To wand or not to wand...?

[arianne]

I'm working on an urban fantasy with wizards, where the ability of magic is passed on from wizard to wizard (think JB's summer/winter knights method of passing on power), and I've been writing the story with everyone using wands, for no particular reason I can remember, but I guess it must have made sense at the time.

Now I've had time to read back, I wonder if wands are too Harry Potterish? Should I go for a different item to focus power? A staff or chains or something like that for example? Or should I skip the item altogether and just let them have fireballs in their hands or do what they did on Charmed?

Any thoughts, advice, or personal preferences?

[DragonEyes]

Wands are well established in lore, but they are by no means the only method of magical focus. Orbs are usually well liked. For a more sinister flavor, bones or bird talons. For the Norse it was braided ropes with different magic woven into different braids. For Native Americans, it was totems, pieces of representative "gods" or at least their likenesses. You have a whole array to choose from and I see no reason for their to be only one available choice.

[cenwolfgirl]

personly don't use them my selth
i think you should use what ever feels right in your univers

[Nickeris86]

I personally am not a fan of wands, especially in a world with heavy combat magic if that is the case in yours, because their really is nothing very threatening about them. I would use them for more creative magics, to me a wand is more like a paint brush and not a .45.

For me a focus is more based on the personality of the individual wizard. If a character is passive then their focus is probably not going to be a knife and if they are a warrior their focus is probably not going to be a feather.

[Shecky]

I'm working on an urban fantasy with wizards, where the ability of magic is passed on from wizard to wizard (think JB's summer/winter knights method of passing on power), and I've been writing the story with everyone using wands, for no particular reason I can remember, but I guess it must have made sense at the time.

Now I've had time to read back, I wonder if wands are too Harry Potterish? Should I go for a different item to focus power? A staff or chains or something like that for example? Or should I skip the item altogether and just let them have fireballs in their hands or do what they did on Charmed?

Any thoughts, advice, or personal preferences?

Is the wand the method of passing on the magic? If so, how does it work? Is the wand itself an heirloom, an item with its own power, or is it just something purpose-made in a purely utilitarian way? Would making one's first wand be a step towards becoming a full wizard à la Jedi lightsaber? Would they maybe be made with a portion of the wizard's own life-force, or maybe even a bit of their body?

There's SO much that can be done with wands story-wise, and as has been pointed out, they don't even have to be the classic wooden stick.

[hank the ancient]

I would suggest bypassing anything you find too constricting with a larger and more adaptable system. For instance you could have the magic be inherent to a system of printed designs or glyphs which operate more like components on a circuit board then letters in an alphabet, that way characters can focus from whatever they chose to write/engrave on, be it wands, books, staffs, stones, jewelry, tattoos, graffiti, etc.

As a bonus it can provide a rule set similar to modern electronics. Most vanillas don't understand how it works, just that it does. With a bit of basic understanding, you can get a vague idea of what simpler magic crafted items can do just by looking at their layout, while the really complex stuff is like trying to interpret the schematic for an f-16 guidance system. Theoretically, you can do anything from a set number of components, but as the functional sophistication rises, so does the physical complexity of the item. Lastly using anything in a way it wasn't designed for can seriously damage it or cause it to explode.

[Shecky]

Not to be adversarial, just playing Devil's advocate: instead of going with a larger, more adaptable system, you could figure out what you want it to do and work backwards from there to a VERY precise, rigidly constricting system, one that requires dead-on accuracy for magic to work (which would conveniently explain why people don't just stumble upon it). Just an option, not a disagreement with Hank.

[arianne]

Is the wand the method of passing on the magic? If so, how does it work? Is the wand itself an heirloom, an item with its own power, or is it just something purpose-made in a purely utilitarian way? Would making one's first wand be a step towards becoming a full wizard à la Jedi lightsaber? Would they maybe be made with a portion of the wizard's own life-force, or maybe even a bit of their body?

There's SO much that can be done with wands story-wise, and as has been pointed out, they don't even have to be the classic wooden stick.

The wands aren't really ay sort of rite of passage item, and they're not custom made by the wizards themselves. As of now, the wands are things that can be bought in stores located at the ends of dark alleys. There isn't really a "matching" process for wizards and their wands (not like in Harry Potter where they have to see if they have to test the wands to see if they're good with each other), since most wands are created equal.

I'm just worried that in a modern urban environment it would feel out of place to have something like a wand (which may be an awkward thing to get out of one's pocket in emergency situations). The wand itself is only a conduit of the magic inside the wizard, so at this point I've having doubts as to whether I really need a focus at all. Would it simply be easier and less complicated to just use one's hands to shape one's will?

[DragonEyes]

The wands aren't really ay sort of rite of passage item, and they're not custom made by the wizards themselves. As of now, the wands are things that can be bought in stores located at the ends of dark alleys. There isn't really a "matching" process for wizards and their wands (not like in Harry Potter where they have to see if they have to test the wands to see if they're good with each other), since most wands are created equal.

I'm just worried that in a modern urban environment it would feel out of place to have something like a wand (which may be an awkward thing to get out of one's pocket in emergency situations). The wand itself is only a conduit of the magic inside the wizard, so at this point I've having doubts as to whether I really need a focus at all. Would it simply be easier and less complicated to just use one's hands to shape one's will?

So why not make a joke of it? Have the wands made of modern stuff so they can be disguised. Call it a wand, but maybe it looks like an old  cell phone with an antenna or a chewed up pencil. Maybe its built into a briefcase or an umbrella. In an homage to the Dresden files tv series, maybe one has a drumstick that he uses as a wand. They, of course, aren't the things they look like, but they are disguised to fit in with the modern world.

For me, though, this question would depend on what system of magic I'm borrowing my insights from or whether I'm creating a new one out of whole cloth. If its a new system, I'd suggest you use something new. If you are borrowing from existing myth and lore, you have a literal world of choices.

[Lanodantheon]

I personally support the "Make a joke of it" and "Use modern Materials" ideas, but that's just my sensibilities.


At the end of the day, 1) Wands being associated with magic is older than dirt and certainly older that Potter. As are Staves, which you could also update. Both of them I believe are related to the Axis Mundi Concept, a solid connection between two worlds...but don't quote me on that. 
2) It's your story. If you don't like wands in your urban fantasy, don't use them.


My personal advice is for you to have fun with it. Do what you think is cool or best for the story. It all depends on the tone you're going for.


I can give a dozen ways to make it funny but from a practical side a Wand is portable, concealable and can get past airport security.  Wood doesn't set off metal detectors.


Jim Butcher himself has a story in WOJ talking about having to tell a security guy, "It's a Magic Wand" and the guy just leaving him alone. Who's going to look twice at a guy holding a stick?

[The Corvidian]

Why not have them use walking sticks, or cane umbrellas? Another idea would be vintage clothing.

[hank the ancient]

Not to be adversarial, just playing Devil's advocate: instead of going with a larger, more adaptable system, you could figure out what you want it to do and work backwards from there to a VERY precise, rigidly constricting system, one that requires dead-on accuracy for magic to work (which would conveniently explain why people don't just stumble upon it). Just an option, not a disagreement with Hank.

Actually agreeing with Shecky here. Going either way you still come up with the system first, then invent whatever mechanism you want around it. The idea is to try to fit wands or not wands around your story, not vice versa. Jim had a quote somewhere about a story of an old knight, a farm boy, a wise old teacher, and an evil empire. done poorly it's a cliche. Done well, it's Star Wars. 

[belial.1980]

I personally am not a fan of wands, especially in a world with heavy combat magic if that is the case in yours, because their really is nothing very threatening about them.

Maybe, maybe not...This could make a nice "wand." After all, it's essentially the same thing as your typical wizard's wand: a wooden stick. This one's just a bit bigger. And it has the added bonus of being useful for adjusting unwelcome attitudes.

[Nickeris86]

Maybe, maybe not...This could make a nice "wand." After all, it's essentially the same thing as your typical wizard's wand: a wooden stick. This one's just a bit bigger. And it has the added bonus of being useful for adjusting unwelcome attitudes.

By definition that would be a rod not a wand. lol semantics i know but still.

[belial.1980]

By definition that would be a rod not a wand. lol semantics i know but still.

Ah, but by definition a wand is a rod...