How to Describe Magic

I've discussed description before--how to describe critical rolls, how to describe combat, and how to describe narrative details. Description is perhaps your greatest tool as a GM, so it's important to use it to the fullest potential to create scenes for your players. And just as description is the key to GMing, magic is the key to a lively fantasy world. This means that your descriptions of magic will be especially important in painting a colorful picture of your gameworld. This guide will present some considerations to make when you describe magic so your players get a real sense of how magic functions in your world. 

The first question to ask yourself is whether you're going to use the magic rules of a game like D&D as presented or if you're going to approach it from the homebrew perspective. You can deviate from the rules as far as you would like. I created a custom magic system with room to separate from the game's mechanics, and it's surprisingly easy to do something like it. But for the sake of this guide, let's say that you're walking a middle path: you're using the D&D rules for magic and you're allowing mostly cosmetic changes to the way the spells work. This raises more questions for you to answer about how magic works. 

One of the most basic details of a spell is what it looks like. Some official D&D spells provide simple description of what a spell looks like--Magic Missile, for instance, reads, "You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several." We get some basic information here: the spell creates three glowing darts which strike their target(s) simultaneously. Other spells offer much less information. Inflict Wounds, as an example, simply reads, "Make a melee spell attack against a creature you can reach. On a hit, the target takes 3d10 necrotic damage." This spell doesn't really tells us what it looks like at all. In my opinion, there aren't many spells at all that offer concrete details on what a spell looks like, and I believe that is so that you as the GM can offer those details on your own. 

So how can we spice up these descriptions? Let's start with Magic Missile. We have three glowing darts. But that's only three pieces of information: three, glowing, darts. We want to provide our players with more than that. So you could decide that all three darts are pale green in color and that their glowing light is faint. We can add that the darts are shaped like arrows or perhaps simply d4-like pyramids. We can describe the darts as moving slowly at first and then accelerating faster and faster into their targets; we could also describe them as flashing quickly through the air and exploding in dazzling bursts of light when they strike. The important thing is that the details make Magic Missile seem interesting and unique. And when a player casts Magic Missile again, you can return to your earlier description to keep things standard, or give it a different twist if it expresses how the situation has changed. 

Then we have the Inflict Wounds spell. We have very little to go off of here--all we really know is that the target takes necrotic damage. But that's still enough to go on. Imagine for a moment what this spell looks like in your mind. 3d10 necrotic damage averages to about 15 damage, which is a fair amount for early-level characters. And necrotic damage is especially brutal, as it directly removes life from the target. We can use these details to describe the spell more effectively. When the caster touches their target for the attack, there is a snapping sound and a burst of silver light from the place they touch their target. Then we can describe how the skin around the touched area quickly becomes dry and veiny. We can add that the target shouts in pain and grasps at the wounded area. We could even consider whether the target drops their weapon in pain and shock or decides to surrender rather than face such a blow again. The details give way to more details--this is how good narration functions. 

The visual details of a spell are important because they characterize spells which otherwise are simply rules. Whether you're in combat or not, it's a good idea to take a moment to describe what it all looks like. The easiest way to do this is to develop a sense of what colors different spells are represented by. You don't need to do a lot of work to accomplish this--just use your emotional associations with each color to associate effects with different hues. By way of example, I use green for vibrant energy like the Magic Missile spell above or anything that is nature-related. Light blue energy is for healing, reddish colors are for damaging spells, and white light is associated for me with spells that call on divine entities. You can and should think about how each color is related to an effect in your mind and use that as a key to what spells look like. 

A small note on using emotional associations for descriptions: you can do this for other effects as well. Magic is supposed to be otherworldly but still intuitive, and your associations are the perfect source for something that is both otherworldly (filtered through your subconscious) and intuitive (it fundamentally makes sense without thinking about it). And after all, this is really the place where GMing will come naturally to you--in the place that makes sense to you without working at it. Allow yourself into this place when you GM and you'll find that the results will reflect your vision for a gameworld better than you anticipate. 

The level of a spell is important, too. It follows logically that a cantrip shouldn't seem as impressive as a 9th-level spell. So take the level into consideration when you describe a spell. D&D's spells are already rated on a scale of 1-10 (cantrip through 9th level), so just think of the spell's level as a rating of how powerful it should be. A cantrip should be impressive enough as a spell in the first place, especially for a beginning party, but you should be ready to bump up the level of detail as the spells and the player characters become more powerful. Let's look at a pair of examples to illustrate this point. 

Let's say you're running a game with some 8th-level characters. That means your spellcasters have access to 4th-level spells. So when the wizard in your party casts Magic Missile (a 1st-level spell), you want to use your sense of what a 2 out of 10 is (since a 1st-level spell is the second step toward the top). When the wizard casts the spell, you describe its power as being a bit below moderate. Now when those three green glowing darts fire through the air, you can tell the other players that their characters feel a rush of wind and the sensation of static electricity from the impact of the darts. But when that same wizard casts Banishment (a 4th-level spell), we're now working with a higher threshold of power. We can relate this to a 5 our of 10 (since a 4th-level spell is the fifth step towards the top) and up the impact of the spell's effects. Now when the same wizard casts Banishment, we say that a creature is enveloped by dark purple lights which swirl around them before enveloping them; after a crash of thunder, they are gone. The thunderclap evokes some of the higher power we're talking about, but we can add more. When the thunderclap sounds, a smell of sulphur and burning hair fills the area. Now the effect of magic are far greater, and you can describe the different spells in a consistent way. 

Another aspect of spellcasting involves whether or not a spell succeeds. Some spells like Magic Missile automatically hit, but most involve a roll on the target's part to avoid at least part of the effect of the spell. A successful hit with a spell should be described as outlined above, but a failed spell requires a different tactic. Let's use the Banishment spell as an example. A wizard casts Banishment on a foe, and the foe rolls high enough to avoid being banished. But the spell still happened, so we need to describe it failing. I like to have my failed spells function as intended up until the moment of effect. So our failed Banishment spell encloses the enemy with the dark purple light and a sound of thunder in the distance booms closer, but the thunderclap dissipates with a hissing sound as the foe stands against the spell. The dark purple light wavers in the air and collapses, the foe standing with a resolute look on their face. Details like this create a sense of the spell's functioning and its failure in a way that dramatizes the spell despite its failure. 

What I have described so far is how to deal with spells in combat. But many spells are cast outside of combat, particularly in roleplaying campaigns. Because the momentum of combat is quick-paced, we generally want to offer detailed but brief descriptions of magic. If a few players are controlling melee combatants who roll to hit and end their turns, it doesn't make sense to take several minutes to go into the details of a spell. You want to temper your description given the demands of combat's pace. But out of combat, there are no such limits. I recommend taking out-of-combat spells further and describing more details as they appear. Let's consider some examples. 

The spell Remove Curse is a 3rd-level spell which removes malignant effects from a cursed individual. Let's say one of the members of a party is cursed in combat, and after the enemy has been dealt with, the party wants to remove the curse. Now we have the time and space to really get into the effect of the spell. You will have already described the effect of the Curse spell, and we'll say for the sake of example that you have described it as a dark red cloud that hums around the target, a whining sound and a wave of heat emanating from the target. That red cloud remains after combat. When the party's wizard casts Remove Curse, we describe it as outlined above: a pale bluish light in a sparking ball moves slowly from the caster toward the cursed individual; it crackles with energy as it encounters the cursed person, getting louder and brighter as its aura collides with the red aura. After a few moments of crackling energy, the pale blue turns white, and a loud snapping sound marks the disappearance of the curse. The person who had been cursed feels physically exhausted for a time, but can feel the strength returning to them as the seconds pass. 

This description is a touch longer than the earlier spell descriptions. And it works well because the moment of a player becoming uncursed is an important moment, and it deserves to be observed in detail by the players. This makes the wizard who cast the spell a valuable asset to the team, and the description of how the spell functions lends power to the wizard. Let's look at an example that's totally removed from a combat application to see how it can enrich a narrative moment. 

We'll use the spell Fabricate for this example. Fabricate allows a user to create an item out of a selection of resources, such as a wooden bridge from a clump of trees. The wizard in our party wants to create several outfits of average clothing from a heap of linen. When they cast the spell, it's time to provide the details we can. So as the wizard casts while standing over the heap of linen, you describe a vibrant yellow light emerging from the wizard's fingertips, coalescing into a swirling cloud of energy over the heap of linen. Tendrils of the yellow energy reach down from the cloud and begin to manipulate the linen, folding and stretching each piece. The linens move faster and faster until a blast of orange light explodes; when the player characters blink away the burst of light, five sets of linen outfits are laid side-by-side on the ground where the heap was. The clothing is warm to the touch, and the area smells faintly of fresh cloth. 

This description takes the foundation of the spell and fills in details so that it will entertain the players. It creates an impression of the power the wizard holds. And it makes a narrative moment out of what could otherwise simply be the wizard obtaining a set of clothing. Your players will take note of your descriptions and try to cast spells in ways that make the most of the detailed spell descriptions you provide. 

A final note on describing magic: it's easy for a magic spell to seem more impressive than someone trying to strike an enemy with a sword. And you don't want your players who are melee specialists to feel as though they aren't as powerful or valuable as spellcasters. My advice is to offer the best descriptions you can of magic and try to match that intensity with your combat descriptions--there are plenty of ways to make a melee attack more exciting than simply rolling the dice. Once your players are receiving detailed descriptions of their actions in and even out of combat, they will be eager to best their previous actions in terms of excitement. Once you have communicated that magic is something to get excited about, your players will get into the spirit of it and have fun with their use of spells. And that's your goal as a GM: get your players invested in the process of playing and making decisions. 

That's all for now. Good luck turning magic descriptions into something that enriches your game.As always, if there's something I didn't cover here or you would like to see written about here, comment below! Look out for a guide to the accessories you need to play, a guide to building a strong party, and uses for my expanded Wild Surge Table. Until next time, happy gaming!

Back to the homepage (where you can find everything!)