Thoughts by Lylia:
Sorcerer Discussion Board
March 27, 1999 / June 25, 1999 / June 30, 1999
If Sorcery is "evil," it is a necessary one. Read your histories and see just why the most lethal aspects of the Art were developed.
The essence of Sorcery is battle-magic. It must not only kill, it must kill so horribly as to terrify those foes who witness it and show them the folly of crossing a Sorcerer in battle. I can imagine that in the years following the destruction of Maelshyve, there were many who fell upon their own blades rather than meet a Sorcerer in combat. Even so, to call Sorcery "Evil" is like calling a finely crafted blade evil; we are (or were once) simply the deadliest of weapons.
Although times have changed and we no longer face Despana and her like, we are still destroyers. We do not mete out death and destruction most "efficiently"; instead we do so in such a way that some who witness it are too sickened to continue to fight. That is the core of what we are and always should be. It does not matter if some people see themselves as daisy-picking nurturing types; they are aberrances, and to the true practitioner of the Art, an abomination. They are weapons made of base metal and are unfit for Sorcery.
Now that we live in an age of comparative peace, I realize the need to broaden our scope. While once we did nothing but destroy, we may learn how to create with Ensorcellment or bewitch with illusions. As masters of hybrid magic and spells of war, I see no reason why defensive skills such as Ensorcellment or utilitarian magics such as Necromancy should be beyond our purview (after all, we who are most fit for the battlefield should learn to work with what is nearest to hand, that being corpses; Necromancy is a logical outgrowth).
Forgive the length of this missive... but I grow exceedingly weary of discussing what we are. History tells us what we were; what we are is merely an outgrowth of that.
------Lylia Rashere
It is a poor sword which breaks under the first stress of real combat. Likewise, it is a poor Sorcerer who kills and maims indiscriminately; that is a sign of grave weakness and has nothing to do with the concept that common men perceive as "evil."
There was a time that when an advancing army saw even one Sorcerer ranged against them in battle, they turned and fled or fell to their knees in horror without the magic-user having to cast a single spell. We have since lost some of our power, admittedly. Foes forget their fear; they do not remember so well these days what Sorcerers of old could call down upon their heads.
We, however, should not forget what we had been --- and still are, in large part. We were weapons so lethal that often we did not even need to be brought to bear on an enemy to produce abject surrender. To kill indiscriminately is to tarnish what we are meant for; it is akin to using ballistae to slay a gnat. I consider it beneath me to break everyone who gets in my way. I am better than that; I can simply step over them rather than knocking them down.
Sorcerers who cheapen their Art by killing others indiscriminately and without finesse are likewise beneath me. They are not fit to wear the honorific of Sorcerer, and I do not dignify them with the title.
As regards these discussions of "evil" that I have read of late, is a weapon evil? Does it not depend on how it is used and against whom? Most people have an incredibly unsophisticated idea of "evil" anyhow. Usually it is defined as that which seeks to better its own life instead of bettering the lot of others. If this is so, I am evil to the core... to all but one man.
------Lylia Rashere
I certainly see Sorcerers as rather dark and intimidating individuals; I think our spells and our history bear out that impression. Sorcery's finest hour was the destruction of Maelshyve, yet it contributed to the fall of the Faendryl-ruled Elven Empire; we may no longer rule that empire, but have we sunk so far as to be witless giggling nursemaids to the least of Elanthian society?
However, there are as many shades of dark as there are of light. I have met Sorcerers whose interests lie mre with quiet research than with the arts of destruction. Some Sorcerers could even be called kind, yet are not necessarily diminished thereby. Even I do no hold myself above an act of kindness or a smile for those whose company I appreciate; I even enjoy a good jest or game of darts. The difference is that I am not indiscriminate with my good graces the way some people are, and never without the dignity of my station as a Sorceress.
We are not Empaths. Our Arts were not developed to aid the weak and the wounded, as their gifts are. We should be moved to disgust by the infirmities of the mind which overtake so many people; we should not join them in their insanity. And make no mistake, insanity it is to paw strangers and giggle at nothing and bite at passers-by.
Too many of us have forgotten their pride in what we were, what we are, and what we will one day rise to be. One who can call demons to do his bidding, unleash the fury of the tempests, call plagues and curses upon his foes, and look into the Void without fear of madness has doubtless had most of the foolishness and giggles wrung out of him. A sorcerer who is always giggling and tickling is, to me, clearly a Sorcerer who has not drunk deeply of the night-black and blood-hot waters of our Art. I believe that such Sorcerers simply have not yet learned enough yet; I do not revile them when they are young, but I do when I see they have grown old and still have no sense of what they are.
A blade, even if made of bright mithril and gilded to look fair as day, is nonetheless a blade and can be as deadly as any weapon blackened in the fires of the Abyss. Death can wear a fair face and even -- sometimes -- a laughing one, but it is not for us to be every man's friend. Be kind if you wish, be compassionate if you must, but never forget that we are Sorcerers and should be above the madnesses and fits that plague those with weaker minds.
------Lylia Rashere