the DM vs the writer, on magic objects

[marycatelli]

though a different point this time. . . .

I've seen solemn discussions of magic items in D&D and how the ancestral sword that looked so nifty at third level is outclassed by ninth level when you pick up an ordinary dagger.  That the only real way around it was an evolving item that would produce new powers at higher levels.

Now, a novel about a sword, or a ring, or whatever that unfolded its powers as time went on is certainly workable.  Perhaps the magic requires its wielder prove his worth, or perhaps the inexperienced user would draw too much attention with the wonders it's capable of it, so it caps them until he can take the attention.

But tossing a character a vastly overpowered item and having him wrestle with the consequence is much easier in a novel. Particularly since if he's the main character, the other characters, even if in the same party, should be less important.

And minor items can continue useful forever, partly because the character can come up with more ingenious uses for them, but partly because their power is not fixed and defined, and because the hero doesn't have to become superhuman in the course of adventure. 

Comments

[nodrog]

There might also be some maturation involved - that the character outgrew the item, which was nifty at the time but what enthralled you at thirteen is likely to bore and irritate you at thirty.

Or, like a "Golden Book Encyclopedia for Young Readers," might still be brightly colored but hasn't much practical value now.

[marycatelli]

A possible plot, but very rare. Possibly because people don't come to high fantasy looking for "things grow tedious" plots.

[nodrog]

Yet “coming of age” is quite common, and often involves putting aside the things one once cherished - not without a pang.

Consider, for example, “The Men of Yarnith” by Lord Dunsany, who went to pray to their guardian god to protect them - and found the chisel-marks by which their “god” had been carved!

- And said, “Well, all righty, then!” and rolled up their sleeves and saved themselves.

---

It might also happen from the other direction, a case of “The Magic Goes Away” - if the spells or the guardian slowly lose their potency, the one(s) who depended on these for protection, would perforce have to find other ways.

n b - An interesting epilogue - the worship of Yarni Zai continued regardless, because it was socially useful, people were accustomed to it, and as they said, Hey, why not - even if he does not hear our prayers, some other god might, y’ know?

[marycatelli]

The modern view seems to me to involve a false conception of growth. They accuse us of arrested development because we have not lost a taste we had in childhood. But surely arrested development consists not in refusing to lose old things but in failing to add new things? I now like hock, which I am sure I should not have liked as a child. But I still like lemon-squash. I call this growth or development because I have been enriched: where I formerly had only one pleasure, I now have two. But if I had to lose the taste for lemon-squash before I acquired the taste for hock, that would not be growth but simple change. I now enjoy Tolstoy and Jane Austen and Trollope as well as fairy tales and I call that growth: if I had had to lose the fairy tales in order to acquire the novelists, I would not say that I had grown but only that I had changed. A tree grows because it adds rings: a train doesn't grow by leaving one station behind and puffing on to the next. In reality, the case is stronger and more complicated than this. I think my growth is just as apparent when I now read the fairy tales as when I read the novelists, for I now enjoy the fairy tales better than I did in childhood: being now able to put more in, of course I get more out. But I do not here stress that point. Even if it were merely a taste for grown-up literature added to an unchanged taste for children's literature, addition would still be entitled to the name 'growth', and the process of merely dropping one parcel when you pick up another would not. It is, of course, true that the process of growing does, incidentally and unfortunately, involve some more losses. But that is not the essence of growth, certainly not what makes growth admirable or desirable. If it were, if to drop parcels and to leave stations behind were the essence and virtue of growth, why should we stop at the adult? Why should not senile be equally a term of approval? Why are we not to be congratulated on losing our teeth and air? Some critics seem to confuse growth with the cost of growth and also to wish to make that cost far higher than, in nature, it need be. C. S. Lewis

[nodrog]

No argument there.  Someone was talking about the works of Andre Norton, and that while they are good teenage fare, the mature SF reader must regretfully put them by and pass on…  Poppycock.

---

A man came into view, crossing before Ross…

The stranger was oddly dressed—too lightly dressed if one judged the climate by the frequent snow patches and the biting cold. A strip of coarse cloth, extending from his armpit to about four inches above the knee, was wound about his body and pulled in at the waist by a belt. The belt, far more ornate than the cumbersome wrapping, was made of many small chains linking metal plates and supported a long dagger which hung straight in front. The man also wore a round blue cloak, now swept back on his shoulders to free his bare arms, which was fastened by a large pin under his chin. His footgear, which extended above his calves, was made of animal hide, still bearing patches of shaggy hair. His face was beardless, though a shadowy line along his chin suggested that he had not shaved that particular day. A fur cap concealed most of his dark-brown hair.

Was he an Indian? No, for although his skin was tanned, it was as fair as Ross's under that weathering. And his clothing did not resemble any Indian apparel Ross had ever seen. Yet, in spite of his primitive trappings, the man had such an aura of authority, of self-confidence, and competence that it was clear he was top dog in his own section of the world…

---

That lady could write, and she knew her stuff.  I prefer her earlier works, but even admitted YA fare like The Sioux Spaceman are well researched and thumping good stories, and many of today’s pretentious PC twits would profit from studying her works.

So, yah, I agree.

[marycatelli]

She was uneven, with hindsight. I re-read Forerunner Foray and was surprised at the gaps (why did the artifact draw everyone into doing what it wanted? And why did NO ONE notice this?), but Ice Crown was even better than I remembered.

[nodrog]

On the other hand, have you been visited by jolly old Saint Nick? Do you expect to be? Do you believe that Santa Claus' workshop is at the North Pole?

Some things do get put aside.

[marycatelli]

Saints are in Heaven, not the North Pole.

[nodrog]

In any case, if you could now defeat with an ordinary sailor's dirk the vorpal blade that shone for you at 3rd level, either you have gained power or it has lost it.  That would depend on the story.  The only way it could “keep up with you” is if you are a magic-user, and you can now comprehend that the artifact exists on several Planes and has powers you never suspected, &c.  But as a standard combat weapon its utility is limited, and a sword-swinger would pass it by.

[marycatelli]

Unless you play the evolving weapon trick -- you don't need the wizard if the weapon does it itself.

[nodrog]

Why would it evolve only now, and not before? Coincidence?

- I mean, it could be! There might be a whole species of these weapons and this is their life cycle. Speaking of "coming of age" - not him, it!

[marycatelli]

Because the wielder was not worthy.

Or to prevent his receiving more attention that he could cope with before he grew into his power.

[nodrog]

So someone else must be controlling the weapon - even if the weapon were sentient it wouldn't know what it hasn't been yet. Unless it has already evolved and is playing dumb. Either way, someone is deciding what to disclose.
Which is okay, if that's the story.

[marycatelli]

You'd play dumb, too, if you wanted to hide your ability. It helps hide the ability to hide the ability.