

The phrase loosely translates to “god from the  machinery” how epic is that phrase. But it means  

the gods would descend from the sky at the climax  of pretty much every Ancient Greek play where  

the characters couldn’t solve the problem and be  like, “it’s aiit fam.” And everything was a-okay. 

Now that was fantastic if you were going to see  the latest Euripides play at your local theatre  

420BC. But audiences have dramatically evolved  from then. Just something to keep in mind,  

but I will say there are always excellent  exceptions, it all depends on the story. 

The keyphrase here is ‘solving problems’ and  there can be multiple solutions to a problem.  

But without that sprinkling of internal  logic and consistency, it removes the  

problem rather than provides a solution. That  difference is everything. And knowledge can  

be just as important as the lack of knowledge. Let’s hop back to Lord of the Rings. Spoilers  

but it’s been decades what are you doing. We don’t know everything Gandle can do,  

but at this moment we do know he can’t magic away  a balrog. Even before he faces it head on. Fear  

shows on his face, he starts to hurry the group. At the very least, subconsciously, we gain the  

knowledge that this might not be something  that Gandaddy is capable of handling.  

That’s where the problem solving begins. I can’t magic away a balrog, so we run,  

we can’t run fast enough, so I stay behind.  Once again I can’t magic away a balrog,  

but I can magic enough to go down with it. At no point do we ever understand “Hey  

he’s casting a 4th level intimidate balrog  spell.” It’s not needed to solve the problem,  

the only things we do need is Gandledore is  a badass and he can’t magic away a balrog. 

It’s the same thing with One Piece. The only  tidbits of knowledge that we know is devil fruits  

give you powers and takes away your ability to  float, the sea rejecting you blah blah blah. But  

apart from that, everything else is up for grabs.  It is literally limited by your imagination,  

the softest magic and if you have a counter  argument, I present to you the soap soap fruit. 

It doesn’t have to be the thickest of  rule based magic for Luffy to demolish  

his opponents and then throw a dance party  on their graves. We know he’s a rubber man,  

but the extents of that are never really defined.  Eat the fruit, get the powers. Wait have the  

tacos been an analogy for devil fruits this entire  time? One piece is great by the way, check it out. 

I do want to note though, that stakes is  also a factor in all this. When it’s a  

problem solving magic, it’s ideal that more  knowledge is revealed the higher the stakes  

of the problem being solved. If not, Deus ex  Machina. Another one is cost, Gandoddle turning  

off the bridge might not have been so easily  acceptable if the balrog didn’t snatch him down  

straight to the dephths of hell with it, even  though the magic is sufficiently explained. In  

fact when the magic not sufficiently explained,  more cost, something abominable for magicking  

away the problem is usually the way to go. Defining the magic by problem solving and  

wonder-based allows it to work with the story  yet still be as wild or as logical as possible. 

And this is where I can’t go on without  addressing the Sanderson shaped elephant  

in the room. I’m not sure if he coined the  terms hard and soft magic, but he definitely  

popularised them with his 3 laws of magic. Which  I will probably discuss about in a future video  

even though I just paraphrased the first two,  but you know, hit the buttons and all that. 

The things I’m saying aren’t laws or rules to  follow, please I’m not Sanderson, I don’t have  

a cheeky WIRED article written about me. And even being him, he is not the end  

all be all of magic and worldbuilding he’s  said it himself numerous times. Roll clip. 

These are not necessary laws that I think  everyone needs to follow because rule number  

one of this class and writing instruction is:  try it out, if it works for you keep using it,  

if it doesn’t work for you, throw it away. Most  likely you will adapt it to your own needs. 

And there it is right there. Writing is  subjective. Feel free to try it. If it  

works for you and/or your story, fantastic keep  it, if it doesn’t straight to the trash. K bye.