Stage Magic & Wizardry

[Ice9]

Disarming traps with celestial monkeys is the dumbest fucking thing that people thinks work but clearly doesn't.

Stipulating that we're talking about disarming via setting off, how so? Celestial Monkeys have weight and can manipulate objects, which is all you need to set off many types of traps. With Int 3, they can speak a language (RAW Common, but may be ruled to be Celestial), and summoned creatures do what you tell them. So do you disagree with part of that, or is this an "all traps would logically be magical and filter out summoned creatures" stance?

[Kaelik]

Disarming traps with celestial monkeys is the dumbest fucking thing that people thinks work but clearly doesn't.

Stipulating that we're talking about disarming via setting off, how so? Celestial Monkeys have weight and can manipulate objects, which is all you need to set off many types of traps. With Int 3, they can speak a language (RAW Common, but may be ruled to be Celestial), and summoned creatures do what you tell them. So do you disagree with part of that, or is this an "all traps would logically be magical and filter out summoned creatures" stance?

If a Trap is successfully bypasses by sending a Monkey ahead, then it would be successfully bypassed by walking into the damn thing yourself and whipping out your Lesser Vigor wand, or having a Dread Necromancer in your party at all.

If a trap alerts enemies, setting it off doesn't do anything but fuck you, if a trap does anything you care about at all (drop you into a pit, cast finger of death on you) then it resets or still serves exists after the monkey dies automatically anyway and you still have to do something else to actually bypass it.

Ultimately, I give zero fucks what the number of "there was a scythe that shoots out of the wall" traps you bypassed with fucking spell slots, because you could have bypassed them with 12gp wand charges or a follower's at will class feature instead.

[K]

Wasn't this question answered by the movie Willow?

[virgil]

Wasn't this question answered by the movie Willow?

No

[K]

Wasn't this question answered by the movie Willow?

No

I think it was.

See also The Prestige and Lord of Illusion.

[sendaz]

The movie 'Now you see me' kind of falls into this.

[virgil]

Wasn't this question answered by the movie Willow?

No

I think it was.

Willow performed mundane illusions, unaided with actual magic. That is very specifically not what I asked.

[Slade]

Wasn't this question answered by the movie Willow?

"Which is the finger held the power to control the world?"

[Judging__Eagle]

There seemed little point in elaborating how the lowest level ability to create whatever illusion you want to perform would facilitate any sort of "stage magic". This is ; because "stage magic" is called by its own industry members as "illusions", and anything else is actually unnecessary for stage performances.

Any possible illusion that is seen in a modern stage magician show; could be achieved (or at least greatly facilitated) with a Silent Image spell.

Sleight of handing a watch into a fishes mouth for a bit on David Letterman becomes easier when you don't have to bother with fake breaking Letterman's watch. You just Silent Image that you're breaking the watch, while your actually hammering at empty space. Thus you aren't noticed pocketing the watch to slip to your stage tech whose hiding under the fish crate to push the watch up into the fish bellies with the metal tubes you've arranged ahead of time. Thus, when Letterman picks out his fish; the Illusion hid watch will be found in the fish's mouth. [While video of this isn't available, Penn & Teller repeating it with Stephen Fry here]

Likewise, any D&D spell effect that you want to "demonstrate"; or use in "illegal" (i.e. by the rules; not the setting) manners is facilitated by using a Silent Image spell.

That using higher level Illusion spells makes it easier to achieve the above should go without saying.

Note: the person actually casting Silent Image doesn't necessarily mean they will be on the the stage performing. Really, you want your spellcaster in a trapdoor under the stage with line of effect/sight to the stage. The "stage magician" is obviously a Bard or Rogue who is making Sleight of Hand, and Perform (Prestidigitation), checks.

[Eikre]

This is such a blatant false analogy that it makes my head hurt. You know what magic can do in D&D? EVERYTHING! You are impressed by people pulling rabbits out of hats and locating your card because these are things that you do not consider possible based on your understanding of the world.

This is not a false analogy, asshole. The assertion I am refuting is that a person with a life full of amazing things is going to be so jaded that they won't be amused, impressed, or perplexed by cute trivialities that have been executed skillfully. I offer this as proof: I am a person with amazing things. I still think stage magic is sweet. Q E fucking D.

I mean, do you think I watch a magician do his trick and think to myself, "wow, my world-view is shattered, these things that are impossible I have seen with mine own two eyes"? Do you do that? I actually know it IS possible to pull a rabbit out of a seemingly-empty hat and locate a card without ostensibly ever seeing which one it was, because I have personally witnessed these things occur and even understand the principles which permit those things to happen.

Magicians do not need to do impossible things. They, in fact, cannot. They can only give the superficial appearance of an impossible occurrence, and literally every fucking person on the face of the goddamned planet understands this and will applaud their skill regardless, because the thing we enjoy and recognize IS their skill, and not any of the apparent effects of that skill. Now, they employ this skill to create the illusion of impossible occurrences because that is a conceit of the genre. Magicians depict impossible things instead of mundane things because it is an expedient way of showing the audience that their skillful maneuver has happened at all and that they've successfully tricked you. What would happen if a magician employed his fast hands to give the illusion of smoking a cigarette? Without an obvious discrepancy between his act and a completely ordinary activity, he would need to take the audience through the whole thing and specifically point out the cool shit he was doing if he wanted them to appreciate it. And, although that is an act which actual magicians have actually preformed to the amusement of many an audience, it would get pretty tiresome if they were being that hopelessly explicit all the fucking time. So, instead, they do some shit that doesn't have an immediately obvious explanation and let you draw your own conclusions.

As you guys have indicated ceaselessly: In fantasy, the "immediately obvious explanation" to almost everything is that a wizard cast a spell. One of the most basic abilities of a wizard, though, is to be able to tell when a person is casting a spell. So, for them, the "impossibility" that you use to show off your sweet tricks is that you're not using a spell, and it's reasonable to expect that they will have the capacity to see that this is the case for precisely the same reason that a real-life magician can expect us to understand, when he shows us the inside of his hat, that there isn't a rabbit in it.

EDIT- also includes masking your magical aura, because there are fucking spells for that and anyone with a point in spellcraft knows that too.

Aside from the fact that most of those spells have stricter limitations than you might know off-hand (Magic Aura only works on objects, for instance), you can invite people to use all the instances of Dispel Magic they want during the "please confirm that this is an ordinary deck of cards and sign your name on one" stage of the trick. Or you can eat a couple of mental stat debuffs. Or you can do it under circumstances where Concentration is really tough. Or just do it in an anti-magic field. Whatever.

[GâtFromKI]

People are impressed by stage magic because it breaks the rules of the world as they know it. They know the world wasn't broken but still, they don't know how the performance was possible in our world.

In D&D, magic allows litteraly anything. You can even research a new spell when you need a new app. Stage magic can't be impressive in any way because there's no rule to break. If you don't see the magician cast any spell, you can safely assume that someone off-stage cast it - or he was under the effect of a spell that conceal casting. If you don't see any magical aura, you can safely assume that he is under an effect that conceal casting. Etc. Since magic can do anything - even stuff that isn't done by any of the CRB spells - , there is nothing all that seems impossible in D&D world.

Some other wizards may be impressed by a new spell because they recognize the skill of the caster, but that's it. In reality, if you are an expert in some field and see something really skillful, you are impressed because you know how difficult it is, not because it seems impossible; it is in no way comparable to stage magic.

[Eikre]

So it is your contention that people are obviously only appreciative of sleight of hand because they don't understand what they've just seen, and that people can only be appreciative of real magic if they do understand what they've just seen.

[Omegonthesane]

I'm just going to point out - at what level can magic "do everything" and how common do you really think people of that level are in D&D? I mean, Limited Wish isn't on the table until 13th level, at which point you are playing Planes and Planetars IIRC.

As for cheating at the stage of "And now my glamorous assistant will show that there are no spells on this hat before I pull a rabbit out of it" - Magic Aura is level 1, but so is Identify.

[Chamomile]

I'm just going to point out - Eikre just barely posted a magic routine about lighting a cigarette. All of us can light cigarettes. The idea that anyone is still trying to carry on that magic tricks are about accomplishing impossible feats after that video is clearly not paying attention.

[Omegonthesane]

I'm just going to point out - Eikre just barely posted a magic routine about lighting a cigarette. All of us can light cigarettes. The idea that anyone is still trying to carry on that magic tricks are about accomplishing impossible feats after that video is clearly not paying attention.

What, the Penn & Teller one? I thought that was all about explaining exactly how tricks work and still being entertaining about it.

I recall an improv exercise in either year 10 or year 11 drama class in which we had to demonstrate the showmanship expected of a stage magician, but for a completely boring mundane trick.

EDIT: ...yeah, couldn't watch it at work and forgot to rewatch when I got home.

[Kaelik]

I'm just going to point out - Eikre just barely posted a magic routine about lighting a cigarette. All of us can light cigarettes. The idea that anyone is still trying to carry on that magic tricks are about accomplishing impossible feats after that video is clearly not paying attention.

Uh.... is there like a secret conspiracy or are you guys actually that retarded.

I mean, on gitp, I've seen people argue that Teleport is exactly the same as walking, because they both just take you from point A to point B, but I didn't expect to see that on TGD.

If your entire argument hinges on arguing that "lighting a cigarette" by using a lighter is the same as shooting fire out of your hands, then we are long past the part where you are even in the same universe as a real conversation.

I guess I'll pretend this is a real conversation, and not you idiots banging on with increasingly dumb as shit arguments about a completely tangential nonsense issue.

1) People enjoy lots of things for lots of reasons. Some people enjoy literally cutting themselves, but I don't recommend you make a game with a blood trail based RNG.

2) Some people enjoy magic tricks because they are watching skilled members of a craft, and skilled members of a craft often can be enjoyable to watch. I hear some people watch sports for this reason.

3) Other, different, people enjoy magic tricks because magic tricks give off the illusion of a bunch of shit happening that can't happen, and the whole, wonder of magic or whatever that people bang on about in pop culture in all that bullshit "If you know the trick, then it's not magic" crap.

4) If you can't tell the difference between these two things, then your argument is probably going to be wrong if it is in any way based on talking about how people like magic.

5) Notice that the first part of the Penn and Teller Routine is literally worthless. Like, it's some magic tricks, but no one would ever do just that half of a trick as a magic act, because it literally just accomplishes things that anyone can do, and while you might notice the sleight of hand, if you don't, you didn't see anything worth seeing. Which is why no one performs the "trick" alone, they do it while telling the audience they are cheating, then they show the cheats, because that invites the audience to join the 2) people, which is good, because it sure doesn't apply to the 3) people at all when the trick is lighting a cigarette. On the other hand, notice that if you don't tell people you are cheating, there is literally no 2) fun to be had for people who aren't masters of spotting sleight of hand.

6) If you think that routine counts as a "magic trick" you are deluded.

[Omegonthesane]

I'm just going to point out - Eikre just barely posted a magic routine about lighting a cigarette. All of us can light cigarettes. The idea that anyone is still trying to carry on that magic tricks are about accomplishing impossible feats after that video is clearly not paying attention.

Uh.... is there like a secret conspiracy or are you guys actually that retarded.

I mean, on gitp, I've seen people argue that Teleport is exactly the same as walking, because they both just take you from point A to point B, but I didn't expect to see that on TGD.

If your entire argument hinges on arguing that "lighting a cigarette" by using a lighter is the same as shooting fire out of your hands, then we are long past the part where you are even in the same universe as a real conversation.

You might try actually watching the vid before mischaracterising the argument.

[Kaelik]

You might try actually watching the vid before mischaracterising the argument.

I know the routine, the point is that this is just a continuation of Eikre's previous position that "I can find the 4 of clubs right now" argument, where he just deliberately refuses to understand what makes any particular act interesting, and instead generalizes all possible points down to trite phrases about how "anyone can light a cigarette" even though the whole point is that lighting a cigarette isn't the fucking trick, just like pulling the four of clubs out of a deck of cards also isn't the trick.

[Omegonthesane]

So let me get this straight. You are saying that because a tiny fraction (high level wizards) of a fraction (wizards) of the most privileged and dangerous people in the universe (people with levels in PC instead of NPC classes) can perform great wonders a few times a day using power that in practice is going to be diverted to summoning a harem of succubi and some cocaine to snort off the harem's thighs, that lowly commoners throughout the entire multiverse will not only know the things that magic can do but be intimately familiar with them to the point of being unimpressed with showmanship and sleight of hand no matter how effortless it seems or how it might appear to violate the known rules of magic.

Are Penn & Teller out of a job in the Marvel universe because Dr Strange exists? Are faux-psychics unable to impress with their act due to the presence of Professor X? Does the existence of Bullseye mean that no mortal can impress by throwing knives?

[Mechalich]

Most slight of hand based stage magic barely rises to the potency of 0-level spells. More complex effects might amount to 1st or 2nd level spells (please remember that turning completely invisible is a 2nd level spell). Anything 3rd level and above is pretty much utterly beyond stage magic capabilities - especially the capabilities of stage magic restricted to renaissance technologies (which is highly relevant).

In standard D&D or Pathfinder, people who can cast 1st level spells are quite common, there's at least one in every small village. Spellcasters (and adepts count here) are something like 1% of the population (the sample hamlet of 200 people in the 3.5 dmg has 1 adept, 1 wizard, 1 druid, 3 clerics, and 1 bard, which is 3.5%), which makes them a lot more common than stage magicians are or have ever been. They will actually assume anyone who is faking spellcasting is actually a spellcaster (assuming the fake is actually good at it). Now there's some utility to being able to pretend to be a spellcaster - learning to fake 1st level spells for entertainment purposes is probably cheaper than attending wizard school, but faking magic in terms of impressing people out of the sleight of hand trickery is pretty absurd and people who think they're getting a +1 to saves for a minute and don't actually get that will be pissed if they find out.

There are also Extraordinary non-magical abilities available in D&D that make conventional slight of hand look like chump change - like a Monk's slow fall (hey Bob, what me jump off the face of Mount Thor and have nothing bad happen but my hair getting messy).

[GâtFromKI]

how it might appear to violate the known rules of magic.

OK, that's the point you're missing: their are no "known rules of magic" in D&D world. Identification may be level 1, but you can easily create a level 3 spell that bypass it.

A wizard can do a performance using magic, but it won't be in any way similar to stage magic : it can be a concert using animated instruments, or a visual spectacle using Silent image, or anything, but people will be impressed by the art, not because the wizard said at the beginning "look, there's nothing in my pocket".

[Jason]

Are Penn & Teller out of a job in the Marvel universe because Dr Strange exists? Are faux-psychics unable to impress with their act due to the presence of Professor X? Does the existence of Bullseye mean that no mortal can impress by throwing knives?

Apples and oranges. The OP clearly states D&D and its respective setting as the standard of magic by which the act is to be judged. Those two worlds (Marvel Universe and D&D) are vastly different and you can't simply compare the two.

The Marvel Universe is an analogy to our orld with added supernatural elements. Those elements are rare, not the mainstream of economic trade and in most cases feared by the general populace. A stage magician in the marvel universe that turns out to be a mutant or true magician (which the general polulace would most likely simply label a mutant anyway) woud soon find himself the victim of massive abuse and a lack of bookings due to bad PR. The Marvel Universe is grim, xenophobic, paranoid and racist against mutants.

Compare that to the D&D Universe. Here magic is a common part of the world's economy: everyone with enough cash can simply buy magic. The tavern stories boast of magic feats, magical races like the elves and deva roam the lands, undead infest entire swathes of land and each king has his own personal wizard. Add to that the omnipresent clerics and divine casters. It's world where magic is not just real, it is fundamental to the sociopolitical landscape. In D&D people don't merel know magic exists, the experience it on a daily basis.

So, coming back to the initial question, the reception of stage magicians in those two worlds woudl be drastically different. In the Marvel Universe, s stage magician could probably still be working a regular show, as long as he is not (known to be) a mutant (which includes wizards in that cateory). A known mutant would face severe social repercussions and might even end up incarcerated.
A stage magician in D&D on the other hand would face an entire different professional orientation: even a wizard's aprectice can cast cantrips and illusions. The populace knows that and expects that. To find a card "magically" or to "pull a rabbit out of his hat" are expected to be magical in nature and as such about as impressive as simply sifting through the deck and picking the card, albeit with more showmanship. No, the role of a stage magician in D&D is more akin to modern day cinema. It's visual entertainment, be it romantic, comedic, dramatic or maybe even erotic in nature. Those magic trick are simply too easy to pull of for the populace to be amazed by it. It's not a daring feat of a well trained professional, requiring massive amounts of skill, it's literally what a wizard's apprentice in his first year can do.

Now, if a wizard's apprentice came across a primitive people, way out in the middle of nowhere who know nothing about magic, even though the most primitve people have a magical tradition, he might fool them and preted to have greater powers than he actually possesses but as far as a stage magicians in a populated area of average civilizatory level are concerned, there ist simply no entertainmnt vaule beyond "cinema" for them to add.

[erik]

Identify takes 1 hour to cast and expensive material component as well.

I could totally imagine magicians, especially illusionists, entertaining crowds in a D&D setting. People might know its doable, but that's a far cry from getting to see first-hand a deadly monster being summoned.