q&a7 STORY: Wednesday, May 25, 2016

[Drasvin 123]

1 hour ago, Scotty said:

I wonder if hybrids like that are possible as well, maybe they wouldn't be as powerful as they would if they were just one or the other, but they could still both gain spells tailored to their personality and learn some from others. They might never get high ranking spells like a guardian form or maybe their rate of learning is slower, but they could be potentially more versatile.

There wouldn't be hybrids, as wizards can gain spells through the normal personality-tailored method. Being a wizard just adds a new method of gaining spells. There's nothing to suggest that being a wizard would cause a person to lose the normal method of earning spells other than a notion of balance or fairness and the EGS-verse isn't an rpg. The different types of magic aren't balanced against each other. If the magic of the EGS-verse was intended to be balanced in some manner, then there would be serious questions about Grace, who is possibly the most powerful person in Moperville that isn't an immortal and she got that power for just being who she is.

[Vorlonagent 442]

9 hours ago, ijuin said:

Hmmm, there may be a possibility that a person with Wizard potential can be Awakened as a Mage without their Wizard potential being immediately available for use (i.e. a second "Awakening" would be needed).

Since someone can be awakened without their knowledge (Justin) and nobody knows what their spells are short of a spellbook or accidental castings (Elliot, Sarah respectively), I'd definitely say that when a person with the Wizard talent is awakened, they wouldn't automagically know they had the talent.  They'd have to figure it out or be told, or something like that.

[hkmaly 490]

5 hours ago, Vorlonagent said:

14 hours ago, ijuin said:

Hmmm, there may be a possibility that a person with Wizard potential can be Awakened as a Mage without their Wizard potential being immediately available for use (i.e. a second "Awakening" would be needed).

Since someone can be awakened without their knowledge (Justin) and nobody knows what their spells are short of a spellbook or accidental castings (Elliot, Sarah respectively), I'd definitely say that when a person with the Wizard talent is awakened, they wouldn't automagically know they had the talent.  They'd have to figure it out or be told, or something like that.

Sure, but it's not second awakening. I think that despite "it may not be that simple", it IS actually possible for wizard to learn a spell by accident, just like it's possible to cast spell by accident for normal user. (Probably only low-level spells or something, but still.) So, yeah, person can get several own spells before finding out he's wizard, but mainly in situations where he rarely see other people casting anything.

[Don Edwards 548]

Other than Elliot/Ellen (who are potentially a special case because they are identical twins and one is magically created), have we seen anyone attempt to read someone else's spellbook? Beyond the title? And been able to determine if they could read the spells?

[SeriousJupiter 49]

On 25.5.2016 at 2:46 AM, hkmaly said:

By "nerdy foolishness" you mean the marking which will take care of the first problem?

Actually, I meant the Q&A.

On 26.5.2016 at 5:09 PM, Drasvin said:

Given the old symbolism and stereotypes associated with wizards, my guess it they learn spells by reading other people's spellbooks. Granted, such ideas might be from before one of the system changes mentioned in Squirrel Prophet, but the concept is simple, iconic, and would help moderate the power levels of wizards (or at least the power versatility). It could also create some interesting drama, with a wizard hunting down spellbooks with rare and powerful spells, maybe even getting into awesome magical duels to obtain said spellbooks.

I doubt that. Not only has it been confirmed that wizards need to see the spells being used to learn them, but also because incantations don't exist in EGS. There are no magic words that activate the spell a person wants to use, they just need to wish for the spell to work. In other words, I don't think it would do any good for a wizard to read about how someone else's spell works unless of course they were planning to learn the spell later by observing the spellbook's owner.

[Don Edwards 548]

4 minutes ago, SeriousJupiter said:

Not only it's been confirmed that wizards need to see the spells being used to learn them

When and where was this confirmed?

Quote

but also because incantations don't exist in EGS.

I agree that we haven't seen any. But has it ever been canonically stated that they don't exist?

[SeriousJupiter 49]

13 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

When and where was this confirmed?

On 27.5.2016 at 4:29 AM, hkmaly said:

Wizards just have to see a spell enough times to learn it. No spellbooks.

 

13 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

I agree that we haven't seen any. But has it ever been canonically stated that they don't exist?

No, but if there were incantations, then wouldn't every wizard be able to learn every spell without ever seeing them used? That would make them way too OP.

[InfiniteRemnant 141]

42 minutes ago, SeriousJupiter said:

Incantations don't exist in EGS.

are you sure about that? Nanase ellen and elliot using vocal callouts (see 2nd goop battle & ellen training with grace) occasionally could be chalked up to Greg's teaching style, but Raven and Abraham were calling their spells as well when they fought, and there's no such explanation for them. it might not be necessary for all spells, or even most spells, but maybe some, like Murder Shroud, do need it? it wouldn't be the first spell with oddly specific casting requirements.

[Scotty 1,061]

7 hours ago, InfiniteRemnant said:

are you sure about that? Nanase ellen and elliot using vocal callouts (see 2nd goop battle & ellen training with grace) occasionally could be chalked up to Greg's teaching style, but Raven and Abraham were calling their spells as well when they fought, and there's no such explanation for them. it might not be necessary for all spells, or even most spells, but maybe some, like Murder Shroud, do need it? it wouldn't be the first spell with oddly specific casting requirements.

The callouts used for the martial arts stuff being incantations is kinda debatable. I don't see them being incantations in the general casting a spell sense, but I certainly see how they'd be helpful in focusing a person's power, just like when you grunt while lifting something heavy or when people curse out loud when they stub their toe on thing to try to minimize the pain.

In terms of Adrian and Abraham calling their spells, it's probably a similar reason. Saying the spell you want to cast would ensure that spell is cast. Just thinking about the spell might be harder to do if you're in the middle of combat and unable to fully concentrate on a particular spell, there could be errors if something interrupt your though process, Adrian's Murder Shroud may have ended up being a flight of seagulls that just pooped all over Abraham.

Incantations usually imply some elaborate phrasing, like an actual code for what the spell is supposed to do. The closest thing I could find in the archives would be these sketchbook pages, but those aren't canon and can't with any certainty say that incantations would be in pig latin, but the general idea is there.

[Pharaoh RutinTutin 1,586]

Incantations and other spellcasting rituals would seem to fall in a few categories

1.  A way for the magician to ensure that she or he is casting the spell properly.
2. A prayer, plea, or instruction to some sort of force or spirit.
3. Theatre for the mundane, because the people seem to expect it.

And I can just imagine little girl Pandora appearing in front of someone and singing an incantation,  It would be incredibly creepy, even for her.

If your mind is in a dither, and your heart is in a haze
I'll haze your dither, and dither your haze, with a magic phrase
If you're chased around by trouble, and followed by a jinx
I'll jinx your trouble, and trouble your jinx, in less than forty winks

Salagadoola mechicka boola bibbidi-bobbidi-boo
Put 'em together and what have you got?
Bibbidi-bobbidi-boo.

[Scotty 1,061]

23 minutes ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

2. A prayer, plea, or instruction to some sort of force or spirit.

Nanase asking God for help in Sister II can certainly be seen as that, whether or not it was actually necessary is unknown, though Ellen certainly believed in it enough to do the same in Family Tree. Though it is noteworthy to mention that Nanase didn't say anything to invoke her guardian form the second time.

[hkmaly 490]

3 hours ago, Scotty said:

3 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

2. A prayer, plea, or instruction to some sort of force or spirit.

Nanase asking God for help in Sister II can certainly be seen as that, whether or not it was actually necessary is unknown, though Ellen certainly believed in it enough to do the same in Family Tree. Though it is noteworthy to mention that Nanase didn't say anything to invoke her guardian form the second time.

Which is consistent with the idea that the spell is now hers and she only prayed to GET the spell, not to CAST it.

8 hours ago, Scotty said:

In terms of Adrian and Abraham calling their spells, it's probably a similar reason. Saying the spell you want to cast would ensure that spell is cast. Just thinking about the spell might be harder to do if you're in the middle of combat and unable to fully concentrate on a particular spell, there could be errors if something interrupt your though process, Adrian's Murder Shroud may have ended up being a flight of seagulls that just pooped all over Abraham.

Also, both Adrian and Abraham are old-school. Calling spells was probably in fashion few centuries back

Or ... wait. They are both wizards. It may be specific to being wizards ...

16 hours ago, InfiniteRemnant said:

it wouldn't be the first spell with oddly specific casting requirements.

Well, true. But even then, the "incantation" is only one of requirement, and not so important one. Finding out the words will not help you much in casting that spell.

17 hours ago, Don Edwards said:

Other than Elliot/Ellen (who are potentially a special case because they are identical twins and one is magically created), have we seen anyone attempt to read someone else's spellbook? Beyond the title? And been able to determine if they could read the spells?

Sure we did. Jerry. While, as immortal, he might be another exception, we also don't have any reason to assume other people CAN'T read the spellbooks. Nanase is certainly afraid her mother WILL be able to read it, despite her assuming her mother doesn't know magic.

 

[Scotty 1,061]

1 minute ago, hkmaly said:

Also, both Adrian and Abraham are old-school. Calling spells was probably in fashion few centuries back

Or ... wait. They are both wizards. It may be specific to being wizards ...

Abraham is certainly a wizard, Adrian's half immortal which is something completely different, although Abraham did refer to Adrian as "also a wizard" I think he just used that term loosely to describe the fact that Adrian is also a magic user. But yeah I can see casting spells verbally being more the norm back in Abraham's day. I kinda wonder if verbally casting spells was developed more as an aid rather than a necessary component of a spell. Like I said before it's clear that spells can be cast without words, but using words seems to allow better focus, so people could have figured that at least for learning spells, it was better to verbally cast them, while masters of certain spells didn't have to. Later on it could have developed into "It makes you look cooler if you verbally announce the spell you're casting".

[Drasvin 123]

17 hours ago, SeriousJupiter said:

17 hours ago, Don Edwards said:

When and where was this confirmed?

 

On 5/27/2016 at 8:29 PM, hkmaly said:

Wizards just have to see a spell enough times to learn it. No spellbooks.

Except that Tedd admits it might not be that easy just a couple panels latter, showing that he's not certain if that's the method that wizards learn spells from others, though it implies that he figures it's something fairly easy. Reading a spellbook would be fairly simple, and the EGS spellbooks aren't just simple books that explain spell. They are intrinsically linked to their owner. Whenever the owner earns a new spell, the book automagically gains new pages detailing the new spell in exact detail. It also changes when the spells update.

Also on the incantations/calling the spells, it might also provide a some extra oomph, as calling your attacks is a rather dramatic thing to do and Magic loves being dramatic. If that's true, a long incantation would likely only be helpful with the proper setting, like lighting, candles, fancy diagrams, and the like. Also calling the name of your spell might be a useful mnemonic device for wizards who have dozens of spells, since spell casting in EGS is largely subconscious and intent based, losing focus might result in casting a similar but different spell from the one desired (especially as Magic seems to like to troll people sometimes)

[Don Edwards 548]

Also, even if it were that simple - that a wizard can learn a spell just by seeing it used a few times - that wouldn't mean that this would be the ONLY way a wizard could learn a spell. They (possibly) could also learn it by reading another person's spellbook. Or by being told about it in the right way.

[CritterKeeper 1,102]

Hmm....*if* a wizard can learn spells by reading someone else's spellbook, then could they *steal* someone's spellbook, and carry on learning their new spells?  They'd know more about a new spell than the book's rightful owner, since the rightful owner would not be able to read about their new spells and would have to learn to use them by trial and error.

Could someone have assigned Justin a spellbook, and just not given it to him?  We have precedent in Pandora Marking and later Awakening him without telling him, and a new magic-user who doesn't know what spells he has is sure to be less boring than one who studies up every night....

[Scotty 1,061]

4 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:

Could someone have assigned Justin a spellbook, and just not given it to him?  We have precedent in Pandora Marking and later Awakening him without telling him, and a new magic-user who doesn't know what spells he has is sure to be less boring than one who studies up every night....

I think Justin would have to be given a spellbook. Edward had to order spellbooks for Elliot and Ellen after they awakened, Helena and Demetrius gave Nanase her's, Jerry saved Susan a trip to "ye olde magic shoppe" by making her one, so Pandora could have just as easily made a spellbook for Justin and hidden it on a bookshelf or something and at some point we might be seeing Justin rifling through books trying to find it Or Pandora didn't bother and Edward might have to get another one ordered.

It also does sound like spellbooks have to be linked to a person before they start loading up with the person's spells, for an Immortal it should be easy, but I imagine Edward would have to do something ranging from either simply putting the magic user's name in it, or attuning it to their aura.

[hkmaly 490]

17 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:

Hmm....*if* a wizard can learn spells by reading someone else's spellbook, then could they *steal* someone's spellbook, and carry on learning their new spells?  They'd know more about a new spell than the book's rightful owner, since the rightful owner would not be able to read about their new spells and would have to learn to use them by trial and error.

That's exactly the reason why I think it will NOT be possible. Magic might be trolling, but not maliciously, and this sounds like something which wouldn't make sense as a mechanism ...

12 hours ago, Scotty said:

Pandora could have just as easily made a spellbook for Justin and hidden it on a bookshelf or something and at some point we might be seeing Justin rifling through books trying to find it Or Pandora didn't bother and Edward might have to get another one ordered.

Similarly, I don't think you can actually HIDE the book from owner who knows what he's doing. I mean, Justin currently doesn't know, so he may have it on a bookshelf, but IF the spellbook must be unique, it would be possible to locate it with magic and Edward will likely know how. Alternatively, maybe he can just link a new spellbook to Justin which makes the old one stop working or something ...

[Scotty 1,061]

2 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Similarly, I don't think you can actually HIDE the book from owner who knows what he's doing. I mean, Justin currently doesn't know, so he may have it on a bookshelf, but IF the spellbook must be unique, it would be possible to locate it with magic and Edward will likely know how. Alternatively, maybe he can just link a new spellbook to Justin which makes the old one stop working or something ...

I can see making a spellbook for someone who already had one making the original useless. It'd be a good safeguard to have if a magic user were to lose their spellbook or get it stolen, just have a new one made and the old one becomes just some random encyclopedia.

I think only those who have awakened can read a spellbook properly, back after Grace's birthday when Sarah, Nanase and Justin were at the comic shop, Sarah asked Nanase what the book she had was about, and thought squirrels. We didn't actually see the title on the book but we do know that spellbooks have random titles to hide the fact that their spellbooks, so Sarah probably saw the title as something about squirrels, and I'm wondering if Sarah tried reading it, she'd probably see stuff about squirrels rather than Nanase's spells.

[hkmaly 490]

10 minutes ago, Scotty said:

I think only those who have awakened can read a spellbook properly, back after Grace's birthday when Sarah, Nanase and Justin were at the comic shop, Sarah asked Nanase what the book she had was about, and thought squirrels. We didn't actually see the title on the book but we do know that spellbooks have random titles to hide the fact that their spellbooks, so Sarah probably saw the title as something about squirrels, and I'm wondering if Sarah tried reading it, she'd probably see stuff about squirrels rather than Nanase's spells.

I'm not sure she SAW the title, much less what's inside. Sarah might be referring to Grace. While it's possible non-awakened can't read it, we have nothing in canon supporting the idea.

Also, those "random titles" might be fixed, we have nothing supporting the idea different people see it differently.

On the other hand ... maybe Edward's writting is not just that bad ...

[Scotty 1,061]

35 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

On the other hand ... maybe Edward's writting is not just that bad ...

Edward didn't make Nanase's book, Helena and Demetrius gave it to her when they awakened her.

 

[hkmaly 490]

1 minute ago, Scotty said:

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

On the other hand ... maybe Edward's writting is not just that bad ...

Edward didn't make Nanase's book, Helena and Demetrius gave it to her when they awakened her.

Even if he did it wouldn't mean he wrote it personally. I meant that he might be using similar trick, possibly even learned the trick from spellbooks.

[Scotty 1,061]

Ok that I can believe.

[Drasvin 123]

17 hours ago, hkmaly said:

On 5/29/2016 at 2:12 AM, CritterKeeper said:

Hmm....*if* a wizard can learn spells by reading someone else's spellbook, then could they *steal* someone's spellbook, and carry on learning their new spells?  They'd know more about a new spell than the book's rightful owner, since the rightful owner would not be able to read about their new spells and would have to learn to use them by trial and error.

That's exactly the reason why I think it will NOT be possible. Magic might be trolling, but not maliciously, and this sounds like something which wouldn't make sense as a mechanism ...

I don't see it as Magic being malicious. Maybe punishing, in the "You should have protected your spellbook better" sense, but not malicious. And to be fair, even if wizards don't learn spells from other people's spellbooks, it is still entirely possible to steal a person's spellbook to deprive them of a reference of their spells, forcing them to figure stuff out through trail and error (or to go through the trouble of getting a new spellbook), meaning keeping the spellbook safe is very important regardless of whether or not wizards have particular interest in them. If wizards do have particular interest in the spellbooks of others, then it would give the wizards incentive to either seek out someone willing to share a book peacefully, or engage someone in epic, dramatic combat for the possession of the book, assuming other magic users are properly protecting their books.

 

17 hours ago, Scotty said:

I think only those who have awakened can read a spellbook properly, back after Grace's birthday when Sarah, Nanase and Justin were at the comic shop, Sarah asked Nanase what the book she had was about, and thought squirrels. We didn't actually see the title on the book but we do know that spellbooks have random titles to hide the fact that their spellbooks, so Sarah probably saw the title as something about squirrels, and I'm wondering if Sarah tried reading it, she'd probably see stuff about squirrels rather than Nanase's spells.

Honestly, I think the fact that spellbooks have really mundane titles supports the hypothesis that anyone could read a spellbook, assuming they could parse the diction that even the books' proper owners struggle with. We've seen the titles of two spellbooks on panel so far, Susan's, The Ecology of Anteaters(Not a Spellbook), and Elliot's, A Perfectly Normal Book. The second one was ordered up by Mister Verres and clearly shows his style of obfuscation, which inexplicably works in other cover up situations for some reason. The first was generated by Jerry, and uses a fairly dry and academic title, while dipping a little into the Verres-brand of disguise at the end (If it works why not use it?). Sure, someone who is really interested in anteaters might open the book and try to read it, but most people don't read academic books, sometimes even when they need to. Assuming Sarah actually saw the title of Nanase's book, it's like to also be something dry and academic, possibly pertaining to squirrels or woodland critters in general.

If non-awakened couldn't read a spellbook, then why have it appear as something dry and mundane (or 'perfectly normal' in the case of Elliot's spellbook)? Why not have the book appear as something the owner would want to read regularly, or at least have on their person semi-regularly, like a journal, or a good fiction book or just simply have it as an untitled book? If non-awakened can't read the spellbook, then there would be little to no danger to the masquerade of them trying to read it. There would still be the danger of enemies trying to steal the book, which having the book either be untitled or something potentially of sentimental value (other than being a spellbook) would help hide it from those that would like to steal it.

 

Also a read thought that popped into my head at one point: What happens to a spellbook when it's owner dies? Does the book retain the information within it, or does it become blank once the owner perishes? The idea is kinda pertinent to the 'wizards get spells from spellbooks' idea, but still is an interesting thought nugget otherwise.

[hkmaly 490]

3 hours ago, Drasvin said:

And to be fair, even if wizards don't learn spells from other people's spellbooks, it is still entirely possible to steal a person's spellbook to deprive them of a reference of their spells, forcing them to figure stuff out through trail and error (or to go through the trouble of getting a new spellbook), meaning keeping the spellbook safe is very important regardless of whether or not wizards have particular interest in them. If wizards do have particular interest in the spellbooks of others, then it would give the wizards incentive to either seek out someone willing to share a book peacefully, or engage someone in epic, dramatic combat for the possession of the book, assuming other magic users are properly protecting their books.

The difference is that "depriving people of a reference of their spells" will not be that big incentive. Option to learn their spells WILL be. And while those combats will be dramatic, they would also make harder to keep magic from public knowledge. And they would "militarize" magic - currently, lot of people have very different, INTERESTING spells, while real and serious risk of combat would mean most would want fireballs. We don't know the reason for it, it wasn't even directly mentioned, but from how the world look it's likely magic doesn't WANT to be mostly used in combat.

(At least on this half of world. The other half of world have lot of signs of magic being used in combat a lot there.)

3 hours ago, Drasvin said:

If non-awakened couldn't read a spellbook, then why have it appear as something dry and mundane (or 'perfectly normal' in the case of Elliot's spellbook)? Why not have the book appear as something the owner would want to read regularly, or at least have on their person semi-regularly, like a journal, or a good fiction book or just simply have it as an untitled book? If non-awakened can't read the spellbook, then there would be little to no danger to the masquerade of them trying to read it. There would still be the danger of enemies trying to steal the book, which having the book either be untitled or something potentially of sentimental value (other than being a spellbook) would help hide it from those that would like to steal it.

Yes. Even if the book would look to have such titles just to mundane people, it makes little sense unless it's to make them unlikely to try to read it.

Note that obviously the best title for spellbook is something like Dungeons & Dragons: Player's Option: Spells & Magic, because that would be 100% protection of masquerade even if someone would read it whole.

3 hours ago, Drasvin said:

Also a read thought that popped into my head at one point: What happens to a spellbook when it's owner dies? Does the book retain the information within it, or does it become blank once the owner perishes? The idea is kinda pertinent to the 'wizards get spells from spellbooks' idea, but still is an interesting thought nugget otherwise.

Yes, very interesting question. Note that it might also completely disappear.