Could magic work as an adaptation in an ecosystem or would it

>>50617796
Depends how magic works, but I'd say they fit just fine. Something that can turn invisible is still going to be foiled by keen hearing and sense of smell. Presumably using magic would also have higher caloric intakes or development time, meaning a magical animal might be limited to smaller populations.

>>50617796

I think it would make more sense for inately magical creatures to predate on humans and other races that regularly make use of magic but then that doesn't stop the magic arms race as it were. For instance, having some kind of large herbivores that can fly by walking on air as a means of defense suddenly causes carnivors to start flying to find some way to pull them out of the air

>>50617796
First, you'd have to define what magic can do and what its limitations are, before you can tell how strongly it'd be selected for evolutionarily.

>>50617888
Even if large herbivores can fly, a mundane predator could still get them. It's just a matter of either sneaking up on them as normal before they can take off, or ambushing them when they trying to graze in treetops.

Depending on how quickly they can take flight and how long they can stay airborne, this might only change things slightly for lions hunting zebras or wolves hunting deer. Plus, even if it is a magical adaptation, it may not be the same one. Wolves might develop a way to howl while surrounding something to create a silence effect and preventing them from taking off. Lions might just start breathing fire so that if their initial ambush fails they can spit a fireball while they're still near the ground to take one out. Or maybe the large herbivores instead start getting preyed upon by giant spiders with giant webs that aren't really magic at all.

>>50617796
depends on how good the creature has evolved to be magic, I guess

I mean, birds evolved flight, and they're p good at it, but humans built flight and I dare you to imply that a bird flying past your window would be as impressive as a fighter jet breaking the sound barrier as it screams past your house flying like ten feet off the ground.

so the magic birb would be faster and whatever, but it wouldn't be good enough to become the dominant species just based on that.

as for inter-animal relationships, maybe its similar to how humans work.
we're shitty at lifting, running, jumping, all that shit, but we can think like a bunch of thinking motherfuckers; so maybe your magic animals sacrifice proficiency with normal animal shit to become magic, and in situations where they cant use their magic (which would become more abundant as animals evolve around a new threat) get fucked by regular animals that just punch good.

the only thing is you'd probably want to keep the power levels relative, so if the magic animals are good as fuck at doing their magic stuff, the regular animals are probably going to be on steroids

>>50617796
Depends on how the new lifeforms settle into the ecosystem. A bird that spends most of its time invisible won't have to fear foxes or hawks and will have a problem when looking for a mate, otherwise it's still just a bird. Giant teleporting spiders on the other hand, they are going to compete with and push out all other predators, and then kill or drive off all prey that doesn't have suitably effective protective magic.

File: IMG_6935.jpg (155KB, 1500x885px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1500x885px

>>50617796
Isn't this the explanation Eberron gave for magical beasts?

>>50617796
An adaptation induced by "magic" isn't different than any other adaptation in terms of natural selection.

That said, the scope of what you mean by "magic" is kind of important.
It's one thing to have, say, a bug that stings you with a miniature magic missile instead of venom.
An ecosystem where full-grown flying dragons are a viable lifeform than all bets are off.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/52318.Wild_Seed?from_search=true

>Could magic work as an adaptation in an ecosystem or would it just fuck everything up?

Definitely. They can be simulated as traits like any other trait. Define their costs, define their benefits, etc.

>Would magical beasts be able to live side by side with non-magical ones

Sure.

>or would an evolutionary arms race develop with until all mundane beasts have been out-competed or devoured?

Not necessarily. That can happen, or not. You would probably have to throw some new traits in there like "magical resistance." However if you're thinking of magical resistance as also being a magical trait, it could still work: Some non-magical creatures may still have sufficient advantage just from being non-magical, because they're not as interesting to enemies and predators. If there is sufficient partitioning of the ecosystem into magical/non-magical sub-systems then *not* having magic may itself be an advantageous niche.

The great thing about this question is that it's what you'd call a simulation question. That is to say, there's no way to calculate this out using only math. You really won't know until you try.

File: shutterstock_198664448.jpg (8MB, 4653x3102px) Image search: [Google]

8MB, 4653x3102px

>>50617796
Well, sure; it depends on what you mean when you say "magic"--what exactly makes something magical, as opposed to non-magical.

From certain perspectives, we're pretty magical.

File: liontree.jpg (290KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 1024x682px

In any setting where magic exists, it's just part of the natural world. Not every animal is gonna take advantage of it, just like not every animal can swim in water, fly in air, or use light to see. But if magic exists, it's probably a fundamental part of the ecosystem. It might even be literal "life force," produced and metabolized by all living things. Ask your local druid.

>>50617796
It really depends on what the magical beasts in question do. Something like a griffon wouldn't really hedge out more mundane creatures, while a fire-breathing dragon very well could. In the way of herbivores, magic might enable new ecosystem niches instead of kicking out mundane herbivores.

>>50620830
What's necessarily magical about griffons? Do they violate laws of physics? I mean there was pretty big flying birds long ago.

>>50622157
Griffons aren't aerodynamic or balanced at all. The wings are way too small for the body, and the griffons ass would hang as it struggled to fly. Not to mention how ridiculous the calorie intake a creature like that would need to sustain itself assuming it could fly, which would quickly devastate any ecosystem