7 Comments
User's avatar
Jay Logan's avatar

I call all my people with physical magic "wizards" though my exception to it is that I have a category called "battle mage" though only as a subset. Seers are a type of wizard (according to most other wizards), though typical people do not call them that (or think of them as such) - it is more of a cultural thing. My reasoning is that all "wizards" inherit their magic, but the specific magic ability is based on their experiences/education that cause them to develop in their specific ability. The simplicity of this magic system makes it easier keep track of what people are while allowing a great diversity of abilities.

The inheritance part though, is very complex, but that I leave for a long article.

But the naming remains rigid, not variable, in order to avoid confusion - which I agree is necessary to make the story easier for the reader.

Expand full comment
Mary Catelli's avatar

Sounds like an excellent setup!

Expand full comment
A.C. Cargill, All-Human Author's avatar

I skimmed down to your final paragraph. Have to agree with that premise. We can get too carried away with our vocabulary. We're not writing thesauri or word-a-day lessons. We're writing fiction. And a good writer can make it work.

Expand full comment
Mary Catelli's avatar

The words are there for the story and not the story for the words.

Expand full comment
A.C. Cargill, All-Human Author's avatar

So very true.

Expand full comment
Sintra E'Drien's avatar

Ah, but would JRR agree? (Actually, I think he would, but still . . . )

Expand full comment
Mary Catelli's avatar

He used half a dozen terms *in different languages of his own devising*. Which languages were all built into the world, and many things had more than one term.

Expand full comment