Being a Better Writer: Brandon Sanderson's Three Laws of Magic · 4:08pm Aug 2nd, 2016
Apologies for the delay. Once again I had a Monday morning shift. I am considering moving future Being a Better Writer posts to Tuesdays for the time being as a result. I'll keep you updated!
This post was bound to happen. Sanderson's Three Laws have been a frequently requested topic since the very beginning of this blog, and it's a staple of a lot of writing education these days (especially fantasy), so I knew there would come a day when I had to write about it. Of course, I wanted to ease into the topic first, which I did two weeks ago when I wrote a post about creating magic systems. During that post, I referenced the Three Laws, saying I'd talk about them later. You see, before I got into talking about the Three Laws, which are more about how to use magic in a story, I did want to dedicate some time to the subject of creating magic first, so that there would be a basis for Sanderson's Laws to dig into.
Now, with that post behind us, the time has come to look at Sanderson's Three Laws of Magic.
You can read the rest of this post at Unusual Things
Curious to see how well Canon!Equestria works with these three laws. From what I can tell from my limited recollection of S1-3, magic is never really focused upon, being a tool to tell the current story rather than something that is world-building. The most we get is that Twilight learns lots of cantrips, Dark Magic being teh evilz, and time magic being very limited, or at least that was the case until what I am hearing of what one Starlight Glimmer apparently was able to accomplish.
Amusingly, when magic balance comes to mind the first thing I think of is the original A:tlA series, where characters work with what they have and refines their abilities. The only one who does not really follow this rule is the Avatar him/herself, because they are meant to be Overpowered, but even they have limitations, as Azula can attest.
On a completely separate note, are "Legacy Characters", in and out of universe, something on your discussion table? It would be interesting to see your two cents on those types of characters and what makes good and bad examples.
4127868
I noticed that although the Avatar was extremely powerful, the fact that they usually never focused on one specific element resulted in them often never learning the sub-classes of bending (Lightning, metal-bending, blood-bending, lava-bending) aside from Roku and Korra. That's why I really liked watching the other benders, because while they could bend only one element, it forced them to build and expand upon that skill, leading to them creating the sub-classes of bending. While LoK could have been better in areas, I think it did a great job of integrating technology in a fantasy world, such as having lightning-benders working at power plants.
4127868
For clarification, what do you mean by "legacy characters?"
4129508
Characters who have been established, with their own identity, flaws, development, etc., who pass their title on to another character, and how the new character can be part of the title without becoming a carbon copy of the previous character, or becoming a title-in-name-only sort of deal. Can be in-canon, such as Morpheus!Dream passing his title down to Daniel!Dream, or one of the Flashes from DC, or the Dread Pirate Roberts title, to out of canon like reboots. How do you make a character fill the shoes of another character? Is it just writing them well? Take the more controversial ones such as the recent Ghostbusters remake, or Fem!Thor, and compare them to, say, Aang and Korra for their respective Avatar series.