So for the past few days I've been mulling over ways to flesh out my characters' wiki pages, and as I thought about Glacir's story, I found myself thinking about the different schools and methods of spell casting, and what factors contribute to a spell's power and/or a person's affinity for certain methods. I understand the basic differences between the schools, but want to toss a few personal thoughts and see if you guys agree/disagree, and/or have lore to prove/disprove my thoughts.
First I'd like to discuss Glacir's situation specifically. He's studied the main four schools of magic (Conjury, Thaumaturgy, Arcanism, and Astrology) but has an easier time grasping Arcanism and Astrology compared to the other two. My reasoning is that those two schools are more formulaic; rooted in numbers, math, and logic. Arcanism is all about the formulas and patterns written in the books, and Astrology is tracking the stars and constellations to draw upon the powers from the six gates which is all angles, spheres, geometry, etc. Where as I see Thaumaturgy and Conjury being more free-form, just imagine the spell and it will be done. I'm not sure if that's exactly the best way to compare them, but that's my reasoning for Glacir's greater understanding of certain forms of spells.
This part is more in general, to make sure I understand spells properly (and for a secret event idea I've been mulling over that hinges on part of this being confirmed). The way I see it spells, and their strength, is dependent on a number of factors:
First I'd like to discuss Glacir's situation specifically. He's studied the main four schools of magic (Conjury, Thaumaturgy, Arcanism, and Astrology) but has an easier time grasping Arcanism and Astrology compared to the other two. My reasoning is that those two schools are more formulaic; rooted in numbers, math, and logic. Arcanism is all about the formulas and patterns written in the books, and Astrology is tracking the stars and constellations to draw upon the powers from the six gates which is all angles, spheres, geometry, etc. Where as I see Thaumaturgy and Conjury being more free-form, just imagine the spell and it will be done. I'm not sure if that's exactly the best way to compare them, but that's my reasoning for Glacir's greater understanding of certain forms of spells.
This part is more in general, to make sure I understand spells properly (and for a secret event idea I've been mulling over that hinges on part of this being confirmed). The way I see it spells, and their strength, is dependent on a number of factors:
- Knowledge - If you don't understand how a spell works, you're not going to be able to cast it, but if you master it you can bring out its full potential.
- School of Magic - I'm sure a Conjurer could make ice and fire if they had elementals aiding them, but they focus on the less destructive elements, so it's harder/impossible for them to do it.
- Aether Source and Quantity - Obviously each school draws from a different source, but if you either don't have access to it or don't have enough to draw from, your spells will fail, and reverse the more you have the stronger they become.
- Focus/Weapon - This is the one I'm most interested in for now. I know different materials channel different spells better (Bone/metal makes good thaumaturgy tool, wood for conjury, etc.). What I'm wondering is: how does a lower-grade focus influence spells. Does it limit the aether that can be used, or is it just if you try to use more than it can handle, the tool will break and your spell most likely explode in your face?