McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
mechanics of faith in urban fantasy: a notion for a project
LizW65:
I'm reminded of the Jewish vampire in Fearless Vampire Killers who was unaffected by a cross; also the Australian Aboriginal alleged practice of killing one's enemy long distance by "singing the bone", the efficacy of which seemed to be directly proportional to the victim's belief.
It also sounds similar to treating a medical condition with a placebo; as long as the patient believes in the cure, he/she starts to feel better.
Starbeam:
So, if I'm understanding this right, basically how a spell affects a person depends more on what that person believes than on how talented the spellcaster actually is. Bad example, I'm sure, but like someone cursing a person who believes in voodoo would be more effectual than cursing a scientist who believes more in science than anything else?
Quantus:
--- Quote from: neurovore on April 27, 2009, 05:22:50 PM ---"Underpowered" on what grounds ? I don't think all urban fantasies need to have so much magic present as, say, the Dresden Files in order to work; and it's not as if there aren't an awful lot of devout Christians in the world who would be vulnerable to magic working this way.
--- End quote ---
Just that any old pigheaded joe shmoe is all but immune to magic simply by not believing in it, and that would be the majority of the populace. Even most die-hard christian, or to a further extreme orthodox Muslims (who believe that they cannot choose what to believe in their holy texts and must take in in total, including the stories of demons and djinn abroad in the world) can have a very real and strong faith, but when face-to-face with an angel will wet themselves and start the rationalization cycle that humans are so good at. You tell a christian that you felt the presence of an angel protecting you during a car wreck and they nod sagely and mutter blessings. You say you actually saw and spoke to it, and they get the padded room ready. Its just one of those human contradictions.
That being said all this only applies to magic that actually targets a human (or sentient being, at least). What about the more physical magics? Are they fine, or do the beliefs of say witnesses matter. Like if I wanted to conjure a chair, would I be able to do it in front of a non-believer without difficulty, or would their disbelief still hamper me?
comprex:
--- Quote from: neurovore on April 27, 2009, 05:20:39 PM ---What I have in mind for the operation of magic is that there exist spells and spell-casters. And that the spells must be initiated by someone casting them. The subject's belief governs the efficacy of the magic rather than its existence, is I think the distinction for which I am looking; magic cannot be generated ex nihilo by the belief of a subject. The belief effect is reactive rather than proactive.
--- End quote ---
Ah. Yes, that is different. I see an interesting little area of possibilities between what you describe and commonplace hypnosis mechanisms.
the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh:
--- Quote from: Starbeam on April 27, 2009, 05:27:57 PM ---So, if I'm understanding this right, basically how a spell affects a person depends more on what that person believes than on how talented the spellcaster actually is. Bad example, I'm sure, but like someone cursing a person who believes in voodoo would be more effectual than cursing a scientist who believes more in science than anything else?
--- End quote ---
Exactly.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version