 Magic, A Question, Something I realized I don't know. |
  |
 Aug 31 2007, 04:59 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421  |
I was about to make another post no one cares about over on the casting spells without LOS thread and I realized I didn't know something. Has it ever been explained exactly how someone has the ability to be a mage and who doesn't and what that exactly means? Is the astral something that is inside us all and around us all and mages only have the sense? Is the astral so confusing that only mages can really interpret it and other people just close off the sense?(psychosomatic loss of a sense in response to an extremely painful or confusing and sustained stimuli?)
Just wondering if there has been something covering exactly WHY 1% of the population is magically active and what that means in the SR universe. Chris |
 |
 
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:04 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 609 Joined: 13-August 07 Member No.: 12,615 |
Short answer: no one knows. Given some of Dunkelzhan's bequests in "Portfolio of a Dragon", some think there is a "magic" gene. Astral space is "beside" physical space. A more in depth explanation can be found in Street Magic.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:12 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 91 Joined: 25-July 07 Member No.: 12,356 |
It comes down to who is "Awakened" and who isn't. mages are people who have awakened at some point of their life and become magically active. A mundane person, or someone who isn't magically active, can not use magic or see into the astral. Why the exact specifics of it are unknown, thats kind of the basis of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:17 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,269 Joined: 18-September 06 Member No.: 9,421 |
Sorry, I should have been clearer, I've read and understand Street Magic, I just have some interesting theories based on current evidence and the workability of this and all previous magic systems, I was wondering if I should bother to talk to anyone about them or if the details had already been published in like a 1-3rd edition book I haven't read.
Chris |
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:27 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 609 Joined: 13-August 07 Member No.: 12,615 |
to my knowledge, no concrete explanation for magical ability exists, though there are theories. In YOTC, it was revealed that at least some of the junk DNA metahumans carry within them has an astral "shadow". It got pretty technical, and I can't remember all of it, but I recall something like "fourth dimensional DNA".
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 06:01 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 458 Joined: 28-March 05 From: NA/UCAS/IN/ Member No.: 7,246 |
Like Zhan Shi said, the official explanation given has something to do with 4th dimensional "astral shadow DNA". Which would mean, I guess that mages have 5th dimensional DNA that we obviously can't detect. (As 3rd dimensional people, we cast a 2 dimensional shadow, so that's how I figure a 5th dimension into it).
Essentially, this extra DNA gives the creature the ability to process mana in some manner, whether it's a physical manifestation of phenotype (expressing as a troll or barghest), enhanced physical abilities (adept powers or fire breathing like a hellhound), or the ability to detect and manipulate mana and astral space with spells, conjuration, and astral detection/projection. Just like other parts of the DNA deal with how to process proteins. But more science-fictiony. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 01:28 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 633 Joined: 23-February 06 Member No.: 8,301 |
A shaman would say that all of that is bunk and he can do magic because his totem deigns to grant him the power.
What I'm saying is that all of those explanations are theories put forth by scientist-types. But that doesn't mean that they are necessarily the truth in the SR world. Maybe it's just, um... magic. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 04:37 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
The number of magically active varies by edition. It's supposed to rise over time, but Frank said it was 2% in either SR1/SR2. I can't find my old books to check.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:15 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Not exactly. The quoted percentage is 1% in every edition. But every edition claims that 1% includes more and more "barely awakened" types. In 1st edition, 1% of the population was described as being Full Magicians. In 4th edition, 1% includes Full Magicians, Adepts, and people who only have Astral Sight. So it used to be that Full Magicians were 1% of the population, now they are reported as being a small fraction of the 1% of the population who are awakened. And yet the books also claim that the magical percentage is rising - despite the fact that this apparent sharp downturn took place over 20 years (roughly 1/3 of the awakening). -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:17 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,748 Joined: 5-July 02 Member No.: 2,935 |
The percentage is rising, but shadowrunners keep geeking the damn mage to keep the number of living magicians down to 1%. Can't let them Awakened get too uppity!
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 05:33 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...damn straight!
My Sharpshooter Jill used to paint a magician's hat on the stock of her Walther 2100 for every one she geeked. Had to get a new stock. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 06:59 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 524 Joined: 12-April 06 Member No.: 8,455 |
Nice one! *hands AH a No-Prize* :)
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 11:23 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 609 Joined: 13-August 07 Member No.: 12,615 |
Speaking of totems...assuming they are in the same vein as ED's "Passions", there is evidence to indicate they are jungian archetypes, given life by metahumanity. The power of belief in an ideal creates the totem, who in turn grants advantages and disadvantages to it's "children". That would mean that totems are merely a reflection of the awakened's own subconcious.
On the other hand, I could be full of crap, and the totems are real, independent forces. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 31 2007, 11:28 PM
Post
#14
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,748 Joined: 5-July 02 Member No.: 2,935 |
Indications for either or both, really.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 04:09 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 85 Joined: 16-June 07 Member No.: 11,924 |
Toaster is disappointed with your lack of faith. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2007, 04:26 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,748 Joined: 5-July 02 Member No.: 2,935 |
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 07:22 AM
Post
#17
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 5-September 05 From: LAX, UCAS Member No.: 7,687 |
According to Augmentation (page 78): Interestingly, recent studies reveal that another percentile of the population consists of latent or dormant magicians; people whose Talent has either been repressed, never Awakened, or done so incompletely and remains rudimentary. These individuals often show only a minor or specialized level of magical talent. The genetics underlying this latency are unknown but are assumed to be connected. I would take this to mean that the first 1% consists entirely of full magicians (old priority A), mystic adepts (also old priority A), and adepts (unless one wants to call adepts a "specialized level of magical talent", which I could see as they were priority B in the old systems). Aspected magicians and people with only astral sight or a spell/spirit knack IMO would definitely fall under "specialized level of magical talent". So it seems things are getting a tad better in regards to your complaint ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 05:22 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.