Out of curiosity, when you're reading a LitRPG where magic is happening, do you prefer it to work like an MMO where it basically comes down to "I spend X manna and the spell happens," or more of a table top gaming approach where the characters have to do something in the game to make it happen be it a ritual, speaking words of power, or an intricate hand gesture etc.? I was just writing a new kind of magic in my book when it hit me how different the two styles are. I can see making an argument for either. The first, of course, is more like what we're used to dealing with in an MMO, but with the latter within the context of full immersion VR, also makes sense in terms of giving the world depth and realism. What do you all think?
Personally, either works for me if it's presented well and goes with the rest of the story's game system. However, my preference is sort of a mixture of both? I like the idea of the MC/Caster having the limits of a mana pool and having a casting time (for certain spells) or a channeling timer so the magic isn't too overpowered. So basically I like to have the MMO feel complete with the 'animations' (i.e. - moving their arms, etc.). However, depending on the type of magic, having the intricate ritual is actually pretty cool as well, as well as having spell components like in D&D and they used to have in WoW (back in the days before streamlining). I'm not a huge fan (for LitRPG, etc.) of having the "can only cast x amount of spells per day" and prefer the mana pool to that, although exceptions are made for really powerful spells, like "Summon Greater Beast" or something that is clearly extremely strong in the setting. And I apologize if I'm not making a lot of sense. It's a really good question though and I had to think and try and organize my thoughts.
I don't mind as long as it's presented well (and consistently), and as long as there is an explicitly-stated cost, like mana, to differentiate it from traditional fantasy. And I like each spell to be different, like this one is 'expensive', but has a short cast time (or not-so-intricate gestures), etc., so characters will have to choose wisely which one to use in each situation, which provides more 'game-y-ness' to the story.
I don't mind either so long as it makes sense within the narrative. The thing about magic is that it can be used as an excuse for almost anything. The typical "A wizard did it" was made into a punchline for a reason. Also my personal punchline "because Magik-k-k-k-k-k-keh!". My favorite is actually a hard magical system where the rules are placed front and center for the reader. Want to control the elements? Then you need to measure your affinity towards them and the ones that rise to the top are the ones you'll control. further down the line as your skill goes up you can combine say fire and earth to create glass for crafting and so on. I tend to drop books that relay too heavily on mysticism. The MC meditated for five minutes and he tapped into the source code and can now do X function that usually requires you to be a different class/race and at the top of the pyramid to preform... shove off! I had to google this but I was reminded of these two videos regarding soft and hard magical systems.
In a vacuum, I prefer more detailed (closer to standard Fantasy, broadly speaking, although of course the cooler the details, the better). I think Windfall hits the nail on the head, though, the key being "game-y-ness" (which usually, I believe, has to be strongly rooted in choice-y-ness, as in: character has to choose between A and B, the choice not being trivial, both choices having pros and cons; ideally with layers of such choices, like "I gotta decide which spell to learn", later "I gotta decide which spell to cast", etc). Last but not least, something that is a bit of a deal-killer for me is when some area of the game (say, Melee Combat) is a lot more (or less) detailed than other (say, Magic). For example: if the Warrior does extremely complex movements, described in great detail (Blocks with hilt of sword, then sweeps with feet, etc), while the Mage just throws a fireball... dunno, there is something not quite right (in my personal and completely subjective opinion). I give no guarantees of the above making any sense, by the way, but typing is cheap I'm afraid! =)
I like mana pools BUT most authors in LitRPG dont seem to understand how to do mana pools. Mana pools arent banks the entire point is that they limit you by yourself mages are insanely powerful regardless of magic rule so they have to be limited by something they cant manipulate with magic that is usualy themselves or the immediate environment Ie. extracting latent mana from the air or from the self. The problem with this is when authors let there characters carry around vast of mana they "found" or "bought" it just makes this system ment to limit give them near infinite power as a general rule a mana pool should stay limited if they grow with the character thats fine but they should never grow beyond the character even if this is accomplished by a simple channeling limit.
