Notes on Diverse Magicka
Legatus Pax Sytan Fiac
This is a series dedicated to informing those with limited or non-extant abilities in arcana on the various forms of magic and their uses. This is not intended as an in depth study, nor does it go into all details. For many, the usage of leylines or nodes will never manifest, nor will the finesse to guide the blood magicka explicitly.
This discourse will cover the concepts of similarities and differences among the branches, and peel back some of the mysteries.
The first section will cover my specialties of hematurgy and necromancy.
The second will cover natural magicka.
The third will touch on the psionic talents.
The fourth will delve into the divine controversy.
The fifth will touch upon the delicate and complex question of void.
It is to be hoped that the interested student will find the more technical treatises on the above topics more readily accessible for this humble offering. Any errors or elisions in this work must be attributed to the difficulty of enumerating in plain language what becomes a nearly reflexive, intuitive impulse for the grand adept.
In part one, we compared and contrasted hematurgy and necromancy. Part two focused on hematurgy. Part three, therefore, is on the necromantic arts.
Necromancy relies on subjugation and animation for its workings, which is precisely what conjuring an elemental requires. The difference lies in the power source. The necromancer relies on the power of pain and blood, as they are calling dead flesh to move again, and like calls to like - blood responds to blood.
As contrast, an elemental conjurer calls on their own power, or the power of lay lines and nodes. Nearly all other elements are shared.
Dead flesh has no motivator force to give it direction. Subjugation, or the forcing of will upon a thing, is the key first step. With no will to maintain movement, all energies fed to an undead thrall soon dissipate.
There is always some challenge at this, as the original inhabitant of the body can still influence how the flesh responds - or in most cases doesn't - especially if the inhabitant is a ghost. If the working is vital, going out of the proximity of the ghost can assist matters, as can banishing or appeasing it.
In certain rare cases, ghost and body can be brought back together and instill life once again, though this is so rare as to have no known causal factors.
What is known, however, is that ghosts do not hold well to flesh that was not their own very easily, and any stresses can break a binding.
Animation, or kineticism, is the other end of the necromantic working. Many mages are capable of such, and again the difference is power source.
Even with a will, undead flesh still does not wish to move. It will need direction at every point. Some necromancers will link this to their thought, and others will 'teach' certain movements and convey special instructions from there.
Which ever way direction is given, animation is thus bestowed, completing the familiar.
In parts one and two, ritual was mentioned. Because the natural order of magic and motion is broken in working with the dead, a full ritual is not just necessary, but required. The power needs explicit direction and shape that intention cannot bestow.
The symbols and representations guide the shaping even as much as a Druid or shaman's magic might. Without, the least you get is wasted time, and the worst is a thrall that tries to kill you. Rare cases exist where the unattached thrall is docile and accepts no commands, though one can guess the majority of these are unreported.