Bogus alternatives vs Plot holes

[Rambling]

I have just finished my first draft of a story about magic users, and I notice I've written quite a bit of this:

Tyro: "Why don't we (use magic) to (solve problem easily)"
Expert: " Because (magic has limitations)"

I can see the problem, but I don't know what to do with it. If I leave out those lines entirely, I create a plot hole. If I show the limitations of the magic every time before it becomes an issue, I turn my 4000 word short story into an overpadded novella.

Of my five unattractive options:
1. leave as is
2. create a plot hole
3. set up explanation ahead of time
4. (solve problem easily) with (magic)
5. write (magic) out of story

which is the reader most likely to forgive? Is there something I'm missing?

[Richard]

I'd go with 3. As long as magic isn't written as being the answer to absolutely everything, I doubt there's a problem.

[Jamesaritchie]

I would definitely go with three. But rather than having magic with limitations, I think it works best to have magic with a price to pay, and the bigger the magic, the higher the price.

"Well, gee, lowly aprentice, I'd like to wave my arms and solve this problem with magic, but for a problem this size I'd have to sacrifice my left foot, half my liver, and my first born son. I think I'll just go ahead and kill that mouse with a club."

[brokenfingers]

Hmmm, maybe you can show the reader.

Somewhere, in the beginning of your story (maybe as a lesson from the master etc.) have the apprentice perform some feat of magic and show the devastating results and his reaction/thoughts.

After that the reader should know that using magic is not something to be taken lightly.

Maybe show the reader how this has had a sobering effect upon the young ‘un and had made him/her gunshy.

It might even prove useful later on when the newbie must overcome his adverse feelings/fear about magic and is faced with the dilemna of whether to use it or not for something trivial or maybe even not so trivial etc…

Dilemmas, conflict – gotta love ‘em!

Just some random thoughts on a Sunday morning…..

[reph]

In superhero comics, generally the protagonist has one or a few special powers, and these are known from the start. Elastigirl (The Incredibles) can stretch, but she can't read minds or set things on fire by looking at them. The reader knows what's possible before the particular situation comes up when the hero uses (or decides not to use) the power. Other ways of foreshadowing would create a similar understanding in the reader about what the limits are.

[veinglory]

I think that magic without limitations is inherently uninteresting as then there are no effective obstacles and no plot. But it is also implausible--how can any ability be limitless?

[Rambling]

So the general consensus is to make a fundamentally longer and slower paced story. It seems I've been overparanoid about padding!

jamesaritchie & brokenfingers: that's a good model for magic, but not the one I'm writing about here. Thanks though - I'll keep it in mind for the next magic story I write.

reph: my system is the superhero model, and you're right that the intuitive limits are enough for some: one character can only break magical things, and one character can only see whether an object is magic or normal.

But others need more limits -
One can create portals, but for plot purposes they can't just port into the enemy stronghold or disappear to safety (therefore portals take a long time to open and are impossible to hide).
One can manipulate the minds of non-magic folk (but not in such a way that anyone else would notice or else he'll get into trouble, and not when mind power inhibitors are around)

veinglory: it's the 'convienient' limitations I want to gloss over. Like in Star Trek episodes:

A: "Captain! They've crash landed on a strange planet!"
Captain: "Can't we teleport them off?"
A: "No because of (lame science)."
/ Audience: "No, because then the show would be over."


Thanks, everyone!

[Jamesaritchie]

So the general consensus is to make a fundamentally longer and slower paced story. It seems I've been overparanoid about padding!

jamesaritchie & brokenfingers: that's a good model for magic, but not the one I'm writing about here. Thanks though - I'll keep it in mind for the next magic story I write.

reph: my system is the superhero model, and you're right that the intuitive limits are enough for some: one character can only break magical things, and one character can only see whether an object is magic or normal.

But others need more limits -
One can create portals, but for plot purposes they can't just port into the enemy stronghold or disappear to safety (therefore portals take a long time to open and are impossible to hide).
One can manipulate the minds of non-magic folk (but not in such a way that anyone else would notice or else he'll get into trouble, and not when mind power inhibitors are around)

veinglory: it's the 'convienient' limitations I want to gloss over. Like in Star Trek episodes:

A: "Captain! They've crash landed on a strange planet!"
Captain: "Can't we teleport them off?"
A: "No because of (lame science)."
/ Audience: "No, because then the show would be over."


Thanks, everyone!

Well, I'd calll the Star Trek tricks "convenient problems," rather than lame science. For the 60's, the science was about as good as they could make it, and it gotten better with later versions.

If the audience actually says, "No, because then the show would be over," you've goofed badly, and you'll lose viewers, and readers in a novel. Plot holes are always bad things, and there's never, ever a need for them.