Hard Magic vs Soft Magic: Fantasy Magic Systems Explained
Sanderson's Laws, magic systems, and why some fantasy has rules while others have mystery. A guide to how magic works in fiction.
Some magic has rules. Exact costs, specific limitations, predictable outcomes. Other magic is mysterious, unexplained, more about wonder than mechanics.
Both approaches work. Here's why the distinction matters.
The Basic Spectrum
Hard Magic: Clear rules, defined costs, reader understands the system. Magic is like science but fantastical.
Soft Magic: Mysterious, unexplained, emphasis on wonder. Magic is... magic.
Most systems fall somewhere in between, but the distinction helps identify what you're reading.
Sanderson's Laws (The Short Version)
Brandon Sanderson formalized some principles that are now widely discussed:
First Law: An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is proportional to how well the reader understands that magic.
Translation: If magic is going to fix problems, readers need to understand the rules. Otherwise it feels like cheating.
Second Law: Limitations are more interesting than powers.
Translation: What magic CAN'T do is often more interesting than what it can.
Third Law: Expand what you have before adding something new.
Translation: Deep systems beat broad systems.
These aren't universal rules, but they explain why hard magic works the way it does.
Hard Magic Examples
Mistborn (Sanderson): Allomancy is incredibly systematic. Each metal does one thing. Costs are clear. The reader can predict and appreciate clever uses.
Avatar: The Last Airbender: Four elements, each with specific capabilities and limitations. Viewers understand what benders can and can't do.
Fullmetal Alchemist: Equivalent exchange. You can't create something from nothing. The rules drive the entire plot.
Most LitRPG: Explicit systems with stats and skills are the ultimate hard magic.
Soft Magic Examples
Lord of the Rings: What exactly can Gandalf do? Nobody knows. He's a wizard. He does wizard things.
Harry Potter: Magic has rules-ish, but they're inconsistent. Why can magic do X but not Y? Because the plot needs it.
Game of Thrones: Magic exists but it's rare, mysterious, and often unexplained.
Most fairy tales: Magic just... works. Don't ask questions.
Why Hard Magic Is Popular Now
I think several things have pushed fiction toward harder magic:
Video games trained readers. We're used to systems with explicit rules. Gamified magic feels natural.
Fan scrutiny. The internet picks apart inconsistencies. Hard magic is more defensible.
Progression fantasy. If characters are getting stronger in measurable ways, you need systems to track that.
Sanderson's influence. He's massively popular and he literally teaches this stuff.
Why Soft Magic Still Works
Hard magic can feel clinical. Sometimes you want wonder, not mechanics.
Mystery and atmosphere. Unexplained magic creates a different feeling.
Flexibility. Authors can do what the story needs without rules-lawyering.
Focus elsewhere. If magic isn't the point, detailed systems can distract.
The Tolkien defense. LOTR has soft magic and it's the foundation of modern fantasy.
The Middle Ground
Most modern fantasy actually does both:
Protagonist magic is hard. The reader needs to understand what the MC can do.
Background magic is soft. Ancient artifacts, enemy powers, and world mythology can be mysterious.
Mistborn does this. Allomancy has rigid rules, but there are also mysterious forces the characters don't fully understand.
What This Means For Readers
Understanding the spectrum helps you find what you want:
Want systematic, predictable magic? → Sanderson, LitRPG, most progression fantasy
Want mysterious, atmospheric magic? → Traditional epic fantasy, fairy tale retellings
Want both? → Look for "rational fantasy" or stories that explicitly play with both
Creating Your Preferences
When you're describing what you want to read (or generate on narrator), thinking about magic hardness helps:
"I want a hard magic system where each spell has a specific cost" vs "I want mysterious magic that maintains a sense of wonder"
These give very different results, and both are valid preferences.
My Take
I lean toward hard magic because I like the puzzle element. Watching characters solve problems within established constraints is satisfying.
But some of my favorite moments in fiction involve magic that's genuinely inexplicable. Wonder has value.
The best authors know when to explain and when to leave mystery.
The Real Question
What do you want magic to DO in the story?
If magic is a tool for problem-solving: make it hard enough that solutions feel earned.
If magic is a source of wonder: keep some mystery.
If magic is both: be strategic about what you explain.
There's no wrong answer. There's just what serves your story.