There are no absolute definitions. Le Guin's _Earthsea_ books had
sorcerers as having less training than wizards, and no staffs, with
witches being real amateurs in name-magic. Pratchett's discworld has
women practicing witchcraft, sometimes psionic in nature, and males
practicing wizardry with much flashier magic and larger meals. Brust
sorcerers just practice sorcery, while wizards know lots of vague
things. Of course, the fantasy sorcerer, who often treats magic as a
standin for technology, can differ from an anthropological sorcerer, who
tends to supposedly be playing with pissed off spirits.
Vaguely, I'd presume a wizard to be equivalent to or more powerful than a
sorcerer, and a magician to have fewer connotations carried by the other two
terms, whatever those connotations might be. But RuneQuest (a game) had
"mage' as a term for a really powerful sorcerer. *shrug* Sorry. This part
of the world doesn't come in neat boxes.
-xx- Damien R. Sullivan X-)
[To drop McKinley, tell: majordomo@cco.caltech.edu unsubscribe mckinley]
Received on Wed Jun 10 21:42:38 1998
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 13 2006 - 14:38:24 PST