Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Old-school magical traditions.
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 17 2007, 02:04 AM
I know that in SR3, the hermetic/shaman divide consisted of hermetics binding elementals exclusively and shamans being able to summon nature spirits that had more varied powers but were limited to domain.
What were the other magical traditions, like Wuxing and Voodoo like?
Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 17 2007, 03:23 AM
Wuxing: five elemental spirit types and usually ancestor spirits. Spirits of the elements included sylphs (wind), salamanders (fire), gnomes (earth), undines (water) and manitous (wood). These spirits have much of the pure combat ability of elementals and a fair amount of the power variety of nature spirits. They are summoned with a slight variant of the nature spirit rules.
Voodoo: summon loa, loa cannot materialize, but can possess the conjurer or any other who has payed a small karma price to become a valid host. There are a variety of loa, and I'm not sure how to explain them other than swipe someone's copy of MitS for a while and check pages 102-105 to learn about the loa and zombies.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 17 2007, 03:28 AM
They are the Lwa, the riders of the head. The houngan or mambo serves the Lwa, who they will call in a ritual. When the Lwa has been called, he or she will mount the houngan or mambo, and I don't mean that in the sexual sense. The Lwa will pursue its purpose and then dismount, leaving its steed to recover on its own.
~J
Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 17 2007, 01:46 PM
The biggest defining mark of Shamanic magic is the totem modifiers. Each totem has bonuses and disadvantages.
Eg. A Wolf Shaman with a sorcery of 6 casts Combat and Detection spells at effective ratings of 8, a similar bonus is added to their conjuring of a specific nature spirit, eg. Forest spirits. However, when a wolf shaman recieves damage, they must roll willpower to prevent from going "berserk".
Other disadvantages include subtracted dice from certain spells and spirits.
One of the most interesting things about Shamans was that they all had interesting characteristics for roleplaying purposes, and as long as they conducted their roleplaying in the specified way, they kept the favor of their totem.
The elven "Paths of The Wheel" were an odd tradition that never quite got me into them. They were shaman-like, because they took certain advantages and disadvantages, but they were only really effective (yet cumulative) in a certain place, at a certain time of year, in a certain situation (eg. standing next to a fire or levitating or flying).
Psionics were pretty hilarious, because they do not believe that they are Awakened, but basically believe they have x-men like psychokinetic powers 
I can't believe they got rid of the magical traditions in SR4. Mages always were "cool", but Shamans were much more fun and interesting from a role playing point of view.
Posted by: Fortune Jan 17 2007, 03:12 PM
| QUOTE (Sir_Psycho) |
| I can't believe they got rid of the magical traditions in SR4. |
Um ... they didn't!
Posted by: Ophis Jan 17 2007, 05:25 PM
Infact they have added far more traditions. They use the same basic rule set rather than having one each, but they are still there.
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 17 2007, 06:11 PM
And arguably, mages are a lot more powerful now. They can all summon AND bind.
Plus, all spirits have freaky side powers, not just nature spirits.
Posted by: tisoz Jan 17 2007, 09:05 PM
| QUOTE (Sir_Psycho) |
| The biggest defining mark of Shamanic magic is the totem modifiers. |
Maybe, I think the entire types of spirits available and how they are summoned is bigger. I like playing shamen most of the time, and usually forget to add in totem bonus dice. So that is why I would disagree.
| QUOTE |
| Each totem has bonuses and disadvantages. Eg. A Wolf Shaman with a sorcery of 6 casts Combat and Detection spells at effective ratings of 8, a similar bonus is added to their conjuring of a specific nature spirit, eg. Forest spirits. |
Hold up, maybe that is just poorly written. It is like having a Spell Pool, Sorcery skill, or Conjuring skill modified by the totem modifier. Not the Force of the spell or spirit.
Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 17 2007, 11:54 PM
Yeah I was trying to explain the extra dice to an SR4 player. I probably should have just said "+2 dice to combat and detection spells" rather than getting all fancy.
And hold up, what does the force have to do with it? I didn't mention force at all. The force is mainly dependant on your magic attribute, not your sorcery/conjuring skill roll.
Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 18 2007, 12:12 AM
"Ratings" is used in multiple places to indicate the level of a program/hardware item, but rarely in reference to skills. Its use here caused some doubt as to whether you meant the effective skill level or the effective force.
Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 18 2007, 12:14 AM
Really? I use rating or skill rating in regards to skills all the time. Sorry.
Posted by: SL James Jan 18 2007, 02:54 AM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Jan 17 2007, 09:12 AM) | ||
Um ... they didn't! |
They just made them virtually indistinguishable and useless props.
God forbid magic can only be practiced in one or two ways, and while you can try to shoehorn your religion into one of those ways, being a Wiccan doesn't override being a Hermetic Mage. But no... Goddamn pussies. Then again, extra traditions were first added by just the worst sourcebooks you can imagine (except for PR, which was only written by the two authors of one of those mental abortions). Adding religion to magic and making them interoperable was probably the second most stupid thing ever done in SR.
Posted by: Jeremiah Legacy Jan 18 2007, 04:36 AM
Actually, I think they were right to overhaul the magic system. The problem the old system had was lack of scalability. Basically, you were stuck with what you had.
A decker could be custom-made. A street sammy as well. Want an old school detective? Go right ahead. How about making a sociable rigger?
But magician: you were stuck between the stereotypical bookworm scientist-mage and Tonto with super powers.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 18 2007, 05:05 AM
| QUOTE (Jeremiah Legacy @ Jan 17 2007, 11:36 PM) |
| Basically, you were stuck with what you had. |
Yes. Magic worked two ways. It was a harsh, rigid, inflexible master. It made it clear who was right and who was wrong. That's the only decent thing they did with extra traditions, adding one that was explicitly wrong (but then gave it different abilities from the two true paths anyway).
| QUOTE |
| A decker could be custom-made. |
But couldn't be used to jack into the netherweb, where everything operates on a giant version of token ring.
| QUOTE |
| A street sammy as well. |
The customized street sam couldn't conjure gun spirits.
A mage can choose different spells or emphasize on conjuring or spellcasting. A Shaman can do all that, and have a varying totem besides. Both of them can also do extra stuff on the side—they can even be more machine than man. There is no reasonable argument that magical characters were somehow uncustomizable.
Also, while some of the totems did indicate a personality type for the character, no such guidance exists for hermeticism. You are no more "stuck" with being a bookworm than the decker is "stuck" with being a caffeine-addicted social outcast.
~J
Posted by: Glyph Jan 18 2007, 06:44 AM
| QUOTE (emo samurai) |
| And arguably, mages are a lot more powerful now. They can all summon AND bind. Plus, all spirits have freaky side powers, not just nature spirits. |
And don't forget that hermetics can have mentor spirits (the equivalent of the old Totems) now, too, for those same dice bonuses.
On the flip side, shamans can bind spirits too, now.
The differences between hermetics and shamans are more cosmetic, in SR4. I kind of approve, though, since they are using the same magical forces, and they should follow the same basic rules. And over time, with things like Universal Magical Theory, you should see more blending of previously stratified traditions. The main differences now are in the Drain attribute used with Willpower, and the types of spirits that can be summoned.
As far as the bookworm stereotype for hermetics, it is like the stereotype of trolls as tanks - you don't have to do them that way, but the rules make it the optimal path. In the case of hermetics, one of their Drain Attributes is Logic, which encourages them to take those academic and technical skills that also use Logic.
Also, there are more traditions now. Things like chaos magic or wicca are separate magical traditions now (although I still would have liked to see the three-fold rule for wiccans -"I manabolt him for 6 damage!" "All right, resist 6 damage three times."
)
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 18 2007, 06:53 AM
edited- don't post when tired.
Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 18 2007, 01:19 PM
| QUOTE (Jeremiah Legacy) |
| But magician: you were stuck between the stereotypical bookworm scientist-mage and Tonto with super powers. |
If you have no creativity and adhere strictly to stereotypes.
Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 18 2007, 07:24 PM
| QUOTE (Glyph) |
| Also, there are more traditions now. Things like chaos magic or wicca are separate magical traditions now (although I still would have liked to see the three-fold rule for wiccans -"I manabolt him for 6 damage!" "All right, resist 6 damage three times." ) |
Because that is accompanied by a Wiccan mage walking into a mall or a sports staduim and costing Orgy on several hundred people at once.
Posted by: SL James Jan 19 2007, 01:25 AM
I'll just echo what Kage said.
Posted by: Wounded Ronin Jan 19 2007, 01:51 AM
Do the SR4 rules threaten our supply of magical Native American hipsters?
Posted by: SL James Jan 19 2007, 04:37 AM
I'm more concerned with the self-righteous wiccans.
Posted by: Fortune Jan 19 2007, 05:06 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| I'm more concerned with the self-righteous wiccans. |
Is there any other kind?
Posted by: hyzmarca Jan 19 2007, 05:12 AM
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
| Do the SR4 rules threaten our supply of magical Native American hipsters? |
Unfortunately, the unified magic rules mean that there is no mechanical advantage to being a Native American hippster except for the fact that they get to double-dip with their Charisma (and you could just make up a tradition that gets to do that).
Posted by: Jeremiah Legacy Jan 19 2007, 05:57 AM
| QUOTE (Sir_Psycho) | ||
If you have no creativity and adhere strictly to stereotypes. |
Which is how it was designed. To be stereotypical. Yes, you could juxtapose things, but that is not the same as creativity.
Posted by: Fortune Jan 19 2007, 08:12 AM
Funny. I've played dozens (very conservative estimate 
) of awakened characters over the history of Shadowrun, and not once have I used either of the stereotypes you mention.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 19 2007, 03:34 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| God forbid magic can only be practiced in one or two ways, and while you can try to shoehorn your religion into one of those ways, being a Wiccan doesn't override being a Hermetic Mage. But no... Goddamn pussies. Then again, extra traditions were first added by just the worst sourcebooks you can imagine (except for PR, which was only written by the two authors of one of those mental abortions). Adding religion to magic and making them interoperable was probably the second most stupid thing ever done in SR. |
After a fashion, I agree. I don't necessarily want seperate rules sets for the core X traditions, but just more of the old flavor. While some of the new trads are logically separate from the old hermetic/shamanic model (the Buddhist/Hindu trad, Wuxing, Vodoun, and the whole Paths garbage [yuck]), virtually everything else is just a variation of that general theme (or could be done either way - Druidism, Wicca). Having a separate set of spirit associations/Drain atts for each one of these minor variations (cause really, Hermeticism, Black Magic, and Gardenerian Wicca for example are so damn close in practice that they pretty much are the same trad - especially since the later two spawned from Hermeticism) is just kinda pointless.
And as usual, I solved it with a house rule. [sigh]
[rant]But please, for NERPS-sake call Black Magic friggin LeVayan Satanism - that's what it friggin is and reads like. I mean please - in a game where the evil word fuck
is used, assassination for hire is common place, sex slavery via technonology is so common there is a word for it, and alternative sexual preferences are normal - all of these in the BBB - the designers of a game like this run away from the idea of calling the bogeyman religion [rolls eye] by it's name (except in a foot note the "Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted" section waaaay in the back of Street Magic) when you have a tradition that reads like the same damn thing in the main traditions section of the book! You talk about pussies SLJames, if this isn't a major example of being pussywhiped I don't know what fucking is. But y'know, LeVay would be rolling in his grave from sarcastic laughter if he knew about this - cause it just proves that even 40 years after the Church of Satan was founded he's still getting the shock value he wanted and society's still so pussywhiped that people are affraid to mention the "religion" he put together in a friggin roleplaying game sourcebook.[/rant]
| QUOTE (Glyph) |
| (although I still would have liked to see the three-fold rule for wiccans -"I manabolt him for 6 damage!" "All right, resist 6 damage three times." ) |
Y'know, that sounds like one hell of a good geas
| QUOTE (Fortune) | ||
Is there any other kind? |
A growing percentage, based on the circles I travel in at least [shrug].
Posted by: SL James Jan 19 2007, 08:32 PM
| QUOTE (Fortune @ Jan 18 2007, 11:06 PM) | ||
Is there any other kind? |
If there is, I haven't encountered one.
| QUOTE (NightmareX) |
| [rant]But please, for NERPS-sake call Black Magic friggin LeVayan Satanism - that's what it friggin is and reads like. I mean please - in a game where the evil word fuck is used, assassination for hire is common place, sex slavery via technonology is so common there is a word for it, and alternative sexual preferences are normal - all of these in the BBB - the designers of a game like this run away from the idea of calling the bogeyman religion [rolls eye] by it's name (except in a foot note the "Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted" section waaaay in the back of Street Magic) when you have a tradition that reads like the same damn thing in the main traditions section of the book! You talk about pussies SLJames, if this isn't a major example of being pussywhiped I don't know what fucking is. But y'know, LeVay would be rolling in his grave from sarcastic laughter if he knew about this - cause it just proves that even 40 years after the Church of Satan was founded he's still getting the shock value he wanted and society's still so pussywhiped that people are affraid to mention the "religion" he put together in a friggin roleplaying game sourcebook.[/rant] |
Must... resist... urge... to...
You know what I think. Dogs know what I think (those are scary dogs, too) when it comes to the flavor/tone of books like MitS, especially in regard to how different traditions are portrayed.
Posted by: eidolon Jan 19 2007, 10:56 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||||
If there is, I haven't encountered one. |
There are, and I have.
Posted by: Moirdryd Jan 20 2007, 01:28 AM
To be fair, SLJames and Fortune, you (thats the universal you) dont generally notice anyone who isnt self righteous about something. Because they generally dont stand around drawing attention to themselves in that Self Righteous kinda way. Oh, most of those Wiccans with said complex have failed (or are failing ) in their path amazingly, are very new to it all and its really more enthusiams than self righteousness or are plain want to be's.
As for Old School Traditions. I muchly enjoy the way they are presented in MitS. As I mentioned elsewhere it is nice to have differant things work in differant ways. Otherwise, for all the extra cool RP'd things you've done for your char, all you are really playing is Spellcaster mk-(xxx)
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 20 2007, 10:13 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
If there is, I haven't encountered one. |
What eidolon said
| QUOTE |
| Must... resist... urge... to... You know what I think. Dogs know what I think (those are scary dogs, too) when it comes to the flavor/tone of books like MitS, especially in regard to how different traditions are portrayed. |
I know SL. Normally I'm willing to put up with horrifically bastardized simplications of real world trads and chalk it up to lack of space, author ignorance, or "The Awakening changed stuff", but something as simple and stupid as the name of a trad....well, it irks me on ocassion s'all. Posted by: Synner Jan 20 2007, 11:50 AM
| QUOTE (NightmareX @ Jan 19 2007, 03:34 PM) |
| [rant]But please, for NERPS-sake call Black Magic friggin LeVayan Satanism - that's what it friggin is and reads like. I mean please - in a game where the evil word fuck is used, assassination for hire is common place, sex slavery via technonology is so common there is a word for it, and alternative sexual preferences are normal - all of these in the BBB - the designers of a game like this run away from the idea of calling the bogeyman religion [rolls eye] by it's name (except in a foot note the "Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted" section waaaay in the back of Street Magic) when you have a tradition that reads like the same damn thing in the main traditions section of the book! |
The Black Magic tradition in the Paths of Magic chapter was never intended to reflect LaVeyan Satanism exclusively, in fact, it was intended as a catch-all tradition that reflected the magical practices of several different Satanist/Luciferian traditions/lineages that are quite common but distinct in Western cultures. While LaVeyan Satanism may be the best known in the US, it is only one of many similar practices in the Western world (Theistic Satanism; Luciferianism/modern Prometheism; Setianism; Hermetic Demonolatry; Daeva-worship, etc). All share superificially similar rituals and some symbology, but their beliefs are different (in some cases fundamentally different) and more importantly some are even more popular in other Western countries than the Church of Satan (which Americans seem to have limited their sights to...)
Hence Black Magic rather than Satanism - and why it gets equal billing, equal bias and space to Christian Theurgy.
If you're having problems with why there's a separate mention in Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted, I suggest you take another look at that material again - the Darkness Within section might be a good place to start. You might also be surprised to catch a passing reference to Theurgist zealots in there too, on equal standing to boot.
| QUOTE |
| Normally I'm willing to put up with horrifically bastardized simplications of real world trads and chalk it up to lack of space, author ignorance, or "The Awakening changed stuff", but something as simple and stupid as the name of a trad....well, it irks me on ocassion s'all. |
Or your assumptions could just be wrong. But hey I'm just one of the authors of the material being reviewed, what do I know? And for future reference that I am not a Wiccan, nor was any Wiccan involved in writing the Paths of Magic material in Street Magic.
| QUOTE (NightmareX) | ||||
A growing percentage, based on the circles I travel in at least [shrug]. |
Now there's something we agree on.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 20 2007, 04:15 PM
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| The Black Magic tradition in the Paths of Magic chapter was never intended to reflect LaVayan Satanism exclusively, in fact, it was intended as a catch-all tradition that reflected the magical practices of several different Satanist/Luciferian traditions/lineages that are quite common but distinct in Western cultures. While LeVayan Satanism may be the best known in the US, it is only one of many similar practices in the Western world (Theistic Satanism; Luciferianism/modern Prometheism; Setianism; Hermetic Demonolatry; Daeva-worship, etc). All share superificially similar rituals and some symbology, but their beliefs are different (in some cases fundamentally different) and more importantly some are even more popular in other Western countries than the Church of Satan (which Americans seem to have limited their sights to...) Hence Black Magic rather than Satanism - and why it gets equal billing, equal bias and space to Christian Theurgy. If you're having problems with why there's a separate mention in Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted, I suggest you take another look at that material again - the Darkness Within section might be a good place to start. You might also be surprised to catch a passing reference to Theurgist zealots in there too, on equal standing to boot. |
First of all Synner, please allow me to say this - I like Street Magic, giving it a 10 out of 10 on the Cool, Useful, and Balanced scales. I like the traditions included therein and the writeups thereof.- the gripe about tradition proliferation is minor, and something easily dealt with via house rule. Just so you get where I'm coming from on this, ok?
Also note that I am well aware of the different flavors of Satanism and Demonolatry that are out there. The reason I specifically mentioned LeVayan Satanism is this line:
| QUOTE (Street Magic pg 36) |
| Rather than subscribing to true evil, however, most black magic groups follow a credo which is part hedonist and part fascist—seeking self-serving advancement, emphasizing a will to power, and advocating freedom from the blinders and shackles imposed by “straight” society. |
While that could apply to the various types of Theistic Satanism and Demonolatry around, anyone who has read LeVay's writings or descriptions of the COS could be forgiven I think for immediately thinking of them so apt is the description. Given the way the Black Magic trad is written, and the references to Satanism-as-inverted-Christianity, Faustian, and Goetic mages in Paths of the Twisted and Corrupted I was under the impression that Theistic Satanism, Demonolatry, and Daeva-worship (the last being something I know little about and consider kind of a Hindu version of demonolatry) were considered to be twisted/corrupt paths in this book, like the Petro version of Vodoun. An assumption yes, but a valid one I think considering the way the sections are written and the common societal biases regarding those traditions.
That being the case, I must thank you for enlightening me regarding your vision and intention for the Black Magic trad - you've given me a wider view of the possibilities that were intended. Please accept my apologies for offending you due to my short-sightedness and consider my rant retracted - Black Magic is indeed the best title for the trad as it was intended.
Also, please note that when I mentioned "author ignorance" I was not refering to Street Magic - the authors of the trads therein appear to have a reasonable familiarity with the trads mentioned, or to have done there homework to some extent. Any lackings in said department in SM I chalk up to the other noted reasons.
Posted by: Bodak Jan 20 2007, 04:23 PM
| QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
| Wuxing: five elemental spirit types and usually ancestor spirits. Spirits of the elements included sylphs (wind), salamanders (fire), gnomes (earth), undines (water) and manitous (wood). Voodoo: There are a variety of loa, and I'm not sure how to explain them other than swipe someone's copy of MitS for a while and check pages 102-105 to learn about the loa and zombies. |
Wuxing had spirits of metal as well in that list of 5.
Your original plan to get ahold of MitS was a good one. Lots of good useful information in there for a game in 3rd, and also ideas you could incorporate into a 4th game with some tweaking.
Posted by: MYST1C Jan 20 2007, 05:34 PM
| QUOTE (NightmareX) |
| The reason I specifically mentioned LeVayan Satanism is this line |
The guy was called LaVey, not LeVay...
Posted by: Synner Jan 20 2007, 05:39 PM
| QUOTE (NightmareX) |
| That being the case, I must thank you for enlightening me regarding your vision and intention for the Black Magic trad - you've given me a wider view of the possibilities that were intended. Please accept my apologies for offending you due to my short-sightedness and consider my rant retracted - Black Magic is indeed the best title for the trad as it was intended. |
Apologies if I read too much into your comments and I understand no harm was intended. I was simply attempting to clarify. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, I'm just not too fond misinformation.
As to the proliferation of traditions, while I would agree with you to some extent when it comes to things like Gardnerian Wicca or even Theurgy, I submit that even in those cases the magicians practicing those traditions believe they are addressing fundamentally different forces than a traditional Hermeticist. Since belief is such a powerful tool of paradigm, trope and ritual definition we decided to keep the divisions set out in SR3 in those cases.
Note, however, that I was also the co-author of the Hermetic sub-schools in SOTA64 and think that Hermeticism as a homogenic tradition is overrated, even back in the Renaissance period there were variants ranging from Dee's spiritualism to Alchemical Qabbalism... I was unsure whether these would require modifiers in SR4 (which is partially why they weren't included in Street Magic) but in SR3 it felt very much justified.
| QUOTE |
| Also, please note that when I mentioned "author ignorance" I was not refering to Street Magic - the authors of the trads therein appear to have a reasonable familiarity with the trads mentioned, or to have done there homework to some extent. Any lackings in said department in SM I chalk up to the other noted reasons. |
Jason Levine and I were the writers of the expanded Tradition material in Street Magic and we both did our homework on the relevant traditions.
Street Magic was never intended to present each tradition into a paragraph as previous Magic books had been forced to (a legacy issue we wanted to deal with, since the previous tradition material had to shoehorn all traditions into the 4-5 which had distinct rulesets). In fact, we wanted to give the player enough information that they'd be able to develop magicians of these traditions as unique magic users rather than basterdized Hermetics or Shamans. Personally I'm quite pleased with what we accomplished in so short a space.
Daeva-worship is actually the left-hand path of Zoroastrian magic and very similar to Demonolatry (at least in the profusion of demons and patrons). It has been adopted/adapted by several "satanist cults" in Europe (I'm not as familiar with the North American scene), as have elements of Qabbalistic lore (which can be rather ironic given the fascist right wing tendencies of some of these groups).
Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 20 2007, 06:55 PM
| QUOTE (Bodak) |
| Wuxing had spirits of metal as well in that list of 5. |
No, wuxing has a branch of metal, but its closest spirit representation is the sylph as there is no branch of air.
Posted by: SL James Jan 20 2007, 07:49 PM
| QUOTE (NightmareX @ Jan 20 2007, 04:13 AM) | ||
I know SL. Normally I'm willing to put up with horrifically bastardized simplications of real world trads and chalk it up to lack of space, author ignorance, or "The Awakening changed stuff", but something as simple and stupid as the name of a trad....well, it irks me on ocassion s'all. |
I would, too, if I thought for a second any of those applied.
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| Note, however, that I was also the co-author of the Hermetic sub-schools in SOTA64 and think that Hermeticism as a homogenic tradition is overrated, even back in the Renaissance period there were variants ranging from Dee's spiritualism to Alchemical Qabbalism... I was unsure whether these would require modifiers in SR4 (which is partially why they weren't included in Street Magic) but in SR3 it felt very much justified. |
It was inconsistent, made moreso by authors who seemed to treat the "coldly logical and rational" idea of Hermeticism with utter disdain. However, I find it perpelexing how Hermeticism adhering to one set of rules could be "overrated." I mean, I thought one of the whole reasons for creating a new magic system was because there were too many rules systems for magic, including yours. Why shouldn't all of these people with their own pet beliefs not have to adhere to a set of rules that means they can't just whip out the Bible or anything else and say, "here's my magic textbook."
Much has been said about how Shamanism has been (and still is) focused on a mix of specific Native American beliefs even though it applied to all shamans whether they were from Athabaskan tribes, a Pueblo, or a Chinese-Caucasian whose only exposure to nature is flipping past the Discovery Channel. I don't see why Hermeticism should be rendered limb from limb while Indian shamans still use the same magic system in spite of vast differences between tribal, individual, and Native American Church practices.
Posted by: Synner Jan 20 2007, 09:28 PM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| It was inconsistent, made moreso by authors who seemed to treat the "coldly logical and rational" idea of Hermeticism with utter disdain. |
I'm inclined to agree with that to an extent.
| QUOTE |
| However, I find it perpelexing how Hermeticism adhering to one set of rules could be "overrated." |
You misunderstood me. What I said was "that Hermeticism as a homogenic tradition is overrated," referring to a homogenic Hermetic paradigm not the ruleset. As a rule set I think it worked pretty well.
| QUOTE |
| I mean, I thought one of the whole reasons for creating a new magic system was because there were too many rules systems for magic, including yours. |
Actually, you will note that we added no new rules in SOTA64, only modifiers to the basic magical mechanics (unlike say the Paths, Voodoun, Wuxing). In fact, part of the reason I took it down this path was my dissatisfaction with the Elemental schools of Hermetic magic in MitS (which are more AD&D than any Hermetic school).
SR4's Magic mechanics mean that the fundamental distinction between tradition's is no longer hardwired to rules, but instead linked to the practical roleplaying aspects of beliefs, symbols and tropes of each tradition.
| QUOTE |
| Why shouldn't all of these people with their own pet beliefs not have to adhere to a set of rules that means they can't just whip out the Bible or anything else and say, "here's my magic textbook." |
In SR4 they can and do. All characters adhere to the same fundamental rules and mechanics. What changes is the outwards appearance of their practices. A Hermetic's codex is mechanically the same as a Wiccan's shadow grimoire which is the same as a Qabbalist's Book of Sepher... because even though conceptually they're dealing with entirely different forces than a Hermeticist or even a Qabbalist mechanically they're playing by the same rules.
Quite different from what happened in SR3 where each new tradition had to face one of two solutions: either be shoehorned into the 2 "legacy traditions" (ie. Wicca, Hermetic Druidism, Qabbalism, Black Magic, etc) or have its own set of rules (ie. Path magic, Wuxing, Voodoun).
| QUOTE |
| Much has been said about how Shamanism has been (and still is) focused on a mix of specific Native American beliefs even though it applied to all shamans whether they were from Athabaskan tribes, a Pueblo, or a Chinese-Caucasian whose only exposure to nature is flipping past the Discovery Channel. I don't see why Hermeticism should be rendered limb from limb while Indian shamans still use the same magic system in spite of vast differences between tribal, individual, and Native American Church practices. |
You are assuming that in SR4 Chinese animism isn't a tradition in its own right, and that Inuit manitoos fall under the same tradition as Athabaskan shamans. This is an erroneous assumption.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 22 2007, 07:26 AM
| QUOTE (MYST1C) |
| The guy was called LaVey, not LeVay... |
My bad....I can never remember how to spell his name
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| Apologies if I read too much into your comments and I understand no harm was intended. I was simply attempting to clarify. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, I'm just not too fond misinformation. |
No prob
To add to what I said eariler, the reference to Black Magic as a "modern Western tradition" and the clasifiction of the Path of Maho as a corrupted/twisted path also added to my previous erroneous conclusion (remembered after I posted), especially as the latter section states:| QUOTE (Street Magic page 139) |
| Demonolatry is the counterpart to the Path of Maho in Western and Middle-Eastern cultures. Goetians, black magicians, and devil worshippers in Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions (often reductively pigeonholed as Satanists) deify demons, following “dark twins” or devilish entities (such as variations of the Adversary or Seductress mentor spirit archetypes) as patrons and practicing dark rites in their name. |
Given this, perhaps something in the FAQ or errata to clarify your intent maybe? Not that this is major issue or anything - I'm satisfied with your explanation - just a suggestion [shrug]
| QUOTE |
| As to the proliferation of traditions, while I would agree with you to some extent when it comes to things like Gardnerian Wicca or even Theurgy, I submit that even in those cases the magicians practicing those traditions believe they are addressing fundamentally different forces than a traditional Hermeticist. Since belief is such a powerful tool of paradigm, trope and ritual definition we decided to keep the divisions set out in SR3 in those cases. |
Despite what I said about Drain atts and spirit associations, I don't see that as the biggest problem with trad proliferation. Cause frankly, in SR4 trad proliferation is envitable as the system is pretty much built for it - and the only non-fluff way to differentiate those trads is Drain att and spirit association, so that's kinda a necessary evil. Because in my little mind, trad proliferation ala the way it's done in Street Magic is good - the trads are based in real life trads. Personally, I'd much rather see that than dozens of totally made-up-from-thin-air trads.
My biggest issue with trad proliferation is actually cross trad compatibility for purposes of ritual magic, joining ritual groups, and the like. To me, it makes little sense that a Hermetic, a Gardenerian Witch, and a Chaos Mage who aren't part of a magical group can't join together in a ritual - there are marked differences in their trads, but they share enough that they could concievable work together. That's why I use the "close enough rule". Of course, Chaos Magic is close enough to everything due to its nature
| QUOTE |
| Daeva-worship is actually the left-hand path of Zoroastrian magic and very similar to Demonolatry (at least in the profusion of demons and patrons). It has been adopted/adapted by several "satanist cults" in Europe (I'm not as familiar with the North American scene), as have elements of Qabbalistic lore (which can be rather ironic given the fascist right wing tendencies of some of these groups). |
Doh! I was thinking deva = daeva, thus Hindu. Thanks!
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| I would, too, if I thought for a second any of those applied. |
I hesistate to ask, but what do you ascribe it to?
| QUOTE (Synner) |
| Actually, you will note that we added no new rules in SOTA64, only modifiers to the basic magical mechanics (unlike say the Paths, Voodoun, Wuxing). In fact, part of the reason I took it down this path was my dissatisfaction with the Elemental schools of Hermetic magic in MitS (which are more AD&D than any Hermetic school). |
I didn't mind the elemental schools much - chalked them up to a post-Awakening developement.
| QUOTE |
| You are assuming that in SR4 Chinese animism isn't a tradition in its own right, and that Inuit manitoos fall under the same tradition as Athabaskan shamans. This is an erroneous assumption. |
One has to admit, that does make for a lot of work though...
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 22 2007, 08:36 AM
I'm actually using a different rule for making cross-traditional magic groups. There's a "central" tradition whose centrality to the group will have no bearing on anything outside of group creation. The group has to have at least one magician of the "central" tradition. The negative modifier to creating the group for each extra tradition will be variable based on how much it diverges from the central tradition. For example, if you had a hermetic central tradition and you wanted to admit Gardnerian Wiccans, you'd have no modifiers and they could even join after group creation. Same for chaos mages. Chaos magic will have few traditions with which it would have that lack of a modifier, but it will have at most a -1 modifier with any other tradition. Hermeticism will only have a -1 with Wuxing, and a -2 with hedge witchcraft. And so on, and so forth.
Posted by: Sphynx Jan 22 2007, 09:34 AM
| QUOTE (Sir_Psycho) |
| Psionics were pretty hilarious, because they do not believe that they are Awakened, but basically believe they have x-men like psychokinetic powers |
As one of the only people to enjoy playing a Psionicist, I feel obligated to defend against this statement.
When was the last time your mage cast a spell to Astrally Project or to Astrally Perceive? What you don't understand is that almost all mages are also Psionicists who have fallen into the path of Magic because it's easier to grasp. The Astral Plane is a reflection of our minds, its very existance proof of Psionics. Nobody in the world doubts Magic exists, including Psionicists, we just rather not use it. Rather than 'channel' the astral energy, we opt to become part of it, admittedly limiting our abilities to perform parlor tricks, but also letting us exceed in other areas.
The real power of the current version of Psionicists is the ThoughtForm. What are the chances anyone will ever get 6 successes on a Magic Fingers spell (TN: 6)? My character could summon a ThoughtForm at Force 9 with multiple successes, cross any domains with it, and have a Strength-9 Quickness-9 "Magic Fingers" at my call whenever I wanted. Telekinetically, the Psionicist just couldn't be touched, and in a 'stealth/theft' sort of situation, the telekinetic has alot of potential use.
Anyhows, they simply were NOT worth the 30 points, I agree with that, but from a thematic point of view, they weren't quite as hilarious as it may seem, and the only Tradition that could use Psychokinesis in a Shadowrun type situation (in a building). However, I mostly played them for theme.
Posted by: Herald of Verjigorm Jan 22 2007, 03:09 PM
Air elemental, Salamander, Sylph.
If you specialize in ghost chains, you can also use one of them.
Posted by: SL James Jan 23 2007, 02:21 AM
| QUOTE (NightmareX) | ||
I hesistate to ask, but what do you ascribe it to? |
Sssh. I may get suspended again.
Posted by: tisoz Jan 23 2007, 07:24 AM
| QUOTE (Sphynx @ Jan 22 2007, 03:34 AM) | ||
As one of the only people to enjoy playing a Psionicist, I feel obligated to defend against this statement. When was the last time your mage cast a spell to Astrally Project or to Astrally Perceive? |
Never?
| QUOTE |
| The real power of the current version of Psionicists is the ThoughtForm. What are the chances anyone will ever get 6 successes on a Magic Fingers spell (TN: 6)? |
About as often as conjuring a Force 9 spirit with multiple successes and resisting the Serious Physial drain. Plus being able to use foci to aid the summoning and resist drain.
| QUOTE |
| My character could summon a ThoughtForm at Force 9 with multiple successes, cross any domains with it, and have a Strength-9 Quickness-9 "Magic Fingers" at my call whenever I wanted. |
Thought Form Strength = F-2, Quickness =F+2, so F9 >>> S-7, Q-11.
Posted by: Sphynx Jan 23 2007, 08:40 AM
Tisoz, you should read again.
Never is correct, not-spells = not-magic.
For Magic Fingers, 6 successes on TN:6 takes about 36 dice to succeed (50% chance). A Force 9 takes about 6 dice (50% chance) and you only need 1 success to use the Spirit's PsychoKinesis power Once (like using the Magic Finger spell.... Once). Tons easier and alot more powerful.
I wasn't talking their Strength and Quickness, I'm talking the Strength and Quickness of their PsychoKinesis power.
Posted by: Sir_Psycho Jan 23 2007, 09:41 AM
I always thought Aborigine Shamanic Magic was funny, seeing that we don't have Badgers in Australia.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 23 2007, 11:16 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) |
| Sssh. I may get suspended again. |
For stating your opinion? I didn't think this place was....that way. Oh well, there's always PMs
Posted by: Fortune Jan 23 2007, 09:19 PM
| QUOTE (Sir_Psycho) |
| ... we don't have Badgers in Australia. |
Badgers? We don't need no stinkin' badgers!
Posted by: mfb Jan 23 2007, 10:24 PM
| QUOTE (NightmareX @ Jan 23 2007, 06:16 AM) | ||
For stating your opinion? I didn't think this place was....that way. Oh well, there's always PMs |
for the most part, it isn't. some people get really uppity when you say anything bad about Stephen Kenson, though.
ohnoez! i've let the secret slip. since it's already too late to delete what i've typed or even simply not post this, i'll go ahead and explain more completely. basically, Stephen Kenson's contributions to SR magic strongly favored touchy-feely shamanism over logical hermeticism. the general attitude was that a logical approach to magic was "wrong" because it had no soul, or something.
i'm not saying hermeticism is better than shamanism, understand. i just don't think it's worse, and i'm not the only person that's annoyed about the bias. the fact that Kenson's married to a relatively well-known http://christopherpenczak.com/modules/news/ doesn't help. nothing wrong with being in love with a Wiccan, but it does kinda support the idea that Kenson's stuff was biased.
Posted by: Fortune Jan 23 2007, 10:40 PM
| QUOTE (mfb @ Jan 24 2007, 09:24 AM) |
| basically, Stephen Kenson's contributions to SR magic strongly favored touchy-feely shamanism over logical hermeticism. the general attitude was that a logical approach to magic was "wrong" because it had no soul, or something. |
Which I find kind of ironic, since his best-known (non Adept twinkie) awakened character is a hermetic mage named Talon.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 23 2007, 11:44 PM
Fake hermetic.
~J
Posted by: SL James Jan 24 2007, 02:06 AM
That's a Hell of an understatement.
| QUOTE (NightmareX) | ||
For stating your opinion? I didn't think this place was....that way. Oh well, there's always PMs |
And... Yes. I have three times so far, and it was for the exact same thing by the exact same person every time. So I don't particularly feel like getting mod-raped yet a fourth time.
Posted by: Synner Jan 24 2007, 03:34 AM
| QUOTE (SL James) | ||||
And... Yes. I have three times so far, and it was for the exact same thing by the exact same person every time. So I don't particularly feel like getting mod-raped yet a fourth time. |
And you know full well it's not just because of what you say, but the endearing manner in which you say it. Others have said essentially the same thing without getting suspended. They just made their point more diplomatically.
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 24 2007, 03:35 AM
| QUOTE ( Synner) |
| They just made their point more diplomatically. |
That's a diplomatic way of saying it. A VERY diplomatic way of saying it.
What are you like in RL, SL? Are you anywhere near this surly?
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 24 2007, 03:38 AM
Enforced politeness is bullshit.
Normally I'd include more explanation, but I'm tired right now and none of this is on-topic. Open a thread in the metaforum if you want to discuss it.
~J
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 24 2007, 03:41 AM
Metaforum? You mean the bug reporting place?
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 24 2007, 03:44 AM
The place with "discussions about Dumpshock" as part of its description (added because of you, IIRC, not that that's relevant to anything). A forum about a forum: metaforum.
~J
Posted by: emo samurai Jan 24 2007, 03:46 AM
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| (added because of you, IIRC, not that that's relevant to anything) |
You love me thiiiiiis much.
That's in real distance, by the way, on a scale of 0 to infinity.
Posted by: tisoz Jan 24 2007, 06:22 AM
| QUOTE (Sphynx @ Jan 23 2007, 02:40 AM) |
| For Magic Fingers, 6 successes on TN:6 takes about 36 dice to succeed (50% chance). A Force 9 takes about 6 dice (50% chance) and you only need 1 success to use the Spirit's PsychoKinesis power Once (like using the Magic Finger spell.... Once). Tons easier and alot more powerful. |
Now you are talking about a single success at TN9, instead of the multiple successes you mentioned earlier. Also, you will need multiple successes on the drain test to avoid Serious Physical Damage, 6 more using just Charisma dice and any unused Conjuring dice - again, no foci to help.
It takes 6 Conjuring dice to get that single 9 half the time, but you've got to resist the drain evey time. Lets say you have 9 dice for the drain test somehow (charismatic elf, or very charismatic human with very high Conjuring with left over Conjuring dice.) Using the calculator in your sig, the first Conjuring test succeeds (it could have as easily failed) with 1 success. The drain is (Force)S Physical. Your 9 dice yield 1 success, so you have given yourself a Serious Physical wound for the duration until non-magically healed. You use the single service of the spirit and summon another. This time, you fail to get a single success according to the expected outcome (and this is ignoring the TN modifiers due to being wounded), but must still resist drain, which this time puts you into overflow damage. Check for Magic loss, etc..
Or am I missing something with this Force 9 spirit? If you scale it down to a Force 6 spirit, then the numbers are equal to the Force 6 spell for easier comparison. The drain will probably only be M Stun, using a well built magic user. But it is still 4 successes at TN 6 to fully resist conjuring drain. Magic Fingers is +2M, or 5M at F6, but is still twice as likely to be resisted.
| QUOTE |
| I wasn't talking their Strength and Quickness, I'm talking the Strength and Quickness of their PsychoKinesis power. |
Oops.
Posted by: Sphynx Jan 24 2007, 07:43 AM
Again, try reading Tisoz. I said 'my character' would get multiple successes (though 1 success is all you need for the example), he was a 250+ karma character with a Charisma of 9 (Elf with Exceptional Charisma) and Trauma Dampener.
Why are we discussing this even? Truth is, a Psionicist is the best telekinetic character you can create. Summoning a Force 9 (or even Force 6 if you only want to compare equal levels) Thought Form is very possible. Getting a Force 6 Magic Fingers at full capacity nearly impossible without alot of foci and alot of karma. LEarning a Force 9 Magic Fingers nearly impossible and casting it at full force an absolute impossibility for anyone short of a Dragon.
There's no discussion here. Quit trying to pick a fight through nonsense. I was right.
Posted by: tisoz Jan 24 2007, 09:40 AM
| QUOTE (Sphynx @ Jan 24 2007, 01:43 AM) |
| Again, try reading tisoz. I said 'my character' would get multiple successes (though 1 success is all you need for the example), he was a 250+ karma character with a Charisma of 9 (Elf with Exceptional Charisma) and Trauma Dampener. Why are we discussing this even? |
I am because I think your assertion of the ease of conjuring a Force 9 spirit is absurd. Even for your character, you are looking at taking drain.
| QUOTE |
| Summoning a Force 9 (or even Force 6 if you only want to compare equal levels) Thought Form is very possible. Getting a Force 6 Magic Fingers at full capacity nearly impossible without alot of foci and alot of karma. LEarning a Force 9 Magic Fingers nearly impossible and casting it at full force an absolute impossibility for anyone short of a Dragon. There's no discussion here. Quit trying to pick a fight through nonsense. I was right. |
What is nonsense? I used real numbers not abstract "full capacity" or "full force" descriptors. A 250 karma character should have a good chance of learning a Force 9 spell. It hardly takes a dragon to cast it at full force, which is a single 6.
The reason I even responded was I thought there might be some special summoning rules for Psi's that I had overlooked, making it possible to do the things with ease as you claimed. You made it sound too easy and I was pointing out a few things I thought you may have overlooked.
Instead of making statements to me, which are not backed up with any facts, try responding to the discussion. I fail to see how you are "right". Making a roll of TN6 is going to be just as difficult whether you are rolling Sorcery or Conjuring dice. Resisting the drain is going to be less for the spell though because of the drain code. (Unless the Force is reduced to F2 or F1, which has not even entered the discussion. Neither has the possibility of F3 to F5 spirit/spell, which would make conjuring easier because of the spell's fixed TN.)
At higher Force than 6, Drain becomes a concern for the conjurer, and learning the spell becomes an issue for the sorcerer. Even her however, the sorcerer can do things to help learn and only needs to do it once. The conjurer gets no enefit from foci to help and has to deal with drain every time they summon.
Posted by: Sphynx Jan 24 2007, 09:53 AM
Have you ever read the Magic Fingers spell? 1 success, no matter the Force, gives you a Strength-1, Quickness-1. You need 9 successes on a Force 9 Magic Fingers, to equate to 1 success on a Force 9 Thought Form. 0% chance vs potential 50% chance.
Secondly, I didn't even give an example, I simply stated that a single Thought Form was better than an equivalent Magic Fingers spell, and added on that my own character can produce a Force 9 effect by summoning a Force 9er.
There is no comparrison. A ThoughtForm is your best telekinetic power in the game, even at forces lower than Force 6 (or 9). The simple statement that your chances of even getting to 6 successes on a Force 6 spell while my own character can easily do the Force 9 is not a comparisson or example. It's a simple fact. And honestly, with that TN of 6, I'd be surprised if even a Dragon can cast a Magic Fingers that compares to the Psychokinesis of my Force 9 ThoughtForm.
Posted by: tisoz Jan 24 2007, 10:06 AM
Ok, I had not read the spell for a long time.
OOPS!!!
Sorry. You have many good points.
Posted by: Sphynx Jan 24 2007, 10:23 AM
No problem boss, like I said, I'm one of the only ones that loves playing those guys. But they only kick ass in one area. Not truly worth the 30 point cost. Hopefully with my new system I'm trying to implement in SOTA:2065, they'll be alot more interesting to play.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 25 2007, 10:23 AM
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| for the most part, it isn't. some people get really uppity when you say anything bad about Stephen Kenson, though. ohnoez! i've let the secret slip. since it's already too late to delete what i've typed or even simply not post this, i'll go ahead and explain more completely. basically, Stephen Kenson's contributions to SR magic strongly favored touchy-feely shamanism over logical hermeticism. the general attitude was that a logical approach to magic was "wrong" because it had no soul, or something. |
[nods] Never could put my finger on it, but your right. Which is ironic, because it shows how little Kenson would then seem to know about real Hermeticism (not that SR Heremeticism had anything to do with that til SOTA 64 of course). But yeah, that is a common Wiccan perspective.
I'm kinda neutral on Kenson - like some of his stuff, didn't like other bits. My biggest gripe is actually Talon. As much as I liked the novels, the guy's a total munchkin (not as bad as Ryan Mercury though [roll eyes]). Fake Hermetic? Maybe, more Wiccan than Heremtic to be sure. Kyle Teller was a much better example of Hermetic if you ask me.
Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Jan 25 2007, 08:46 PM
SOTA 63 (IIRC) had some good additional stuff for hermetics. I like the newer approach of Street Magic basically giving a laundry list of magical traditions then just addressing each as valid, and moving on.
Personally I like just having a chaos mage iwth a mentor spirit, and making magical stir fry.
Posted by: SL James Jan 26 2007, 01:07 AM
| QUOTE (Synner @ Jan 23 2007, 09:34 PM) | ||||||
And you know full well it's not just because of what you say, but the endearing manner in which you say it. |
No.
It was very much the content of my posts at issue. Or rather, what a mod imagined into the comments I posted.
Posted by: fistandantilus3.0 Jan 26 2007, 05:49 AM
No the content of saying that you don't like what a particular writer says is just fine. Taking it to the next level and making it about the writer is usually the problem. Say you don't like something, debate what you don't like, and move on.
I have a personal dislike for one of the older author's style and content, but that doesn't mean that I need to go off on the author themselves. I just don't talk about his stuff so that it doesn't become an issue.
| QUOTE |
| So I don't particularly feel like getting mod-raped yet a fourth time. |
In short, you're not being persecuted.
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 26 2007, 09:48 AM
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) |
| SOTA 63 (IIRC) had some good additional stuff for hermetics. |
I liked the Supremacy dueling idea, but it could have been implemented better (maybe). The metamagics were just, well, meh.
| QUOTE |
| Personally I like just having a chaos mage iwth a mentor spirit, and making magical stir fry. |
That's the great thing about 4th - my namesake character started play back in first as a shaman, and was then remade as a hermetic in another 1st edition campaign during which it was retconned that his magical training came from his time in the Souix Wildcats (hence the familiarity to pose effectively as a shaman - he never conjured anything in his first incarnation). Later in 2nd edition (under a different gm) the gm decided that he should have a totem even as a hermetic due to the Wildcats training. When I converted him to 3rd, I kept this oddity cause it had had effects in game, and now in 4th it's legal - some essentially they unknowingly validated the rules mess that he had become.
Posted by: Kagetenshi Jan 26 2007, 11:55 AM
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) |
| I have a personal dislike for one of the older author's style and content, but that doesn't mean that I need to go off on the author themselves. I just don't talk about his stuff so that it doesn't become an issue. |
That is an issue, damn it. When one of the moderators of a discussion forum is willing to completely avoid discussion on something directly to do with the topic of discussion (and make no mistake, someone heavily involved in the shaping of the Shadowrun rules and flavour becomes themself inevitably a part of the discussion), and to advise others to do the same, I find that deeply alarming.
~J
Posted by: NightmareX Jan 26 2007, 12:13 PM
| QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
| That is an issue, damn it. When one of the moderators of a discussion forum is willing to completely avoid discussion on something directly to do with the topic of discussion (and make no mistake, someone heavily involved in the shaping of the Shadowrun rules and flavour becomes themself inevitably a part of the discussion), and to advise others to do the same, I find that deeply alarming. |
Deeply alarming? To say the least. It's usually the type of draconian squelching of free speech that I expect to see on certain religious boards, which generally a) pisses me off, and b) eventually leads me to leave said board. That Dumpshock could be moving in that direction....displeases me.
Posted by: Trigger Jan 26 2007, 12:32 PM
| QUOTE (fistandantilus3.0) |
| Personally I like just having a chaos mage iwth a mentor spirit, and making magical stir fry. |
Chaos mages rock my socks right now, being quite definitely one of my favorite traditions. It also allows with some ease of creating a possible and comprehendible backstory for a street mage....when you can't find a teacher or get into school for magic what do you turn to? Books and chips and whatever you can get your hands on to help you learn about your mojo and then leads to a definite mosh pot of magical theory and influence.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)