each of them one more reason to wonder

No? It's -

Okay, there are magical animals that are not people, some places. Like unicorns, and other stuff from Hazel. How would Hari law tend to handle those?

...So instead of just species which are both of able to understand and follow laws and able to do magic, and species which are neither, they have species that are just one of those? Well, it's the being able to understand and follow laws that matters to being a free citizen, and Har has dealt with individuals who can do magic but not follow laws and can treat releasing them in Har the same way as releasing any dangerous mage like that in Har.

...Incidentally, standard evolutionary theories predict this should be a really unstable situation and the Hazel creatures should swiftly either wipe themselves out or become more intelligent.

The evolutionary biologists of Vanda Nossëo do not appear to think so. It helps that they don't have the same array of magical powers as folks in Har, unicorns for example purify water and stuff like that, not really the kind of thing you can get yourself killed with.

Oh, that'd do it. And the entities that understand and follow laws but don't do magic, why is that not insanely expensive to maintain for basically no benefit?

What would be expensive about it? They can still do jobs that don't happen to involve magic, like many Hari people do.

Having brains that support minds like that is very calorically expensive and, yes, useful in other ways in a society which has the infrastructure to make use of it but, for example, a judge doesn't have to use magic at all but the court needs a knowledge mage and without that there's no point in having a judge, a writer doesn't need magic but copying their books by hand would be so slow and laborious - and this is assuming they do in fact have the cognitive abilities of someone who received an education (because magic makes farms productive enough that people can spend time on other things like learning) and isn't too ill to think (because they have death mages around to stop epidemics), and it's also assuming they're alive at all and not, say, dead in a hurricane. Do other worlds just not have those kinds of problems?

Nonmagical worlds with people on them - let's take Cube's Earth as an example - do lose population to hunger and illness and hurricanes, but by and large that doesn't wipe everyone out, and intelligence does help at all with being one of the survivors. They take a while to get past the stage of books needing to be copied by hand, but have books at all before that, and then copy books nonmagically.

Huh, cool. Is there a documentary or something about how smart animals build civilizations?

They can have history documentaries, though that's a little broad! Most Earths have magic but it's actually not instrumental in hardly any of their civilization-building; it's usually secret minorities who have it. Eclipse didn't have secrecy but also its magic users are so dangerous when they activate that for most of history it was typical to just murder them. Still, just to remove the confounding factor, they can source their documentaries from Cube. (Warp is more borderline; vanishingly few humans from Warp's Earth have psi potential but it's not none.)

Cool! This person will go enjoy some documentaries about weird aliens, then, after reiterating that this seems legally simple and warning them that the people who have feelings about void mages will probably also have feelings about, uh, entities that are ambiguously mages.

As long as they have normal legal rights that's - well, not "fine", but strictly lower priority than the slavery thing, since people who don't want feelings had about them like that could just not come to Har. Should there be any announcement about that since it won't have come up before?

They can do that if they want. The imperial government can go ahead and mention this in the news if it seems important.

Seems maybe important, some of the Dwarves don't have magic, so yes please.

Huh. Some knowledge mage somewhere almost definitely already knows that but apparently hasn't shared yet.

The announcement doesn't result in hate crimes but does result in a couple of customers walking into shops and asking the staff if they're animals.

"Nope. Dwarves were created out of rocks by the Vala Aulë. We're not actually related to any other species at all. But for most everyday purposes we have animal-ish biology."

"Do you sell blueprints for making more dwarves?"

"Nope."

Oh, well.

Slightly more of the people visiting the shops ask for information about alien civilizations and alien magic but it's not like people weren't already doing that anyway.

Har does not get as many tourists as some places, but it gets a few. Here is a photographer with green hair who wants to take pictures of things. Anything he can take pictures of is fair game, right, the things around here people don't want depicted are warded magically?

Technically not all of their wards will stop a camera but they have ever encountered plein air painters before and the people who would be annoyed by them for the most part either aren't around in crowded areas or are cloaked in the sorts of illusions that will fool a camera. For instance, this purple agerah constantly attended by shifting dark clouds does not mind their shifting dark clouds and purple dye job getting photographed at all.

...Actually, some slaves don't have all the illusions they want, but if their owners were going to complain about them being photographed they'd've purchased more illusions.

The slaves are distinguishable by the bracelets, right?

Sometimes anklets or belts or something, if someone's anatomy doesn't allow for bracelets, but all the slave jewelry is extremely stylistically similar and there is no other reason that anyone wears circular gold jewelry. Some local bookstores are now selling collections of pictures of jewelry with explanations of what they mean.

The photographer will buy a book like that. And take pictures of people and places and things. Is it legal to leave the book strategically open in the foreground when taking a picture of a cute child wearing slave jewelry or is there a copyright issue?

The books shows even some very obscure slave jewelry styles, as well as the styles used for people who are under arrest but not slaves, and the ways people wear their rings, and the use of the mage symbols as advertisements, and some examples of jewelry whose design isn't intended to communicate anything other than the wearer's aesthetics (but which is usually enchanted anyway because it's cheap).

It is legal, although a cursory attempt was made to design it to photograph badly and they'll want to work in lighting where they don't need a flash, which coincidentally narrows down which species they're likely to want to use. Would they like to get a picture of this small belul climbing a tree, who looks slightly springpetish? Would they like to get a picture of these half dozen caralendri of varying ages making something best glossed as a sandcastle? Would they like to get a picture of this surly caralendar child selling illusions in the market?