[Dain]

(Oops! As usual, I get impatient and miss a few pages. So...as of the end of the first page):

I think you've eventually happened upon the point I wanted to make in response to Burrahobbit's earlier comments about spells: even though Gandalf speaks some words pertaining to a spell he knows, if Sam said the same words would he be able to hold off the Balrog? Obviously not.

So rather than magic/spell-lore being something study-able by everyone, I see it more like learning different ways of focusing your powers (oops, that's a loaded term here). For example, if Gandalf once knew every door-opening spell, perhaps what he studied wasn't just the words, but different ways of using his innate ability to "make things open," each determined by who made the magical door in the first place and how they shaped their magic. Sort of like knowing how to pick various types of lock, in a way...

(After having read the 2nd and 3rd pages):

I'm confused about what people see as "learned" sorcery or magic. Are we just thinking incatations, potions and spells? Or is it rather learning how to use your "power" to do specific things, so that the sorceror would be harnessing an already existant power that was in themselves, rather than just in the words of the spell. That seems relavant to me, anyway...

As you might be able to tell, I've been thinking about magic lately. Actually, it's in relation to the new LotR RPG (seeing that some people have mentioned D&D here). They still don't want to completely limit players from using magic, of course, and while they do a fairly good job of keeping the magic very "Tolkien", they do allow men to become wizards, which is a bit wrong. Men (and Hobbits) seem to be the one race precluded from magic, except for the sorcerers (Nazgul, Nouth of Sauron) and perhaps other Numenorians.

[ March 25, 2003: Message edited by: Dain ]