What changes would have to occur for HPverse-style magic to work here? Total rewrite? Minor tweaks? Somewhere in between?
It's up to you, but if the 'new' forces could not be produced or used abiotically then it would be up to the author to mention them. No difference would be observed on the cosmic scale or any scale without the presence of magical organisms. It would be of no consequence to avoid mentioning the source of power but if you did then people would be picking apart the explanation. If the forces interacted with the universe naturally (in the absence and presence of life) though it would be very interesting.What changes would have to occur for HPverse-style magic to work here? Total rewrite? Minor tweaks? Somewhere in between?
My personal favorite is the accessing of another universe with slightly different laws of physics, magic is created when our universe interfaces with another universe. My personal opinion is that Superman is in fact an alien from another universe. His superpowers arise from the interactions of the exotic universe that is Superman's body interfacing with the normal universe we live in. How else could he survive in the heart of a star? Star Wars didn't happen in a Galaxy Far Far Away... It happened in a wholly different universe where sound travels through space and light-speed is fast enough to get you from one point in that galaxy to another in just a few hours.I have none either, but if somebody comes up with a way I've got a fiver that it includes the word "quantum".
The thread question is specifically the source of a wizards power. The worldbuilding of the books does contain many rules about the magic (though the worldbuilding itself is weak in favour of entertainment, which is by no means necessarily a bad thing), for instance:
But no where do we get an inclination of why these things work. To my knowledge there's no part of the mythology that accounts for what the difference is between wizards and muggles, where the energy comes from to power spells, why spellcasting actions lead to the consequences they do etc. Contrast that to fantasy such as the KingKiller Chronicle or anything by Brandon Sanderson where all parts of magic have explanations for how and why they work within that universes rules.
- Ability to use it is mostly inherited in some manner
- It requires specific artefacts (wands, potions etc) to work properly
- Performing spells almost always requires specific words to be clearly said/thought along with appropriate wand movements
This isn't necessarily a good or bad thing. Some fiction works well with having the science of magic set out and explained (the discovery is often a good part of the plot). For others it's unnessary and not the focus of the story (like LOTR that had very loose mythology on what magic was, let alone how it worked).
If you click the reply button on someone's post a copy of that post is automatically quoted for you. If you hit the quote button the forum software adds the quote to a list of quotes. If you click "insert quotes" in the bottom left of the text box you can review all quotes in that list and remove them as needed,
I'd get your money back, as they don't appear to have taught you anything useful.What I said came from teachings in the esoteric schools that I'm privy to.
The rules of nature would have to have substantial additions and changes. Even basic conservation laws would change and may or may not even hold in all situations.What changes would have to occur for HPverse-style magic to work here? Total rewrite? Minor tweaks? Somewhere in between?
That's always been the problem with magic, it requires a different set of laws (and thus a different universe) to work. Sadly, that makes real magicians as rare as qualified unicorn riders.The rules of nature would have to have substantial additions and changes. Even basic conservation laws would change and may or may not even hold in all situations.
The Sami in Northern Scandinavia are a shamanic culture (well were, now they're just as Lutheran as everyone else in Scandinavia). Their abilities as sorcerers and wizards were known as far away as England during the Dark Ages. In the case of the Sami, sorcerous ability is inherited. This has always implied that there must be some genetic proclivity to sorcery. So Harry Potter has some real-life precedents in this particular matter.Ability to use it is mostly inherited in some manner
The books are graduated so that the reader matures with the writing style, reading the book that is equivalent to their age as they keep pace with Harry. Of course that doesn't work out any more, kids demand to read as many of the Potter books as they can. Good way to get kids back into actual reading. As for writing style, The Deathly Hallows pulls very few punches, including killing off a few main characters. It's also her longest book. I read Harry Potter's and the Philosopher's Stone in one day.The author of Harry Potter has billions of dollars of money already. Has anyone read her book? I still haven't.. is the English she used kinda poetry? I mean is her English extraordinary good.. or just like other writers? I want to write fictions too but don't have any skills to write... why is she so good.. does she answer what is the source of power of wizard in the potter universe? If I have to read one of her books only to see her writing style.. what book volume should that be?
I was in my fifties. My then-wife, Brenda, was studying to be a children's librarian and wanted someone she could argue about the books with.I started to read the series when I was 11 and if I had not done this I do not think I would appreciate reading as much as I do now. It is not like poetry cube137, but in my opinion the series is amazing. The source of power is never mentioned.
Depends on what King is writing. Rowling writes for young people, so the prose isn't dense. King can be rather convoluted in his writing, or dead simple, as the plot requires.How's her writing style compared to Stephen King? English is not my normal language so I have difficulty with combining euphonious sounding words. I think I want to read one novel now to learn how they write. I have difficulty even combining conversation words. My rhythm is just so harsh sounding.
For people whose natural or first language is English. Can you also write like Rowling? Or is there something special in her writing or is it just normal English? Is what make her bestselling author because of her writing style or her story?Depends on what King is writing. Rowling writes for young people, so the prose isn't dense. King can be rather convoluted in his writing, or dead simple, as the plot requires.
Maybe Rowling should have a contest where the readers especially young children should try to cook up explanations of the source of the power. It will surely be an exercise in creativity. Also in this world where you are not sure of anything anymore. Not bad to hear different explanations. In year 1850. If you would speak about the Big Bang.. you would be put in mad house. Etc.Cube137 I think that perhaps J. K. Rowling does not explain the source of the power because she wanted to leave it up to the reader to imagine or maybe she did not want to constantly explain to people the details or have people arguing with her about the source of power. It is just do hard to FULLY (as people would prefer it) explain the source.