A letter to Murray

[wyrdwritere]

Salutations Professor Mag’Nesson

 

As visiting proctor of your master’s trial, I’m sure you have been acclaimed a fellow of the Penteveral–only a fool would argue after your display of proficiency.  Your ritual working was wonderfully concise and organized, and no doubt you handled the folderol of ‘spell slots’ with like capability.

 

But I do not write now to speak of arcane practice, but arcane theory. It has been clear since the first spell that we exist on a living intelligent world, which responds to our expressed desires—but expressed how?  Does our merely wanting something have some influence on Araman? Must we speak, or can we gesture, or dance, or write? And what happens, as you put it during your examination, when we do nothing? What other influences predominate? Is there a resting state for the world when there are no influences at all?

 

This is why I insisted upon such a thorough exhibition of your novel diffractive method for detecting arcane effluvia:  It offers a new way of exploring the question of an uninfluenced world.  (I have never considering using the scattering of light passing through gems in this way– nor has any other arcane philosopher I know of. What is the chain of thinking that led you detect magic in such a curious manner?)

 

Catching an intersecting breeze, have you given any thought to extending your approach to more focused divinations?  The operation commonly (laughably) known as “Identity” would be more honestly known as “Catalog”.  It serves well enough to help us recognize enchantments based in established arcana pragmatica, but leaves much to be desired with novel effects or unique items.

 

The Shapers have been gone for decades, yet the world remains molded to their appetites.  They never meant for us to understand their secrets. There is no compendium with answers anywhere unless we make it, and lives may hang in the balance if we cannot come to terms with the uncanny relics of our ancient oppressors.

 

If you pursue this research, I think the new curator at the Arcanade might be a useful collaborator.  I begin to hope that sharp young minds such as yours may far advance our art. If a dull old one such as mine can help, please do write back.

 

 

Yours collegially,

“The Magician” Riga

 

 

P.S. I think the central question of arcane natural philosophy, especially for spell casters like us, is “Who are we talking to?”  Do you agree?

 

R