Practicing sorcery: any material components?

[Patrick]

As a follow-up on the ideas that occurred to me based on the thread: http://basicroleplaying.org/topic/4111-origins-of-the-orlanthi-peoples-and-the-lankhor-mhy-and-issaries-cults/

... I'd like to review what we really know about the actual practice of sorcery/wizardry.

1/ we know that casting spells, learnt from a Grimoire or as rote formula, normally requires to talk aloud (not sure, but I kind of imagine powerful Mages would be able to do without). Is holding a physical object i.e. the Grimoire or a talisman, still needed for this?

2/ what about rituals? previous publications & illustrations had wizards work in "laboratories", draw pentacles, stand close to a brasier (presumably to burn incense or something else)... do (some) sorcery rituals require to hold/use/consume specific material objects or elemnts, at least in order to ease the path to success? For instance, would a sorcerer spill water on the floor or drown a tablet with its name to invoke an otherwordly entity related to the Water rune, etc.?

 

In other words: what does the life of a wizard look like, when Talars ask for a specific achievement?

e.g. does he (or she) consult Grimoires and peers for details, and start looking for "a drop of Dragonewt blood, and two feathers from a Demi-Bird"...? ("hey, let's order these Horali to go hunt some Draconic Krjalki for the service of our Lord...")

 

[Joerg]

Nothing official, but here's my two cents.

1) The physical object is the container for the energy flow from the sorcerous realm. A sufficiently advanced sorcerer might be able to hold onto the energy directly, but I wager such an ability will come with a cost. Probably a cost in humanity.

2) Rituals, props, material components all are means to make a magician's life easier. In a lot of spells, these things pull the threshold for succeeding in the spell low enough that a practitioner can manage to set it off.

[M Helsdon]

12 hours ago, Patrick said:

1/ we know that casting spells, learnt from a Grimoire or as rote formula, normally requires to talk aloud (not sure, but I kind of imagine powerful Mages would be able to do without). Is holding a physical object i.e. the Grimoire or a talisman, still needed for this?

2/ what about rituals? previous publications & illustrations had wizards work in "laboratories", draw pentacles, stand close to a brasier (presumably to burn incense or something else)... do (some) sorcery rituals require to hold/use/consume specific material objects or elemnts, at least in order to ease the path to success? For instance, would a sorcerer spill water on the floor or drown a tablet with its name to invoke an otherwordly entity related to the Water rune, etc.?

I suspect that whilst sorcery basically requires the learning and reciting formulae, physical objects are useful: the grimoire because though an aspect of sorcery is probably developing a memory equivalent to that of a reciter of epic poetry, it is always useful to be able to refresh your memory; objects related to the intent of the spell might help focus the concentration of the sorcerer, so when engaging in Fire magic, a naked flame might be useful. As for more distinct components, human memory can be aided by sensory aides, such as smell, so burning a particular incense or substance might aid the focusing of the mind upon the desired intent, especially if the spell requires a very particular and delicate manipulation of Rune energies.

Edited November 9, 2015 by M Helsdon

[metcalph]

4 hours ago, Patrick said:

1/ we know that casting spells, learnt from a Grimoire or as rote formula, normally requires to talk aloud (not sure, but I kind of imagine powerful Mages would be able to do without). Is holding a physical object i.e. the Grimoire or a talisman, still needed for this?

Originally sorcery could be done merely by thinking.  But now because of the degenerate state of the world, most people have to use applied magics (Kachasti - speaking, Tadeniti - reading, Kadeniti - objects etc) to perform sorcery.

[Charles]

I love the idea that different schools of sorcery, even those with similar areas of study, would have different styles of magic, particularly, for the more ritual magic. One school might work its magic by linking the targets of the magic to items and then physically push those items around a board (hey, war gaming!) to achieve the required affect. Another school might perform their rituals through hours of chanting, with more complex rituals requiring choirs singing in multi-part harmony. Or orchestras!

For players, I'd suggest that usually these requirements should be relaxed and be built into the keyword. But, occasionally, acquiring the correct article, relationship, plant, animal or monster part etc. should become the focus of an episode. Or if an enemy has them bound and gagged, again story driven, their magic should be much reduced in potency (i.e. a high negative modifier).

[David Scott]

The HeroQuest Glorantha rules as written don't specify any material components. Spells directly manipulate the runes producing effects. Spells are also very specific in their scope and in some cases may specify specific needs to be cast. This basically ignored for ease in a narrative game, but I'm sure in "Real" Glorantha grimoires more than just "Tap Water" is written. e.g. The incantation must be spoken over water metal bowl containing water drawn from a deep well of greater than 25m by a blue haired woman of age greater than 25 who has given birth and is wearing the long robes with long tassels, the resulting energy must be held in a quick silver wand of 1m length carved with fish. That's a deliberately ridiculous example, but limitations of gender, caste, materials, age, cult and clothing are not unreasonable. I'm of the opinion that the rarest spells have the fewest limitations. I would hesitate to build these restrictions into actual game rules unless as @Charles said, they are story driven

1 hour ago, Charles said:

For players, I'd suggest that usually these requirements should be relaxed and be built into the keyword. But, occasionally, acquiring the correct article, relationship, plant, animal or monster part etc. should become the focus of an episode. Or if an enemy has them bound and gagged, again story driven, their magic should be much reduced in potency (i.e. a high negative modifier).

 

[aumshantih]

Material Ingredients could be Tapped into Energy to give you sorcery more oomph as well.

[Patrick]

31 minutes ago, aumshantih said:

Material Ingredients could be Tapped into Energy to give you sorcery more oomph as well.

I presume you would also be restricted to specific items or beings to tap, in order to get the "right type of energy" i.e. tied to the right Rune(s).

 

Probably not a common practice anyway, as most Malkioni reject tapping.

[Patrick]

19 hours ago, M Helsdon said:

I suspect that whilst sorcery basically requires the learning and reciting formulae, physical objects are useful: the grimoire because though an aspect of sorcery is probably developing a memory equivalent to that of a reciter of epic poetry, it is always useful to be able to refresh your memory; objects related to the intent of the spell might help focus the concentration of the sorcerer, so when engaging in Fire magic, a naked flame might be useful. As for more distinct components, human memory can be aided by sensory aides, such as smell, so burning a particular incense or substance might aid the focusing of the mind upon the desired intent, especially if the spell requires a very particular and delicate manipulation of Rune energies.

An interesting question here: if componentd are here to help "the wizard" rather than "the spell" - acting as training/mnemotechnic support - then:

could two different wizards use completely different components to cast the same spell, learned from the same Grimoire?

 

Also, in some Grimoires components could be mentioned (in "Sorcery for dummies vol.1"), and not in others (because components are not really part of the spell, they are what you add to focus yourself correctly).

Any guess about, say, the Abiding Book or the Blue Book of Zzabur regarding components?

Edited November 9, 2015 by Patrick

[aumshantih]

You are correct that most modern Malkioni do reject tapping, but not the Brithini, Waertagi or the Vadeli.   

So, in my Fronelan game, I have generally allowed Heroes to use the trappings of ritual magic as a way for them using their Sorcerer Profession Keyword as a narrative augment for a spell they are casting from a Grimoire. 

[M Helsdon]

19 minutes ago, Patrick said:

An interesting question here: if componentd are here to help "the wizard" rather than "the spell" - acting as training/mnemotechnic support - then:

could two different wizards use completely different components to cast the same spell, learned from the same Grimoire?

Also, in some Grimoires components could be mentioned (in "Sorcery for dummies vol.1"), and not in others (because components are not really part of the spell, they are what you add to focus yourself correctly).

Any guess about, say, the Abiding Book or the Blue Book of Zzabur regarding components?

I suspect it all depends on the tradition and teaching of the wizard, and if two wizards learn a spell from different grimoires (as in different versions subject to different histories of transcription), then different components might be mentioned. I doubt that the Blue Book of Zzabur would require components (unless a corrupt copy) because a Pure wizard would not deign to use an impure methodology. As for the Abiding Book - no doubt there are partial God Learner versions in circulation with all manner of heretical content.

This is all speculation - I don't know the canonical answer.

[Joerg]

If you look at the possible subjects of Tapping, you may find that the restrictions are mostly directed against tapping fellow human beings. The Tapping of animals, crystals, spirits or the land would be a different topic, and I feel that this would be a common practice for sorcerers in the field, away from the congregations that support the wizards at home.

[Patrick]

Quite a nice remark, Joerg!

It provides plenty of gaming possibilities, in terms of "consuming components": getting the items required, but also possibly facing reprobation, in the case of unusual rituals (the sort of odd ceremonies for dire straits that PCs tend to practice...).

I can quite imagine the mainstream community and local official zzaburi feeling like there is something un-acceptable going on: people who bring animals and precious objects, in order to destroy/tap them in some sort of unknown ceremony... "my Invisible God, isn't that pagan sacrifices right under my nose?"

;-)

 

On a more theoretical standpoint, it actually raises (again) the question of the "convergences" between Magical Ways.

After all, where are the true differences between:

- "Pure" Sorcery, based on Thought: no tapping (no consumption of material objects/beings), no chanting or praying or making gestures (no ceremonies), no worship or veneration

- "Brithini" Sorcery (or so I presume): tapping (consumption of material objects/beings), maybe some chants or gestures (sorcerous ceremonies?), no worship or veneration

- "Modern Malkioni" Sorcery (may vary per school, but likely applies to Rokari and Hrestoli): tapping during rituals (consumption of material objects/beings), chanting and gestures (ceremonies), veneration passed along a "chain" to other wizards

- Theistic worship: consumption of material objects/beings (aka sacrifices), chanting and gestures (ceremonies), worship/veneration passed onto other beings (gods, or even mortal & living Heroes)

- Animist worship: consumption of material objects/beings (aka sacrifices or spirit geas), chanting and gestures (ceremonies), worship/veneration passed onto other beings (otherwordly spirits, or even dead ancestors/Heroes)

- Mystic meditation: no sacrifices (no consumption of material objects/beings), often specific gestures (or absence thereof - aka meditative postures), specific state of mind possibly focused on a particular mental representation of some sort of transcendent power (aka veneration)...

 

OK, I've said enough to be burnt as Heretic in quite a few places... ;-)

However, it sounds to me like:

a) there are no differences in nature, only in practices, between the "Four Worlds"

b) the variations could find explanations that do not necessitate to consider that the 4 types of magic come from different "Worlds"

 

Take the well-known "inflexibility & specialization" of wizardry spells, for instance - as represented in HQG by the "no stretch allowed" rule; and in RQ3 by the difficulty of training a brand new skill for each spell, wit a potential bonus/augment drawn from Ceremony (which, incidentally, was the same damn skill for all types of Magic, at that time), vs. divine magic granting some results almost every time (although often less "targeted", because of th eimpossibility to use skills like Intensity, etc.).

That's pretty much a defining feature of sorcery, in terms of in-world experimental evidence.

You may say - if theistic worship is just a "degraded" version of sorcery, say, how comes theists can get

Well, what if...

What if a Human Being could use a simple invocation spell targeted to a very specific Otherworld entity (which we may call an Ascended Master, Saint, or for simplicity's sake, a "God"), allowing him/her to pass on magical energy provided via objects & beings (animals) for tapping in the form of sacrifices, along with his/her "veneration", to fuel an effect "chosen" by (or asked/commanded to) that summoned Otherworld Entity... don't we get something with a higher chance of "getting something" (because the Human Being has involved a higher-than-usual amount of energy, thanks to the tapping etc.), yet that could resort to less-narrowly defined effects (because the Otherworld Entity intervenes in the process, and picks one of its narrow but numerous spells)?

In other words - a recipe for turning sorcerous practices into theistic ones, as Zzabur always told it happened?

The barriers between the Four Worlds now blur and vanish...

 

All is one, the whole world is one!

Praised be Glorantha, the Invisible Goddess !

8-)

 

[Charles]

8 hours ago, Patrick said:

a) there are no differences in nature, only in practices, between the "Four Worlds"

b) the variations could find explanations that do not necessitate to consider that the 4 types of magic come from different "Worlds"

For the purest of pure practitioners, there is a difference in approach.

Socerers know something;
Spiritists have something;
Theists are something;

Mystics reject all of the above as entanglements in this world and the other world that delay and/or prevent their liberation into the Void (or All).

Eurmali and some (many?) Illuminants embrace all approaches simultaneously.

Most cultures are not that pure - in particular, some suggest that the Orlanthi approach to Theism is very much informed by their knowledge of Spiritism, and a very, very personal approach to worship. On the other hand, the Dara Happans approach to Theisim is usually through a priest that has (or claims to have) a very specific line of descent from an approved god and is perhaps 'a more pure' approach to Theism.

[David Scott]

15 hours ago, aumshantih said:

Material Ingredients could be Tapped into Energy to give you sorcery more oomph as well.

But that's what you do in tapping material components, you tap their Rune source - If you tap a log you're tapping the plant rune, if you tap a metal bowl, you're tapping the rune metal it's associated with, etc.