The Unified Theory of the Weave

Abstract

Archival Summary

This document explains magic in Eldoria in terms that remain useful under stress.

I treat magic as an intentional act that changes the world, and I focus on what happens after that change—how the Weave resists, corrects, redirects, or collects payment.

---

Read This First

If you remember only three things, remember these:

1. A working is an intentional attempt to change reality through non-ordinary means.
2. An anchor is what makes that change “stick” instead of sliding or snapping back.
3. Recognition is what makes the change heavier: the more minds that truly accept it, the more the world must accommodate it.

Then, after any working, the Weave settles the outcome by one or more of Five Settlements (see §2).

Archivist note right

Most failures come from people asking “Can I do it?” instead of “What will it cost, and who will notice?”

---

1) Core Terms

The Weave

The Weave is the world’s ordinary order: causes make effects, names mean something, bodies stay themselves, and the world does not rewrite itself without consequence.

Working

A working is any deliberate act meant to alter the world by non-ordinary means.

Examples:

• a sung phrase that compels,
• a diagram that wards,
• a vow spoken as binding speech,
• a rite that calls a sanctioned pattern,
• a transformation, healing, curse, or transport.

Breach

A breach is a working that forces an outcome the world would not normally permit under those conditions.

Not all workings are equal breaches. Some are small nudges; some are deep contradictions.

Anchor

An anchor is what makes a working belong here—what prevents it from drifting, collapsing, or becoming “nearest-outcome.”

Common anchors:

• true names and precise correspondences,
• vows and contracts,
• sanctioned rites and relic-claims,
• place-accords (shrines, boundaries, old roads),
• repeated reinforcement over time.

Rule of thumb: more anchors = more stability.

Recognition

Recognition is not mere observation. It is acceptance with meaning.

A person becomes a “true witness” when they:

• understand what happened (“that was a binding vow”),
• believe it carries authority (“this rite is sanctioned”),
• repeat it, record it, teach it, enforce it, or build decisions around it.

Rule of thumb: more recognition = heavier consequences (good and bad).

Archivist note left

A crowd is noisy. A witness is costly.

---

2) The Five Settlements

After a breach, the Weave resolves the situation through one or more “settlements.” These are the recurring patterns I have found across credible traditions.

1) Compensation

If you gain something without paying for it, the Weave assigns a debt.

Examples:

• healing without exchange → illness returns, moves, or resurfaces later,
• conjured wealth → contested ownership, sudden loss elsewhere, ruin by “coincidence,”
• creation-from-nothing → the harshest debts.

2) Reversion

If a working is weakly anchored, it collapses back toward baseline.

Examples:

• transformations revert unevenly,
• illusions fade when unattended,
• identity-overwrites unravel unless reinforced.

3) Substitution

If your request is too contradictory, the Weave delivers the nearest outcome it can make coherent.

Examples:

• the spell lands on the nearest plausible target,
• the meaning is fulfilled instead of the literal phrasing,
• the result follows intent more than precision.

4) Witness-tax

The more recognition a working earns, the heavier it becomes—more durable, more expensive, more dangerous to undo, and more likely to escalate.

Examples:

• a private blessing fades; a public miracle becomes history,
• an oath witnessed and believed becomes harder to break than the same oath whispered in doubt.

5) Attractor Attention

Repeated breaches draw attention: gods, patrons, myth-forms, hunters, inquisitors, archives.

Examples:

• repeating the same breach-shape becomes a signal flare,
• public demonstrations call rivals as surely as they call admirers.

Archivist note right

Do not confuse “it worked” with “it was safe.” Success often only means the bill has not arrived yet.

Addendum: Creation by Resonance (Bards)

Creation-work is the cleanest way to incur debt.

A Creation Bard does not merely “make an object.” They persuade the world to tolerate a thing that has no evident source. This concentrates ${\beta }_{\text{conservation}}$, and when the created object is treated as legitimate (spent, traded, sworn upon), it rapidly accumulates recognition-load $\nu$.

Therefore, creation-from-nothing is rarely paid in exhaustion alone. The Weave collects by some mixture of:

• Reversion (the object fails when relied upon),
• Compensation (loss elsewhere, delayed scarcity, contested ownership),
• Witness-tax (the more it is accepted as real, the heavier the bill),
• and Attention (repeated creation-shapes become legible).

If you do not name a payment, you are not avoiding cost—you are choosing a stranger to pay it.

---

3) The Three Questions That Simplify Everything

When writing a scene or adjudicating a spell, ask only:

1. How big is the change? (small / medium / large)
2. What anchors it? (names, vows, rites, place, repetition)
3. Who truly recognizes it? (private / small circle / public / recorded doctrine)

From these three, you can predict which settlements are likely.

---

4) Why Different Traditions Feel Different

This is not hierarchy. It is specialization.

Correspondence (Wizardly craft and kin)

• Strong in anchors and precision (names, diagrams, mapped relations).
• Tends to reduce Substitution and uncontrolled Reversion.

Resonance (Bards and certain bloodlines)

• Strong in shaping recognition (voice, music, shared emotion).
• Can escalate Witness-tax quickly—powerful, but risky in crowds.

Covenant (Patronage, oaths, certain priesthoods)

• Strong anchor borrowed from an authority or vow.
• Often stable—until terms are enforced or debts come due.

Concordance (Clerics, druids, land-taught)

• Works through accepted patterns (season, shrine, deity-shape, ancestral accord).
• Lower chaos when aligned, but constrained by rite and context.

---

5) Equivalent Exchange

Return from death is resisted more violently than most changes.

A practical rule—ugly, consistent:

• A life for a life is the simplest payment.
• If no life is offered, the Weave often collects by Substitution: a different death, a delayed death, a returned person altered, or a debt that unfolds through a household or bloodline.

Archivist note left

People ask if return is “worth it.” They rarely ask who will be counted as “equivalent.”

---

6) Confluences

There are times when settlements accelerate—when debts come due and reversions sharpen.

One confluence is indisputable: dawn. Many workings weaken, settle, or clarify at dawn.

I will not yet publish a full catalogue.

---

7) Practical Guidance (Survival Notes)

1. Anchor first. If it must last, bind it properly.
2. Control recognition. Privacy reduces cost; publicity increases weight.
3. Do not repeat breach-shapes casually. Repetition draws attention.
4. Name the payment. If you do not choose the cost, the Weave will.

Archivist note right

The Weave is not cruel. It is consistent. Cruelty is what careless people call consistency when it reaches them.

Appendix A: Quantification of Settlement

Note

This appendix is written for readers who prefer formal structure. It is not required for practical use.

I employ symbols to prevent the common failure of scholars: mistaking confidence for clarity.

---

A1) Variables and Units

I use the following quantities as field approximations. None are perfectly measurable; all are inferable from repeatable outcomes.

• Δ — Dissonance / Settlement Pressure
  A scalar representing how strongly the world “presses back” toward settlement after a breach.
  Operational sign: increased probability of Compensation, Reversion, Substitution, and Attention events.

• β — Breach Magnitude
  The departure from baseline coherence required to produce the outcome.
  Operational sign: how much the outcome violates ordinary constraints (distance, identity, conservation, finality).

• α — Anchor Strength
  The binding force that makes an outcome belong here.
  Operational sign: resistance to drift, reduced Substitution, delayed or softened Reversion.

• ν — Witness-load (Recognition Weight)
  A measure of recognition—not merely the number of eyes, but the strength of shared acceptance and meaning.
  Operational sign: durability of public miracles and the escalating cost of undoing them.

Archivist note left

I write ν as a “load” rather than a “count” because ten minds that understand can outweigh a thousand that merely gasp.

---

A2) The Baseline Approximation

A compact approximation that fits a wide range of field ledgers:

$$\Delta \approx \frac{\beta \cdot \nu }{\alpha }$$

Interpretation:

• Δ rises with β (bigger contradiction),
• Δ rises with ν (stronger recognition),
• Δ falls with α (stronger anchoring).

This is not a law. It is a reliable first estimate.

Addendum: $\nu$ cannot be zero

Problem (High confidence): If $\nu$ is treated as only external recognition, then a working cast in total isolation implies $\nu \approx 0$, and thus $\Delta \approx 0$. That would make “private magic” free, which is false in every field ledger we possess.

Correction (High confidence): A working requires intent, and intent requires recognition. The caster is always a recognizer. Therefore $\nu$ has a nonzero floor.

Preferred definition:

$$\nu \approx r_{\text{caster}}+\sum _{i=1}^N{r}_i$$

Where:

• $r_{\text{caster}}\ge 1$ is the caster’s internal recognition load (the act of knowing what they are doing).
• $\sum r_i$ remains the external witness-load as recorded elsewhere.

Minimal consequence (High confidence): Since $r_{\text{caster}}\ge 1$, then $\nu \ge 1$, and the baseline estimate implies:

$$\Delta \approx \frac{\beta \nu }{\alpha }\ge \frac{\beta }{\alpha }$$

Interpretation: Privacy can reduce amplification (external $\sum r_i$), but it never erases cost.

---

A3) Time Dependence: Settlement Rate

Most workings persist. Therefore Δ is not static.

Define P(t) as the settlement rate:

$$P(t):=\frac{d\Delta }{dt}$$

A workable approximation:

$$\frac{d\Delta }{dt}\approx \frac{\beta (t)\nu (t)}{\alpha (t)}$$

Total settlement pressure accumulated from t₀ to t₁:

$${\Delta }_{\text{total}}(t_0\to t_1)\approx {\int }_{t_0}^{t_1}\frac{\beta (t)\nu (t)}{\alpha (t)}dt$$

Field use: A small breach held for a long time can outstrip a large breach held briefly.

Archivist note right

People fear the “big spell.” They should fear the spell that never stops billing.

---

A4) Local Resistance: Weave Density ρ(x,t)

Identical rites do not behave identically everywhere.

Let ρ(x,t) denote local resistance to contradiction at location x and time t.

Including ρ:

$${\Delta }_{\text{total}}(t_0\to t_1;x)\approx {\int }_{t_0}^{t_1}\frac{\beta (t)\nu (t)\rho (x,t)}{\alpha (t)}dt$$

Operational signs of high ρ:

• substitutions become more literal,
• reversions sharpen,
• compensation arrives sooner or spreads wider,
• attractor attention escalates faster.

Operational signs of low ρ:

• minor breaches “take” easily,
• effects persist with minimal anchoring,
• debts tend to delay and disperse.

---

A5) Spatial Spread

For workings distributed across a region Ω, settlement scales with the “surface” the world must keep coherent.

$${\Delta }_{\Omega }\approx {\int }_{\Omega }\frac{\beta (x)\nu (x)\rho (x,t)}{\alpha (x)}dA$$

Important clarification: here, ν(x) is best read as local witness-loading—how strongly recognition is imposed at that location—rather than literal headcount per square-step.

Field use: It is usually cheaper to bind one room firmly than to “lightly” bind a district.

---

A6) Crossings and Routes

Some workings are path-shaped: transport, passage, threshold-work.

Let γ be a path from x₀ to x₁. Then:

$${\Delta }_{\gamma }\approx {\int }_{\gamma }\frac{\beta (s)\nu (s)\rho (s)}{\alpha (s)}ds$$

Field use: routes differ in cost. The shortest route is not always the least expensive to make coherent.

---

A7) Decomposing β: Common Contributors to Breach Magnitude

To keep β from becoming a hand-waved “power level,” I decompose it into typical contributors:

$$\beta \approx {\beta }_{\text{distance}}+{\beta }_{\text{identity}}+{\beta }_{\text{conservation}}+{\beta }_{\text{finality}}+{\beta }_{\text{scope}}$$

Where:

• ${\beta }_{\text{distance}}$ increases with transport, summoning across boundaries, and illicit passage.
• ${\beta }_{\text{identity}}$ increases with altering who/what a thing is (shape, name, memory, selfhood).
• ${\beta }_{\text{conservation}}$ increases when creating “gain” without an evident source.
• ${\beta }_{\text{finality}}$ increases when attempting reversals that violate closure (especially death).
• ${\beta }_{\text{scope}}$ increases with radius, duration, and the number of targets.

You need not compute these. The decomposition is only to train instinct.

---

A8) Anchors α: Types and Stacking

Anchors are not all equal. In practice, α stacks by kind.

Common anchor classes:

• Name-anchors: true names, precise correspondences, sigils.
• Vow-anchors: oaths, contracts, sworn terms.
• Rite-anchors: sanctioned forms, relic participation, properly witnessed ceremony.
• Place-anchors: shrines, boundary stones, old roads, treaty-lines.
• Repetition-anchors: reinforcement over time (the world gets used to the sentence you keep rewriting).

A useful field model:

$$\alpha \approx {\alpha }_{\text{name}}+{\alpha }_{\text{vow}}+{\alpha }_{\text{rite}}+{\alpha }_{\text{place}}+{\alpha }_{\text{repeat}}$$

Archivist note left

The difference between a “miracle” and a “catastrophe” is often nothing more than whether someone bothered to anchor the work as if it mattered.

---

A9) Recognition ν: From Observation to Doctrine

Recognition behaves nonlinearly. A crowd does not automatically imply ν is large.

I model ν as:

$$\nu \approx \sum _{i=1}^N{r}_i$$

Where each witness contributes rᵢ, their recognition strength.

A practical scale for rᵢ:

• r ≈ 0: did not notice, forgot, dismissed.
• r ≈ 1: saw it, believes it happened, but cannot name it.
• r ≈ 2: can name what happened (“binding vow,” “sanctioned rite”).
• r ≈ 3: records it, teaches it, enforces it, or reorganizes decisions around it.

Field use: Ten witnesses at r=3 can outweigh a hundred spectators at r=1.

---

A10) Predicting Which Settlement Arrives

Δ measures strain, but the form of settlement depends on context.

A practical heuristic:

• Low α → Reversion likely.
• High β with weak precision → Substitution likely.
• High ν → Witness-tax and Attention likely.
• High ${\beta }_{\text{conservation}}$ → Compensation likely.
• Repeated breach-shape → Attention increasingly likely.

This is an estimator, not a guarantee.

---

A11) Equivalent Exchange: Formal Statement

Return-work (reversal of death) concentrates β_finality and therefore produces extreme settlement pressure.

Let v(x,t) denote vital coherence density (the strength of the “living-pattern” being imposed).

Total imposed return-work across body-region Ω over duration [t₀,t₁]:

$${\mathcal{V}}_{\text{return}}\approx {\int }_{t_0}^{t_1}{\int }_{\Omega }v(x,t)dVdt$$

Empirically, credible returns satisfy a compensation condition:

$${\mathcal{V}}_{\text{payment}}\ge {\mathcal{V}}_{\text{return}}$$

Payment may be offered deliberately or extracted by Substitution.

Archivist note right

People object to the phrase “a life for a life” because it is blunt. The Weave is blunter.

---

A12) A Variational Observation

[Hypothesis | Low–Medium confidence] Among competing methods that seek the same outcome, the most stable methods tend to minimize accumulated settlement pressure.

I express the conjecture as:

$$\text{Stable method}\approx \arg \min \left({\int }_{t_0}^{t_1}\frac{\beta (t)\nu (t)\rho (x,t)}{\alpha (t)}dt\right)$$

I do not assert this as law. I record it because it matches too many survival stories to ignore.

Archivist note left

If elegance consistently survives, then elegance is not taste. It is economy.

---

Abstract

Many novices assume their limit is “energy.” This is an error of metaphor.

A caster’s practical limit is how many complete bindings they can prepare and keep coherent without drift, collapse, or uncontrolled settlement.

---

I. The Misunderstanding

The public imagines that a practitioner “runs out of power” the way a lamp runs out of oil.

In most disciplined practice, what runs out first is not vigor, but prepared structure.

A working does not succeed because the caster wants it hard enough. It succeeds because the change is made to belong—anchored, constrained, and made coherent.

When practitioners speak of “slots,” they are describing the number of prepared bindings they can carry without distortion.

Archivist note right

If you resent the word “prepared,” it is because you want the result without the cost of the preparation. The Weave shares my opinion of that desire.

---

II. What a “Slot” Actually Is

A slot is a complete, rehearsed, internally consistent binding-shape held ready for use.

It is not the spell itself. It is the stability that allows a spell to be cast without the Weave renegotiating the outcome.

In practical terms, a prepared binding:

• reduces ambiguity in what you are attempting,
• narrows the paths along which drift can occur,
• and allows the bill to be paid in a controlled way rather than collected by accident.

This is why more complex workings require larger “slots”: not because the world demands theatrics, but because the binding must be broader, tighter, and more resilient to remain coherent.

---

III. Why the Supply Is Finite

A complete binding is not a single thought. It is a maintained lattice of relation: intent, target, constraint, and permitted paths of settlement.

Keep too many lattices active and they begin to interfere. The result is familiar:

• your precision decays,
• drift becomes common,
• and the world starts to substitute outcomes you did not choose.

Practitioners call this “being spent.” The Archives call it avoidable.

---

IV. Rest, Study, Prayer, Rehearsal (Why Slots Return)

Prepared bindings decay with use. After a working, the binding does not vanish; it unravels—because it has served its purpose and absorbed a portion of what would otherwise become uncontrolled residue.

To restore your capacity, you must rebuild coherence:

• by study (correspondence),
• by rehearsal (resonance),
• by rite (concordance),
• by vow-renewal (covenant),
• or by any practice that re-lays the binding without introducing new contradictions.

This is why “rest” matters. It is not idleness. It is re-anchoring.

Archivist note left

In every city I have visited, there is a tavern full of practitioners who believe fatigue is proof of greatness. They are not great. They are merely loud.

---

V. What Slots Do Not Protect You From

Prepared bindings chiefly strengthen the anchor side of a working.

They do not erase the other multipliers.

If you cast in a crowded square, you have invited witnesses. If you repeat the same breach-shape until it becomes recognizable, you have trained the world to notice you.

No private discipline prevents public consequences.

---

VI. Overreach (Casting Without Prepared Bindings)

It is possible to force a working without a prepared binding.

The Archives do not pretend otherwise.

But understand what you are doing: you are attempting to impose a contradiction without the stabilizing lattice that makes it belong.

When such attempts “succeed,” they succeed by borrowing from the only places left:

• your body,
• your mind,
• your companions,
• your future,
• or your anonymity.

If you must risk it, do so knowingly, and do not call survival “proof.”

Archivist note right

The Weave permits many things once. It punishes repetition, not because it is moral, but because repetition makes you legible.