(EDIT: My use of the word Holy/Unholy seems to have sparked a lolgical debate about lore and the morality of Daedra and Aedra. I'm going to assume that most of you know that holy magic is reffering to white sparkly glowy magic that helps you and destroys nasty things and unholy is dark spooky magic that hurts people. Something other than Fire, Lightning and Ice anyone? Must we be religious fundamentalists about this subject?)

(EDIT: Also if you have a problem with Holy/Unholy magic making some sort of moral distinction that shouldent be there, read the rest of the thread before posting, I address a solution to this.)

The last thread I did was on a Clerics guild/Temple faction and the idea was pretty well recieved. The whole Holy/Unholy concept is always one of my favorite parts of RPGs. But then that raises another question for me... Should there be Holy and Unholy magic in Skyrim? It's a curious subject, because the entire concept seems to be either absent from The Elder Scrolls universe, or very fuzzy.

We have Daedric magic (aka Conjuration) which on its face seems demonic, yet in much of TES lore it says that Daedra are just otherworldly beings and some of them are worshipped as "holy". You would think that Conjuration would be shunned just as much as Necromancy if it were "Unholy". It's also interesting that in Oblivion, Conjuration seems so closely tied to Daedra, yet you can summon a bear. So a bear is a Daedra? That seems more like Druidry to me. Now, I'm not against the summoning of bears or other critters, but if Conjuration is just a neutral term for "Summoning things" then it shoulden't be exclusively linked to the concept of Daedra and other planes. Another strange thing about Conjuration is, it has one of the holiest of spells in it. Turn Undead. Which has always been a spell exclusive to Clerical magic. Making the whole concept of the school just a little bit more fuzzy and confusing.

We have Necromancy, which is a mysterious school of magic which never seems to be usable. And it sounds like a lot of work to find a corpse and do a necrotic ritual to raise a zombie when you can just summon one from thin air with Conjuration. (At least, in Oblivion you could.) And so far in Skyrim it doesn't seem like it's going to be possible to use.

The closest thing to Holy magic is Restoration, which has always had a benevolent feel to it. To me Holy magic has always been heals, enhancements, cleansing, shields, and spells that do extra damage to malevolent creatures like Undead and Demons. In Oblivion all of these things exist in Restoration except shields (neutral in alteration) and spells that do extra damage to evil. Yet at the same time life-draining spells do exist in restoration, which seems like necromancy to me. (In fact alot of Vampires and necromancers used life steals in Oblivion because it was so fitting.)

A common assumption is that Holy magic has to be tied down to gods. This isn't the case in my opinion. Maybe the term "light magic" should be used instead. Whether gods are involved in the lore or not, to me holy/light magic has always meant benevolence. Regardless I would like it if the Aedra played a bigger part in Skyrim and future games. Daedra sure as hell seem real but the Aedra in Oblivion seem like mythological characters. I mean come on... TES is supposed to be based in a world of Demons and Gods right? Well then why does it seem like only the Daedra are real? Lets see the Gods make some appearances, or maybe makes some lesser Aedra that we can summon? Lets spice this up a little bit.

I have three ideas. The first one is more farfetched because it would involve alot more arranging.

1. Seperate the schools of magic by concept rather than what they do.

Example:
Holy magic: Heal, Cleanse, Turn Undead, Fortify Attributes, Protection, Light etc.
Unholy Magic (Necromancy!!): Drain Life, Summon Zombie, Summon Skeleton, Summon Liche etc.
Elemental Magic: Fireball, Lightning, Summon Fire Atronoch, etc.

2. Keep the schools of magic the same but add holy and unholy types of magic that is clearly distinct from neutral forms of magic

Example:
Destruction: Fire damage spells, Lightning Damage spells, Holy Damage spells (Extra damage to evil), Unholy Damage spells (Drains life from the living)
Conjuration: Summon woodland creature, summon daedric creature, summon undead creature, summon divine creature, etc. (And leave out the exclusive ties to Daedra)
Alteration: Fire shield, Holy shield, Unholy Shield etc.

3. Add Necromancy for unholy and make Restoration the designated "Holy magic" school by allowing Healing spells to deal damage and manipulate undead (since they are the opposite of life)

Example:
Necromancy: Drain Life, debuffs etc.
Restoration: Heal spell (Heals 6 every 2 seconds on touch or does 6 damage to undead every 2 seconds on touch)

Aside from the poll, what do you think of the ideas I purpose?

What is holy to the altmer is utter blasphemy to the nords. Keep holy and unholy classifications out, and keep in classifications of what the spells do. As a side note, in reality, magical skill is just the ability to use magicka and manipulate the environment. The most powerful of mages do not see classifications, for all the schools are interconnected in one way.

EDIT: And necromancy isn't evil, it's only the preparation of reanimation of dead bodies, not svcking life, making people weak, or things of that sort.

"What is holy to the altmer is utter blasphemy to the nords." is a reference to lore and religion not a form of magic. Magic that does holy damage, hurts undead, demons, vampires. Unholy magic, drains from the living? I don't think for a second that you don't get where I'm coming from. It doesn't matter what god a person invokes to smite the enemy or what flavor of ritual the necromancer performs. I'm talking about concepts of magic that seem to be absent or fuzzy in the current lore.

I did write quite a book up there, but making a distinction between Evil schools of magic and Good schools of magic was only one of my ideas. Did you not see the others? One of them was just to make restoration (life magic) damage undead (the opposite of life).

I knew that my use of the word "Holy" instead of "Light" and "Dark" would probably cause alot of confusion.

The concepts of magic are devoid of "THIS IS EVIL, HAR HAR HAR" and "This is holy, with kittens and other good things."

Magic is the manipulation of magicka into doing something. It's neither holy, nor unholy, just a tool.

• Restoration is about affecting a body (yours or someone else's) through physical body manipulation.
  
• Alteration alters matter, ranging from being soft, hard, heavy, light, etc.
  
• Illusion magic is the manipulation of another person's mind.
  
• Conjuration is the art of summoning one thing elsewhere to where you are, often seen for the purposes of binding and transporting a daedroth to the realm of Mundus temporarily.
  
• Destruction is about creating hostile conditions into an offensive weapon, and releasing it in the form of fire, lightening, ice, or pure magicka.
  
• Mysticism....has been a misc area. It's been, more or less, of a throw away category for spells that do not fit the other categories above.

It's all very, well, scientific in their classifications. But, the schools of magic are classifications for beginner magical users to group classifications of manipulation into categories.

According to who? You?

Are you not familiar with D&D and the countless other games with lores that inspired TES, that had Warlocks, Necromancers, Demonologist, that got their magic from purely malevolent forces and Clerics, Monks, Priests who got theirs from Divine beings?

Seriously. I see that you don't want the concepts in TES but don't say that "Magic isn't about Good and Evil" when in 90% of all RPGs (And kinda sorta in TES), it is. Lets not forget that there are things called "Aedra" that supposidly have divine power (They just don't flash it much)

Yeah, I don't like it. And not according to me, but the lore in this game. Just because everyone else has holy and unholy magic, doesn't mean TES has to.

Plus, the classifications are all bogus to begin with anyway. The use of magic is the ability to manipulate the world around you, using magicka that leaks from the holes in the sky, known as the stars and the sun. Banishing a physical undead would be breaking its magical bonds that keep it animated, while banishing a ghost or daedroth would be reverse conjuration. It's not holy magic, it's about knowing that the physical undead are just magically reanimated bones and flesh, practically puppets, and that daedroth can have their ties to Mundus severed and be banished to their realm again. It's not about harming evil through good magic, it's about manipulating magic, which doesn't have a preference if you are good or evil.

yeah but...Magick in TES doesnt come from Maligned forces or divine beings save for Magnus who isnt Good/Bad...its a natural part of existence the only ones you can consider..."holy" as an opposition to the "darkforces" are Kyn and Varmina...and they are Aedra/Daedra alike. you come off with a tad shade of ignorance since the Aedra/Daedra aren't viewed as Good/bad...so why would magick?

This would probably turn in a debate on the hypothetical philosophy of magic in games if it rolled on too long.

Look the point is, there is Good and Evil in TES (Don't say good is point of view like some sith lord, I'm not going to debate moral with anyone to prove a point)

If undead are considered evil (Flesh eating monsters that do the will of their masters who generally don't have much nice in mind.) then what would an Aedra most likely grant his follower? The ability to banish the undead. You can get into this "Science of magic (LOL)" all you want and say that it's not "Holy" it's really just "Reverse Animation" but thats just breaking immersion down into a mundane and bland way of viewing it.

Did you know there are already a few open threads regarding Necromancy?

The OP exhibits some interesting ideas, in a well thought-out presentation.

I would support the concept of a deity granting certain boons to worthy followers.

I read the OP's thread about temples and religious factions, and do fully support that idea.

Necromancy, though, is most certainly against the morals and ethics of many... That's why it is frowned upon, and I agree with the frowning....

Hmm does holy and unholy magic belong to ES? No

Is that WoW? No

Is this thread stupid and is lore-ra[x]ing? Yes



Guilty! Nasty Daedra will come and get you when you sleep!
bliviongate:

Gave it roots, sure. That doesn't mean it's a clone.

Magicka filters down from the sun and stars (which are holes in space) that Magnus and the Magna Ge left when they fled the creation of the world at the last second, and is used to manipulate matter. Characters in the backstory separated it into categories to teach it to beginners. Diavath Fyr or Mannimarco would not think of spells as from a school, because they were born before such distinctions existed.

Magic isn't about Good and Evil in TES either. It's just about magic. And yes, there are things called Aedra. One of them is the game's primary antagonist. Aedra are just the gods who were tricked into sacrificing parts of themselves to make the world, and Daedra were not. Aedra are not absolute, or good, or bad. They are just Other, same as Daedra, who are not absolute on Nirn but are omnipotent within their own Realms. Bethesda doesn't care that in the 90% of RPGs they're better than the writers decided to be simplistic enough to apply an absolute moral label to everything.

EDIT: Now different groups of characters trying to TELL you that certain spells were good or evil, sure. That's right and proper. But I want no absolutes.

I knew this thread would be a little more contraversial, and would probably end up showing me that I don't know ALL of TES lore. lol

What this has boiled down to is "Should there be holy or unholy magic in Skyrim?" Has morphed into "Is there Good and Evil in TES?" which could only be resolved by "Is there Good and Evil at all?"

But I think most of us get the jist of a form of light/holy/spiritual magic, and it's opposite. That's the question of the thread. I guess I shoulden't of went too deep into lore because that's the developers job to maintain.

Well see, I don't think that there should be a gameplay morality. Not in magic or anywhere else. I think there should be a story morality, where if you're an outlaw, people distrust you because that's real and natural. I think that, yes, there should be certain factions, perhaps the Synod, a religious magical faction, who frowns upon conjuration and necromancy, but the College should view them as simply "whats," academic ideas to be examined. It'd be a source of story conflict, and such. I just think the phrasing of the holy/unholy, which in modern parlance is very much tied to moral discourse, was the wrong way to frame the discussion.

Okay okay.. I guess it is true, words are extremely decieving...

I won't use Holy anymore. Or even Light. It seems people have alot of baggage attached to them.

Should there be a type of magic that is specifically good at destroying undead and other forms of "evil" (not absolute, just evil as in there is no way you're going to walk up to these "evil things and shake their hands).

Fire, lightning, frost. Great. Earlier in this thread a guy accused me of trying to say the TES should clone other games. But I'll be damned if fire lightning and frost isn't copying somebody out there.

How about something different? "Light/Holy/Unholy/Dark" was one idea, because it happens to be my favorite flavor of magic. Inorite?

Why would magic be holy/unholy? Light or Dark? Petty moralizations of Magnus' gift don't belong in Skyrim.


As Hellmouth has explained, the schools are a categorization created by the mages guild, and magic in TES isn't really divisible by morality. As for summoning bears, game mechanics.


There's a reason for the difference. The Aedra sacrificed parts of themselves to make the mortal world, which is the house of SIthis. The Mortal world is limited, and the Aedra, being a part of it, are limited in turn. The Daedra did not sacrifice parts of themselves to create Mundus, and thus they are free to roam Oblivion and build their realms out of Aetherial refuse. The Gods need a champion to act, the Daedra, need only an invitation.


Good and Evil are perspectives.
Only Arkay has a real hard-on about the life/death thing, but that's because he's the god of life and death. He doesn't like undeath because he wants your ass in the grave. Outside of Arkay, the Daedric Prince Meridia is known for her dislike of Necromancers and the undead, and while her sphere is apparently "obscured," she is associated with "life energies."

This is the heart of the issue. But I'm here to discuss a form of magic, not moral philosophy. Okay, call it "Spirit" magic. It's not objectively "Good" or "Evil" but it works very well against things like Zombies and Demons that apparently have no capability of conscious thought or compassion and live exclusively to devour and burn the flesh of the living.

If you want my view on Good and Evil go read Sam Harris's "The Moral Landscape". Until then, I think everyone understands what I meant by "Holy" magic. I want no "absolutes".

The fact that you like the light/dark dichotomy does not mean that it fits the lore at all. You know what undead are weak against? Fire. Daedra? Lightning (generally). Good and evil definitely are relative concepts in TES as well. The Dunmer consider necromancy to be abhorrent and yet they practice a form of it themselves, binding less honorable members of their families into service as undead tomb guardians for a time to protect the interred.

Daedroth and undead do not operate in the same moral field. The undead are either puppets of some mage playing around with dead bodies, or spirits who have gone insane due to not being in the Dreamsleeve, where the dead belong. The lesser daedra are servants of the princes, and only appear on Mundus when a mage binds one. And there are no demons, nor a hell, nor a heaven (though many mortals seem to believe the Aetherius is their heaven).

A spell that'd work well on an undead would not work well on a daedroth, and vice versa (unless one wants to make the case with what I've said way above earlier). One is magically reanimated bones/flesh or an insane spirits, and the other is a being who serves the princes and lives in Oblivion (which isn't hell).

Arkay would have a major hang-up with undead, and therefore, would likely give you a spell that'd release a spirit back to the Dreamsleeve or halt the magics keeping a pile of bones from moving anymore. However, his power wouldn't do [censored] with the daedra, as they're not undead. You'd rather hope you have Scourge instead, a weapon made from Malacath, which was made specifically to banish daedra (and yet, he's a daedric prince!).

What's all this talk about Demons?

I definitely think that certain types of creatures should be weak to certain types of magic. Like frost Atronachs and Draugr being weak to fire. But there should be a clear reason for it, namedly frost atronachs being made of ice and Draugr skin being a lot like rough parchment. While TES has a lot of metaphysical background stuff, sometimes it, too, can work with the patently obvious. So if you want damage bonuses, just go with your gut and avoid using the frost spell on the frost atronach.

And beyond gameplay, the story should be through perspectives. In Oblivion, you could only work with one perspective on Necromancy but there were alternates. In Morrowind, a good half the magical cast were necromancers of one sort or another.

EDIT: And I'm gonna have to second Ravanger on this one, what demons? Generally, demons are what ignorant people or propagandists call Daedra.

It's not really in the lore, but boy do I wish it were. I used spells from The Judgement of the Nine mod for my paladin, cleric and monk characters and it fit perfectly. Wonderful for role-play purposes. I'd like to see some Restoration "smites" or something or perhaps just healing spell harming undead and vampires and damage Heath spells healing them. Maybe even a banish daedra spell that acts like a full dispel even on perm-summoned daedra and simply harms them if they resist banishment. Dark magic would be all those cool necromancy spells we couldn't get in vanilla Oblivion.

Sadly, I don't think this is very likely. Hopefully we'll see expanded Light and Dark magic through mods but I'm not sure how much Bethesda will implement.

You would probably be lying if you said that Daedra don't remind you of demons. As I'm sure Bethesda intended. However they have very interesting lore on these Daedra that blurs the line on whether they are "demonic" or not. But we could talk about Demons and say "Well whos to say that Demons are really evil?" Which is why a talk on the morals of Daedra (or Demons) is ultimately pointless.

But, from what I've seen, most Daedra are either being controlled by a wizard, or trying to kill you. Of course the greater Daedra like to behave like Aedra and gather followers. I guess my concept is pwned by lore. I just think it's funny that a form of light/spiritual and dark magic must imply a absolute morality in lore. Maybe dark magic isn't bad, just misunderstood, like Daedra? It's the concept of white, glowy magic and spooky dark magic that the poll is about. How that would fit into the lore would be the work of Bethesda not me. I figured I wasn't the only one who would like to see something more than lightning, frost and fire in the next ES.

I wouldn't mind having abilities like an undead destroying spell or a daedra banishing one (they already had banish daedra in Daggerfall), but I'd prefer they keep the spells classified by use as they are now. They'd have to throw too many unrelated spells into the new groups to make them big enough to justify them. Debuffs don't need to have anything to do with necromancy, and if portalling in a daedra is conjuration then it makes sense that portalling them out would also be conjuration.