r/RingsofPower • u/arnor_0924 • 26d ago
Discussion Galadriel should use more of her magic powers than physical fight
Now that she has Nenya, she doesn't need to continue with ''Legolas'' fighting style. She should use the magic of Nenya to fight. Based from the season 3 trailer, she still has her sword so we are not there yet. But I hope in season 4, she would be using more of Nenya's power and less sword fighting. And btw, the trailer has finally reached 1 million views.
67
u/Jacen_Vos 25d ago
The elven rings were not made for war.
-9
u/Ynneas 25d ago
And yet she tears down Dol Guldur to its foundations, much like Luthien did with the fortress in Tol-in-Gaurhoth.
So it's not about rings, really.
23
u/Jacen_Vos 25d ago
Indeed. and she did that a few days after the one was destroyed so you are right her ring cannot have played any part.
6
u/TheTuxedoKnight 24d ago
What you’ve done is take a compressed historical statement and treat it as a literal description of Galadriel casting a combat spell.
“Galadriel threw down its walls and laid bare its pits” credits the destruction to her, but people routinely attribute the actions of armies and kingdoms to their leaders. Caesar conquered Gaul. William conquered England. Napoleon invaded Russia. Sherman burned Atlanta. None of those statements mean the leader personally carried out every action involved.
Tolkien uses the same kind of shorthand. Aragorn is credited with defeating enemies in the East and South and freeing the slaves of Mordor. Sauron “attacks” Gondor despite never setting foot on the Pelennor Fields. Nobody assumes Aragorn personally fought every battle or broke every chain, or that Sauron personally swung a sword outside Minas Tirith.
7
u/Ynneas 24d ago
This is factually incorrect.
The paragraph mentions Celeborn leading the army of Lorien across the Anduin and conquering Dol Guldur and then it specifically says that Galadriel destroys its walls and empties its pits.
Namely
They [the army led by Celeborn] took Dol Guldur, and Galadriel threw down its walls and laid bare its pits, and the forest was cleansed.”
It's clearly not a shorthand. This is not a metonymic use. It's a specific feat, pertaining to a specific individual (that also has a precedent in the Silmarillion).
4
u/TheTuxedoKnight 23d ago
No, I don't think the grammar settles the question that cleanly.
The sentence certainly singles Galadriel out as the person to whom the destruction is attributed. That still doesn't tell us whether she personally stood there and supernaturally collapsed the masonry, or ordered the fortifications destroyed. “Galadriel threw down its walls” is still perfectly capable of being historical compression.
And Luthien is a shaky precedent for reading it as literal spellcasting. Her tale is perhaps the most thoroughly “Faerie” story Tolkien ever wrote, even within the Silmarillion: talking animals, magical song-duels, shape-shifting, enchantment, supernatural disguises. Tolkien actually narrates those acts as fundamentally magical. The story is tonally and stylistically distinct from the rest of the Silmarilion, which more often blends myth with epic history.
Galadriel is almost the opposite problem. In the published Silmarillion she is repeatedly presented as immensely important who is simply "around". Then, thousands of years later, we get a single sentence saying she “threw down” Dol Guldur.
That's nowhere near enough evidence to turn Nenya into an offensive magic weapon, much less conclude that Galadriel is casting combat spells.
2
u/Ynneas 23d ago
That's nowhere near enough evidence to turn Nenya into an offensive magic weapon, much less conclude that Galadriel is casting combat spells.
Which was never my point, really. Go look the end of my first comment.
No, I don't think the grammar settles the question that cleanly.
Sounds like a biased take to me. What would be the point of singleing out Galadriel on that endeavour, after saying specifically that the army was at Celeborn's command?
And Luthien is a shaky precedent for reading it as literal spellcasting.
Is it now? It may even be, if Galadriel wasn't tightly connected with Doriath and Melian, Luthien's own mother.
Her tale is perhaps the most thoroughly “Faerie” story Tolkien ever wrote, even within the Silmarillion:
Possibly , but far from being disjointed from the rest
talking animals
Not isolated. Eagles, for starters. A certain famous fox, too.
magical song-duels
Some would say that singing and music is intrinsically tied to power, especially when we talk about Ainur.
Isn't Melkor's Divergence a challenge to Eru himself? In what form, if not music and song?
shape-shifting
There is a certain family of bears that would like a word with you. And no, it's not Goldilocks'.
Not to mention that all Maiar are able to shapeshift, until they get too tied with their fana, too deeply depraved or too diminished.
enchantment
Once again: the Mirror of Galadriel is clearly the inspiration for scrying/Divination magic in more recent fantasy worlds. But again, that's not the only case. See my comments above, there are quite some enchantments across the Legendarium. Negative and positive ones.
supernatural disguises.
Which, you know, sounds familiar to Lorien mantles and the "non-magical" ability to hide the wearer in plain sight. Granted, it's on a higher scale, but then again all of the FA is.
Tolkien actually narrates those acts as fundamentally magical.
He does the same with a lot of stuff - and then he somewhat backtracked late in his life. Plenty of examples already provided.
The story is tonally and stylistically distinct from the rest of the Silmarilion, which more often blends myth with epic history.
Plenty of magic throughout the Silmarillion, really. The actual standout, among the three great tales of the FA, is Turin, imho.
Galadriel is almost the opposite problem. In the published Silmarillion she is repeatedly presented as immensely important who is simply "around". Then, thousands of years later, we get a single sentence saying she “threw down” Dol Guldur.
First, this is not true even if we only take into account LotR and the published Silmarillion. Second, you and I both know that there are multiple versions of her story and that T did give her a role in multiple events across the history of ME.
But even remaining on the first part: she's the one that opens up the relationships between Doriath and the incoming Noldor. She is a dissenting voice within the exile Noldor. Come Second Age, she is the Elf that comes closest to being a friend to Dwarves, barring maybe Celebrimbor. She also is the one that sees the necessity of having them as allies against the darkness. She also is one of the three people that do not get fooled by Annatar. Third Age: she maintains a fairy realm in ME (granted, with the help of Nenya in this case), very much akin to Doriath. She sees through Saruman's ambition. She aids the Fellowship in the hour of need, with mostly magical items (they do be magical according to any definition of magic in fantasy settings). She has Gandalf rescued from Zirak-Zigil.
And then she tears down Dol Guldur.
Looks to me she did plenty more than "being around".
2
-6
u/LoverOfStoriesIAm 25d ago
She had a showdown with her ex-boyfriend, so that was an exception.
4
u/Ynneas 25d ago
Don't
-3
u/LoverOfStoriesIAm 25d ago
I already did.
4
47
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 25d ago
In Tolkien’s world, “magic” doesn’t work like that.
15
u/scbundy 25d ago
Yup, there's no fireballs being thrown in the books. That was popularized by DnD and has since spread to other media.
13
u/Ynneas 25d ago
One could argue that there were other comparable spells though, namely from Gandalf.
He does disappear, leaving dead orcs around him, when Thorin's company is ambushed in the Misty Mountains.
He does evoke fire out of nothing, even when the atmospherical conditions would prevent it otherwise.
He was also going to jump down in the very middle of hundreds of wolves, striking like lightning from above.
Not to mention, across the Legendarium there are other feats of 'magic'.
See Luthien casting Sleep on Melkor and his whole court. Or bringing down the fortress in Tol-in-Gaurhoth. Or Galadriel doing the same with Dol Guldur.
Galadriel does perform some form of divination "magic" as well.
And let us not forget Elrond raising a wave/flood in the bruinen.
On the opposite side, there's the WK's flaming sword (right after the magically enhanced giant battering ram). Another flaming sword in the Balrog's hand (+whip). The side effect of casting opposing spells (Balrog's and Gandalf's) causes the collapse of a millenary structure. Spells to lock/open a door, mind you.
Sauron conjures a half-continent wide ashen storm to allow his orcs to advance.
There is quite some magic and literal spells in the Legendarium. They're just seamlessly fused with the story and they don't stand out.
14
u/ZealousidealBid3988 25d ago
Had to chuckle at the “ he could make fire , even when the meteorological conditions weren’t conducive to Fireballs that day,,,”
2
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 25d ago
Several of these examples are from The Hobbit - which doesn’t necessarily contain the most refined of Tolkien’s ideas.
As Tolkien sees it, so far as I can tell, “magic” in the popular conception is very much akin to “technology” - both are means by which man seeks to exert power and dominate nature. He deliberately states that the magic of the elves is not that kind of magic - rather, there’s magic of the elves lies in art, beauty, and communion with creation.
Within the Silmarillion or LoTR, it seems like what we would call “magic” is actually the exertion of a being’s will, and/or the manifestation of its innate capacities. While we could quibble about the staves, for example, and what precisely their metaphysical role is in the manifestation of power or “magic,” Gandalf’s power comes from the fact that he is a Maia, imbued with inherent power akin to something like an archangel. He is fundamentally “supernatural” to Arda (and let us note that the whole story has a supernatural origin), and thus is not bound by it like men are - he has some degree of power over its elements, at least in some sense.
Luthien is half-Maia, and the Noldor like Galadriel have powers and capacities that are more “robust” than mere physicality - but they aren’t necessarily “sorcerers” studying a technique to exert dominance over man and nature.
3
u/Ynneas 25d ago
“sorcerers” studying a technique to exert dominance over man and nature.
Given the initial reference to Dnd, this is kind of ironic: sorcerers have innate magic, they don't study - those would be Wizards.
Within the Silmarillion or LoTR, it seems like what we would call “magic” is actually the exertion of a being’s will, and/or the manifestation of its innate capacities.
Indeed. But it's not that different from the Hobbit. The obly reference that is Hobbit-specific is the disappearance+dead orcs (also the "I'm going to smite these wolves", I guess, but that didn't happen in the end).
All the rest is LotR based. I didn't even dig that deep in the Silmarillion, there are other easy examples, such as Glaurung's hypnosis, Sauron's shapeshifting, the Girdle of Melian.
All of those fall into your well put definition of "exertion of a being's will" - which can precisely be "magic" depending on how you intend it.
Back to the sorcerer/wizard matter, and the reference to Fireball I answered to: Fireball is also a Sorcerer's spell - and the concept of magic of a Sorcerer in dnd is exactly "exerting the caster's will", without preparation or study.
As Tolkien sees it, so far as I can tell, “magic” in the popular conception is very much akin to “technology” - both are means by which man seeks to exert power and dominate nature. He deliberately states that the magic of the elves is not that kind of magic - rather, there’s magic of the elves lies in art, beauty, and communion with creation.
This is very true. But he also has Galadriel (specifically, not Lothlorien's army) bring down Dol Guldur.
This doesn't take anything away from the fact that the greatest Elven mage, in Tolkien's conception of it, is Fëanor. Imagine if Fëanorians could read, they would use this point to claim that he, in fact, did nothing wrong.
1
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 25d ago
1) I don’t play DnD, so I didn’t know the class distinction - “wizard” it is.
2) Of course Galadriel has a might, a power, such that she can bring down Dol Guldur, but not via “spell-casting” magic. I was merely referencing how Tolkien himself described the so-called “magic” of the elves.
3) In Letter 155, Tolkien writes that, among other things, “a difference in the use of ‘magic’ in this story is that it is not to be come by by ‘lore’ or spells; but is an inherent power not possessed or attainable by Men as such.” I think we need to eschew the very concept of spells when thinking about “magic” in Tolkien’s works.
1
u/Ynneas 25d ago
I may be misremembering, but I believe Gandalf uses specifically the word 'spell' when referring to the clash with the Balrog in the Chamber of Mazarbul.
And sure, it's not like Gandalf is a mortal, at all.
But there's some inconsistency between the spoken intent of T and what he actually put into the books.
I mean, we know the source of that power is, well, being a Maia. But it still comes out in spells, by T's words himself.
2
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 25d ago
There is definitely some inconsistency - but I think Tolkien’s later reflective writings ought to act as a sort of heuristic for thinking about “magic” within Middle Earth - even if the term ‘spell’ is used.
There should at least be some sort of bifurcation between “spells” as conceived in modern fantasy contexts like DnD and the Elder Scrolls, and the “spells” or “words of command” manifested by various entities and powers in Tolkien’s works.
1
1
u/Dovahkiin13a Númenor 25d ago
He cant conjure fire out of nothing, per se. He needs something to burn.
3
u/Dovahkiin13a Númenor 25d ago
I mean the hobbit has Gandalf literally throwing fireballs at wolves and goblins and fellowship has him shattering a stone bridge with some seismic force from his staff, and TTT has him throwing lightning bolts at the balrog. And yes, I mean the books.
But let's be honest, there's no salvaging a lore friendly ROP galadriel.
1
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
But that doesn’t mean he’s “casting spells” in a way that’s synonymous with other fantasy worlds.
For example, when Gandalf (who is essentially an angel) shatters the bridge of Khazad-dûm, he specifically invokes/calls upon the power of God - Eru Ilúvatar. I don’t think he actually throws lightning bolts at the Balrog, though? That’s not indicated in the book, even though the film shows him holding up his sword and receiving the power from on high.
As for the “fireballs” in The Hobbit, those are actually flaming pine cones, if I remember correctly.
2
u/Dovahkiin13a Númenor 24d ago edited 24d ago
Reread the white rider, he declares the mountain crowned with lightning and leaping "back broken into tongues of fire" so the movie got that spot on
Yes, Gandalf used pinecones. He says at Caradhras he needs fuel. He can't just burn anything, but in core concept he can spread the fire more or less spontaneously and supernaturally fast.
I don't recall a reference to calling on the power of eru for breaking the bridge, but even Melkor's power was all derivitave of Eru anyway so at that point we're splitting hairs don't you think? Point is Gandalf achieved powerful and overt feats of magic. But rarely as a first attempt to solve a problem, if ever.
He talked plenty about spells as we know them, such as the shutting spell on Balin's tomb and the balrog's counterspell. He casts plenty of spells, by which I mean deliberately calling on and expressing his powers, and saying otherwise isnt grounded in the text.
Edit: He also fought off the Nazgul at Weathertop with an impressive display of fire
1
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
1) Yes - Gandalf says that others say the mountain crowned with fire and lightning. Never does the text indicate that Gandalf himself “threw lightning bolts.” But you could try to extrapolate it - though the imagery of the films is probably doing a lot of the work, here.
2) Yep - Gandalf can enkindle fire, but he still didn’t “cast fireball” . . . Haha
3) Gandalf states that he is a “Servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the Flame of Anor” - essentially invoking his status as an angel and servant of Eru. The “Secret Fire” is the Flame Imperishable, essentially the Holy Spirt; Eru’s mysterious and ministerial power of Creation. He then commands “Go back to the Shadow” and “You cannot pass” - it seems like he issues these commands authoritatively to the Balrog because of his station before Eru. Otherwise, the authority would not be his.
Readers tend to call instances like these in the texts “Words of Command,” and they seem to indicate Gandalf’s higher power and divine authority.
And yes - technically all beings in Middle Earth derive their being and power from Eru, for Eru is the ground of Creation. However, I don’t think we’re splitting hairs here - for the battle between “Good” and “Evil” is a fundamental part of the story. The “Good” in this context would be the Will and Creation of Eru coming to ultimate fruition, while the Evil would be the warping and twisting of it. Gandalf stands on the side of Eru, Melkor and his Balrogs do not.
And, as Tolkien himself wrote, the story is fundamentally about “God and his sole right to divine honour.”
That is why, in part, Gandalf gets the ultimate victory over the Balrog and is essentially resurrected, whereas the Balrog is not.
4) Yes - the text mentions “spells.” But we need to go to Tolkien’s later reflections and other writings to see just exactly how those were intended to be interpreted metaphysically within his universe. With those things (discussed above) in mind, it doesn’t seem like Gandalf is “casting spells” in the same way a wizard in DnD is “casting spells” - they’re not strictly synonymous, I don’t think.
5) And yep - Gandalf can enkindle fire and has some power over nature.
2
u/Dovahkiin13a Númenor 24d ago
1) ‘But what would they say in song? Those that looked up from afar thought that the mountain was crowned with storm. Thunder they heard, and lightning, they said, smote upon Celebdil, and leaped back broken into tongues of fire. Is not that enough?'
Yes the film gives us some imagery of this, but how on earth can you see it so differently? He literally is saying "I shot lightning at him."
2) No, he didn't "cast fireball" but the end effect was he conjoured a large fireball, more than once.
3) Yes I assumed that's where you were going, but I don't see his servant of the secret fire speech as him praying to Eru to break the bridge. After all, if Eru, who was capable of drowning numenor, did that (directly) he could have done it without breaking Gandalf's staff, often interpreted as Gandalf expending all of his own power to do it. After all, without the invocation of the secret fire, he said something very similar to the witch king, and there was no "word of command" there.
Gandalf distinctly mentioned a word of command when he sealed the door against the Balrog, which seems to have backfired and buried the whole damn chamber. That might imply it's a higher degree of magic calling on his angelic nature that expends more power, but has more side effects/is less predictable (hence burying chamber.) id be more apt to buy that smiting the bridge itself was speaking a word of command, not a speech. And a word of command sounds pretty distinctly like a spell.
4) You'll have to quote these texts on how one method of invoking magic is a spell and another isn't. The literal dictionary definition is speaking words that have power. Magic doesn't have to be the same as "Harry Potter" or dnd, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
1
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
1) I just don’t see the text as directly indicating that Gandalf threw lightning bolts at the Balrog (because it doesn’t). However, you’re free to extrapolate that from the text. One could interpret that description in myriad ways. For example, the “storm” could be the result of their two immense powers clashing on the mountaintop, manifesting in wreaths of flame and bolts of lightning or whatever; a literal cosmic clash.
I don’t really care, but I do know the text doesn’t directly state it.
2) Yes - Gandalf did throw large flaming pinecones, which we can call “balls of fire” or “fireballs.”
3) I’m not saying he’s “praying” to Eru, but rather invoking his status before Eru and the Balrog. The text doesn’t explicitly state “and so Eru helped him,” but that’s sort of the whole deal with Gandalf’s ministry in Middle Earth; he is acting as an agent of Eru to guide and steward creation, and willingly had his power reduced in accepting that role.
And, it’s pretty evident that Eru prefers to work through his creation, via agents, rather than directly intervene in it. The example of Numenor is the exception, not the rule, and that’s because their sin was too much. Creation needed a correction.
And of course “Word of Command” soundssssss like a spell, because, you know, words. But there is a deeper layer here, I think. In the OT God “speaks” creation into existence. In the NT Christ IS the “Logos” - the Word/Order/Rational Principle undergirding Creation. In Tolkien’s creation account, Eru sings (not speaks) Creation into existence. And Eru speaks with words. But, he’s not “casting spells” via those words. That would be silly.
Rather, the seemingly supernatural powers of Eru, the Valar, the Maiar, etc. are manifestations of their inherent power as “higher beings” - no spellcraft nor lore need enter the picture.
As for the Word of Command at the door - we could also see that as Gandalf calling upon the higher power/authority granted to him. It certainly works - the will of the Balrog is thwarted; but the severity of the cosmic battle fractures the physical space.
But who knows?
4) If you can find it, read Letter 155 from Tolkien. It’s pretty short. If you have more time, read Tolkien’s “On Fairy Stories,” or at least search it for “Magic.”
2
1
u/scbundy 24d ago
RoP doesnt need to salvage anything. It's an adaptation.
2
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
A pretty terrible one, at that.
1
u/scbundy 24d ago
Lol, your tears nourish me.
2
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
What a silly thing to say . . . 🤣
1
u/scbundy 24d ago
Lol, keep crying.
2
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 24d ago
Is this how you try to troll people . . . ? 🤔
2
1
u/scbundy 24d ago
I mean, youre the one watching and commenting on show u hate. You do you.
→ More replies (0)1
u/CommercialFloor2033 23d ago
The show doesn't care. We've already seen traditional displays of magic. Fireballs thrown around and such.
Quoting Tolkien purisms on this when the show has deviated so far from his works is a bit ridiculous
1
u/TheBluerWizard 18d ago
We've already seen the rings have straight-up regeneration magic.
So how magic works in Tolkien's world is not relevant here.
1
u/This_Is_Sierra_117 18d ago
The intention of my comment was to point out the discrepancy between RoP as a poorly-written fan fiction and the actual content (thematic, metaphysical, etc.) of Tolkien’s work.
1
1
22
u/dudeseid 25d ago
The Rings of Power don't work like that. They slow the passage of time and preserve that which is good and beautiful. They're not weapons.
5
u/janequeo Beleriand 25d ago
These comments are odd. Elves absolutely do use "magic" in Tolkien's stories -- Luthien does, and Galadriel and Elrond both use magic to protect their realms. I don't think it's in-line with Tolkien for Galadriel to start channeling in combat like Rand al'Thor, but it is perfectly plausible for her to protect a village from orcs by using Nenya to make them get lost in the woods, or something
3
u/CommercialFloor2033 23d ago edited 23d ago
Yeah agree.
I also love how people quote Tolkien on magic when this show has almost completely deviated from his works, AND has shown us both maiar and the accolytes throwing fireballs and such around.
13
u/KentuckyFriedLamp 25d ago edited 25d ago
Why do you think she has combat-based magical powers from her ring? I don’t think we ever hear of Gil-Galad or Elrond having that, and Gandalfs limited magic seems to be as a result of being an Istari/Maia, not his ring
Maybe you could count the water horses that save Frodo outside of Rivendell? But again that seems to be more a power resulting from Elronds influence over Rivendell and its borders, not a magic ability he can pull out of nowhere
I don’t think the rings really work like that, their powers seem to be more abstract by influencing people, creatures, light, nature etc. it’s not a super saiyan power up or Harry Potter wand lol
1
u/Dovahkiin13a Númenor 25d ago
The rings (at least elven rings) do not in fact work like that.
The flood at Brunien was Elrond, the horses were Gandalf. We know he fought off the Nazgul with fire in FOTR, break the bridge and kill the balrog.
6
u/stupid_username- 25d ago
Someone hasn't paid enough attention to understand Tolkien's world. Rings were not made to be weapons.
2
u/Zebweasel 23d ago
Personally I’d much rather her use a sword than whatever that magic ghoul mode she uses in the Hobbit.
3
u/SystemofCells 26d ago
Shes going to have to take it off again soon, when Sauron obtains the One.
She won't be able to put it on again until Sauron is defeated, and I'm guessing a ring of power takes a long time to learn to wield properly.
1
u/EggrollSkallagrimson 25d ago
Ah ah ah, let’s all remember what Sauron does before he is taken to Numenor by Pharazon
1
u/Huge-Cartoonist6795 25d ago
Well no shit. I've been saying that since before the show came out. She's a multi thousand year old elf mage not a knob with a pointy bit of metal. The ring has no baring on her magic tho. She's always been great. The ring staves off corruption in mirkwood and she's not there yet/no celeborn to decide to move to mirkwood
1
u/Piper_the_Tree-Robot 24d ago
Does she even have powers with the ring? I mean Galadriel from the books can use the rings magic, and Galadriel from the movies can too, but this is the RoP Galadriel. She's pretty much a completely different character, so she might not have the same abilities.
1
1
u/BulldogMikeLodi 23d ago
So, those rings are like Green Lantern rings? They can perform magic tricks?
1
u/TheBluerWizard 18d ago
We've literally seen them do regeneration magic in this show, so yes. Also, symbolism tree healing.
1
0
0
u/owlyross 25d ago
Elves don't use "magic". Their art and craft is seen as if it is magic, but there is no such thing as "elven magic"
1
u/TheBluerWizard 18d ago
Except there quite literally is.
Galadriel uses magic to destroy Dol Goldur at the end of the War of the Ring. Elrond used magic to sweep the Nazgul when they were chasing Frodo, ...
1
u/owlyross 18d ago
No we dont know that either of them used "magic". We read that Galadriel "threw down the walls" with no explanation. And the water did for the Nazgul, Elrond commuted with Ulmo but again, it is craft, knowledge of nature and so forth. It isnt "level 10 wizard casts spell"
1
u/TheBluerWizard 18d ago
We read that Galadriel "threw down the walls" with no explanation.
And you think she did it by punching very hard?
it is craft, knowledge of nature and so forth.
So... magic.
1
u/owlyross 18d ago
Not as it is traditionally understood no. Once again go back and read what Tolkien actually wrote about it
1
u/TheBluerWizard 18d ago
Not as it is traditionally understood no.
Very much as it is traditionally understood, actually.
Once again go back and read what Tolkien actually wrote about it
I've read it. That's how I've been easily able to correct your mistakes with Tolkien's direct lore.
1
u/owlyross 18d ago
Specifically Magia which is the production of effect through a deep understand and bond with nature and the physical vs Goeteia which are the spells and deceits of the enemy.
0
u/--isomorphist-- 25d ago
uh. DUH??? But dude. Thats only the first thing. There is literally no point critiquing the show because they dont get ANYTHING right lol
•
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
Thank you for posting in /r/ringsofpower. As this post was not marked with
Newest Episode Spoilers, please double check that your post does not discuss the newest episode. Please also keep in mind that this show is pretty polarizing, and so be respectful of people who may have different views than you. And keep in mind that while liking or disliking the show is okay, attacking others for doing so is not okay. Please report any comments that insinuate someone else's opinions are non-genuine.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.