Yes, anyway the point is that I don't need to do too much "realism"
I would say that that depends on how you define realism, one definition of realism is things that exist and are happening in real world other is things that are logical therefore could exist. For example orcs and elves don't exist in real world but they could have existed if genes had just taken a different turn at some point of evolution therefore if you use second definition existence of orcs and elves is realistic but if you use first definition it is not. Depending on how you look at magic even magic is realistic if you use second definition, like fore example, human shooting lighting from his arms, impossible, but w8 we do have electric eels in real life therefore like with elves and orcs if genes have took different turn humans could have shoot lighting from their arms. The lack of realism in fantasy story if you define it with first definition is definitely not a problem, nobody expects it in a first place, but if you define it with second definition then I would say every story needs to have it in order to be good. So I think that if you put something in a story that isn't possible in a real life and is not something people can assume on their own because it is something that has been done many times before or is just easy to assume I think you need to explain how it works and by doing that make it logical and realistic. Off course this specific thing we are talking now isn't a big problem as we have established that it might not even be something that doesn't exist in real world so I am speaking more in general.