Shadow magic, Say whaaat?

But Fel magic comes from a different plane, it's something out of reach. The dark energy in a demon-filled realm, the arcane has a similar place and only a select few are capable of tapping into either of those. I still feel like were linking Priest shadow up with warlocks and death knights, purely because they have similar colours ingame. Surely they're must be more of a distinction. We would have fel addicted Death Knights and Priests otherwise!

Necromancy and Fel magic are sugroups of Arcane magic in general. Warlocks, Necromancers and Mages are all Arcanists.

And logic has nothing to do with Divine magic.

Vectoria wrote:What difference is there between a Warlock and a Priest then?

Fel.

Fel is a corruptive chaotic force. It perverts the natural order of things into its chaotic forms. Just like there is a Fel version of the Arcane, there is a Fel version of the Shadow.

Though I am first to admit that the relationship between Fel and Shadow is complicated and could be interpeted in various different ways, this is how I (and as far as I've been able to tell, so do many of my fellow Draenei roleplayers) tend to see things. Chaos and destruction are not the same, though the latter can and has been utilized by the former.

Fel is evil.
Shadow is destruction/consumption.
Fel shadow is evil destruction/consumption.

Fel is evil
Arcane is pure magic.
Fel magic / arcane is evil magic.

Vectoria wrote:
Possibly, I just don't agree with it being mixed in with Necromancers and Warlocks, considering their spells do two very different things.

This concerns an earlier point made by Drustai I believe. Though Blizzard tends to treat these different forces seperately in isolation, many of us players simply cannot accept that. We want to see harmony in the WoW cosmology, not some bundled up mess of incoherent and unconnected dots. We connect the dots, yes, which is probably always going to be a hopeless endeavor because there is no real set numbers to go with the dots telling us what picture to draw. That doesn't stop us from trying, though, because we prefer a harmonized picture over a random collection of dots!

Regarding Delidah's point;

I fullheartedly agree. Though as a player I like the ying-yang model of the cosmos, my character (Thelos) is still very far from grasping this concept. His undying loyalty and faith in the Light will prevent him from acknowledging the proper place Shadow has in the cosmos. For him, enlightenment is the destruction of Shadow and the final victory of the Light. The enlightened soul is a yang without ying. Obviously as a player I dont think this is a very wise and feasible ideal, but its my character's all the same.

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:

And logic has nothing to do with Divine magic.

<3

Thelos wrote:
This concerns an earlier point made by Drustai I believe. Though Blizzard tends to treat these different forces seperately in isolation, many of us players simply cannot accept that. We want to see harmony in the WoW cosmology, not some bundled up mess of incoherent and unconnected dots. We connect the dots, yes, which is probably always going to be a hopeless endeavor because there is no real set numbers to go with the dots telling us what picture to draw. That doesn't stop us from trying, though, because we prefer a harmonized picture over a random collection of dots!

Should I dig up the link for my atempt at that, it's the one with the graphs.

Thelos wrote:

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:
And logic has nothing to do with Divine magic.

<3

Well, this is all definitely food for thought.

Might be interesting for someone to write up the exact distinguishable differences between a Warlock, a Death Knight and a Shadow priest: When it comes down to how they are able to weave said magic.

Oh and by the why allow me the honor of debunking my own theory before someone takes the opportunity to humiliate me!

The major problem with the ying-yang pictures is that in it Fel falls outside of it. Fel is chaos and evil. The Light is supposed to directly oppose the Fel in some way. However, in Tao, the Light is not Good. It is simply part of the cosmos, perfectly neutral. It cannot stand in direct opposition to the Fel. Good and evil are transcendent concepts that excist outside of the natural order. But if the Light it supposed to be synonymous with Good, then that gives us the problem of a force that is simaltenously part of the cosmos and not.

That's the major unresolved problem I have with all of this. The Light cannot be a force that is in opposition to Fel and Shadow in the same way. If I put it in opposition to Shadow like I did in the ying-yang picture, it seizes to be good and it can no longer directly oppose the Fel. It can only do so in tangent with Shadow, as the full cosmos is in opposition to the anti-cosmis that is Fel.

If I put the Light in opposition to Fel, it seizes to be part of the natural order. That means either Shadow is not part of this order either or the Light does no longer stand in direct opposition to the Shadow. Fel is the force that seeks to destroy the natural order; Light is the force that defends and maintains it. It becomes the transcendent force of Good ike the Fel is the transcendent force of Evil. However that means Shadow has to become evil too, making it almost synonymous with Fel, something we definately do not want and is contradicted by the lore in many ways.

So yeah, I've chosen one option, excluding the other. I dont see a good solution to this mess, anyone who does is welcome to share it.

Balance vs. Chaos is a different belance in itself.

Maybe consider adding more types of magic into your equation, or dimensions.

Spoiler:

The fact that you dont know where to put the Light in that picture perfectly illustrates my point.

Alternatively.

Spoiler:

Vaguely a 5 pointed star, if you disregard the Arcane sugroup.
All hail Stan.

That's more how I'd catagorise things, definetly.

Also;

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:Balance vs. Chaos is a different belance in itself

If you accept this you negate Chaos all together by reducing it to a harmony of a second level of reality.

Thelos wrote:Also;

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:Balance vs. Chaos is a different belance in itself

If you accept this you negate Chaos all together by reducing it to a harmony of a second level of reality.

You'd have to both accept it and not to have both Chaos and Balance at the same time.
Or you'd have to semi randomly switch between them...
<.<
>.>
*makes note for further study*

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:
You'd have to both accept it and not to have both Chaos and Balance at the same time.

Which is exactly what I have been doing by differentiating between:

• The cosmos (which is another word for harmony, mind you)
  
• The anti-cosmos (the disharmony that threatens to destroy it)

This does not make a second ying-yang picture in which the first circle is embedded in another, bigger one. Rather, it puts a big scary monsters with enormous teeth next to the first circle that threatens to eat it.

Vectoria wrote:Might be interesting for someone to write up the exact distinguishable differences between a Warlock, a Death Knight and a Shadow priest: When it comes down to how they are able to weave said magic.

Been working on the priest point of view for a about a year now, although that essay is more about magic in general and then specifically about the Shadow from an IC point of view.

It turned out to be more demanding and philosophical than I first thought and not that easy to write at all. I haven't worked on it for a while now, due to lack of time, but I hope to get back to and finish it at some point.

Being less sleepy, I can leave another comment.

In perfect honesty, I think trying make an ordered system into which all the different kinds of magic will fit into is an attempt at something that none of it was ever intended or designed to accomplish. Blizzard makes these things up as they need them (case in point: Monks, obviously wielding some kind of supernatural force, but completely different from everything else we've seen so far) and it's blind optimism to think that writers have set in stone how magic actually functions in the setting.

For the sake of sanity, It's perhaps better not to think too hard about how all the magic in the setting fits together, and just consider each class in isolation for the most part. The shadow magic used by priests? consider it based on priest abilities and lore examples of people using it specifically only. Necromancy? Same. Shamanism? Same.

A good description of any magic, anywhere, is anything that exceeds our ability to comprehend the workings of, or "Magic isn't logical"

Saevir wrote:an attempt at something that none of it was ever intended or designed to accomplish.

That doesn't mean that it's fun to think about and play with, expanding upon existing lore as a realm or community. Look at the chapter, basically a whole new belief system based on the light, entirely community based and accepted as "Defias Brotherhood canon".

That's cool, isn't it?

To me that seems like one of the things that could make role-playing very exciting.

Thinking about starting an IC journal that describes my Gilneans exploration into the shadowed arts and essentially communicates her trying to make scientific sense of it.

Delidah / Scuzy wrote:

Saevir wrote:an attempt at something that none of it was ever intended or designed to accomplish.

That doesn't mean that it's fun to think about and play with, expanding upon existing lore as a realm or community. Look at the chapter, basically a whole new belief system based on the light, entirely community based and accepted as "Defias Brotherhood canon".

That's cool, isn't it?

To me that seems like one of the things that could make role-playing very exciting.

Sure, the magic system can be made into something sensible if we don't stick to what is canon only, but then you'd have to get everyone roleplaying a magic-using character on the server to agree on the same system (one unlikely to be identical to the one each person was thinking of when they created their character).

Your best bet for that would be to gather apprentices so it spreads.

But there are more than one way to each type of magic anyway

At the end of the day, whatever theories we come up with will remain to be speculations or simply personal points of view as experienced through RP. That's good in a sense, because it allows creativity and imagination to run wild, as well as discussions in terms of community activity. Not everyone will agree with everyone however. People should keep an open mind for different opinions since, like already mentioned in this thread, Blizzard most likely never went as far as to ponder about it all in such a detailed level.

Regarding Drustai’s definitions of Light preserving life, Shadow slowly killing you and Shadow being selfish. By that reasoning a learned person could think “Light keeps me alive and Shadow kills me. I want to live hence I go with the Light.” I’d say that is a selfish reasoning which is the antithesis (according to Drustai) of the Light. It could be argued that his reasoning would lead him on the path of Shadow but then it takes out the factors of personal belief and action (performing the correct rites). Following that reasoning there would be a force in the universe that decides if a person is a follower of Light and Shadow, making the choices people make irrelevant, thus nullifying free will. Does that mean, from Drustai’s point of view, that the Warcraft universe is deterministic? All in all it’s a wonderful pool of contradictions that I would like to lay at Blizzard’s feet.

I’ve always viewed warlocks as being dabblers in three types of magic. There is the fel magic which includes demonology, fire magic which includes incinerate and immolate and shadow where you have your curses and the all-powerful shadowbolt. A few spells overlap like Chaos Bolt and Seed of Corruption but I would say that is the result of a warlock’s conscious and wilful experimentation to further empower his spells. I even think there is a snippet about it in the Warcraft RPG core book or Magic and Mayhem that any arcane spell can be infused with fel magic to make them more powerful. So the only truly “warlocky” magic that warlocks practice is demonology.

As for countering negative effects of necromancy and other deteriorating magic, take it from others. Omnomnom. Or race against time to reach apotheosis.

Saevir wrote:but then you'd have to get everyone roleplaying a magic-using character on the server to agree on the same system.

You can have different interpretations. Just think the world is not "advanced" enough to truly understand the mechanics and meaning behind everything, but they sure as hell try! Resulting in a bunch of different view points and interpretations.

For example, a character could observe a shaman cast a fireball. Then a mage cast a fireball. That character could conclude from that that they share a magical source. The character could very much be wrong about that (very likely) but still believe for him or herself that that is the truth. It could create a fun dynamic between different characters with different viewpoints, and maybe one could even be able to sway the other in believing in their observations.

I imagine the chapter started in a similar way. One character preaching a certain interpretation of faith (probably backed up by a guild), and other characters followed. It's all about the interactions you have with different players.

Aleric wrote:I’ve always viewed warlocks as being dabblers in three types of magic. There is the fel magic which includes demonology, fire magic which includes incinerate and immolate and shadow where you have your curses and the all-powerful shadowbolt.

I would say that "fire" is a result of the spell cast, and can be fueled by a range of different sources (Fel, Arcane, Holy, Elemental).

Delidah / Scuzy wrote:

Aleric wrote:I’ve always viewed warlocks as being dabblers in three types of magic. There is the fel magic which includes demonology, fire magic which includes incinerate and immolate and shadow where you have your curses and the all-powerful shadowbolt.

I would say that "fire" is a result of the spell cast, and can be fueled by a range of different sources (Fel, Arcane, Holy, Elemental).

Do you mean like fire bolt would really be Destructive Bolt with the subtype fire?