Blood magic, what are the real negative effects of blood magic? Options

[Apathy]

Doesn't Awakened Lands (SR2) make reference to the aboriginal shamans in Australia using a self-sacrificing version of blood magic to keep some 'threats' (like Spider) locked away? I never got any sense reading through the fluff of that book that they were evil.

[Malicant]

Okay, let's talk about Evil and evil for a moment.

Evil with a capital E doesn't exist in Shadowrun. There are no entities whose sole purpose and choice is to be Evil, even the Horrors were presented as more fleshed-out than that.[...]

Well, actually not the Horrors I know, not by the definition of the word Evil I use, which definitly is very different from what everyone else here seems to use it for. And one single idea plus one generel modus operandi is not what I would call "more fleshed-out than that".
Sheesh, can't a guy say something is Evil, without being accused it is a moral judgement? I guess not. So the guy will further try to use terms like twisted or corrupted, which might help better to deliver his idea. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleepy.gif) Or maybe not.

So, now that we have the consesus that Evil does not exist, we know for sure that corruption (formally known as Evil) does. And Blood Magic is just that.

What do you people actually understand as Evil, btw? I'd really like to know.

[Sweaty Hippo]

Its not okay to hit girls no matter how hard they hit you first.

Unless they hit you with a gun.

As for Blood Magic, it's got a nasty reputation. In the game world, the idea of human sacrifice is taboo among the non-Aztlan, while in the game rules of SR3 (or so I heard), your Blood Spirits can get an infinite Force boost as long as they kept killing. As for SR4, I heard that they have Blood Magic in Street Magic, but I don't really know.

[Malicant]

Blood Spirits had the infinite force boost in Street Magic, in SR3 they actually worked without some bogus loophole mechanics. The post-errata Street Magic version of Blood Spirits is even worse, though at least no longer can they increase their force ad infinitum.

[Moon-Hawk]

Sheesh, can't a guy say something is Evil, without being accused it is a moral judgement?

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/question.gif) Is my sarcasm detector broken?

[Mordinvan]

Sheesh, can't a guy say something is Evil, without being accused it is a moral judgement?

Evil is a moral term, if you use it you are in fact making a moral judgment. Which isn't always a bad thing. But before calling something evil, defining what evil is, often helps.

[Muspellsheimr]

To say Blood Magic is Evil is not moral judgement. It is simply stating a fact.

Wrong. Good, Evil, & Good vs. Evil are all subjects of morality, based on the ethics of a sentient society capable of making such intellectual judgment. The context does not matter. Inherit good or inherit evil does not exist - good & evil is, once again, a human concept, and so can not be automatic in any circumstance.

Many practices that are today considered evil have been considered acceptable, and even holy, in cultures past. Prime example being Aztec/Mayan/etc. sacrifices. They were trying to do exactly what the Shadowrun Blood Magic represents, and it was not evil - it was a holy act.

[Mordinvan]

So, now that we have the consesus that Evil does not exist, we know for sure that corruption (formally known as Evil) does. And Blood Magic is just that.

To corrupt something it must first be 'pure', so if you could describe 'pure' magic to me, and tell me how blood magic corrupts it? Maybe explain to me how blood willingly sacrificed could cause such corruption?
The blood being used need not be from a sentient being, so what happens if our blood mage works in a slaughter house, and simply makes use of all the cows being killed for food? Line up 10 cows in a row, slit all their throats at once, thats about 140 boxes of physical damage... or ~34 dice to soak with. Won't change the quality or quantity of the food, but the ability to use that magic to keep the animals healthy while they grow, or using it to grow the cows food... Not really seeing an issue here?
I can see PETA having a bird, but aside from that, no problem.

[Ancient History]

Well, actually not the Horrors I know, not by the definition of the word Evil I use, which definitly is very different from what everyone else here seems to use it for.

Malicant, at this point I'm not entirely sure you know what the heck your definition of evil is. You certainly haven't given one, except to say you think evil is completely separate from moral judgment. Newsflash: A moral judgment is saying whether something is good or evil. Good and evil are moral terms. You can't use them objectively, especially in SR which doesn't have any convenient labels like "Lawful Evil" to hang on things.

As far as the Horrors go, I suggest you read up. They're a diverse lot, each with their own appetites and goals. Some are mindless critters, others are sophisticated intelligences. They are probably the closest thing to Evil in Shadowrun, if only because the entire spectrum possesses a degree of malevolence...but they are not wholly given over to it, as they can experience a range of emotions, and for the unintelligent ones at least their actions more closely resemble a hunger or instinct than a concerted will to be evil. Horrors are horrific, and some of them are certainly evil, but I wouldn't quite place them as Evil-though they come closest.

So the guy will further try to use terms like twisted or corrupted, which might help better to deliver his idea. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sleepy.gif) Or maybe not.

So, now that we have the consesus that Evil does not exist, we know for sure that corruption (formally known as Evil) does. And Blood Magic is just that.

Try to understand: Twisted and Corruption indicate bad but not necessarily evil, in the same way that you can claim an insane person is sick instead of evil. Because that's what most Twisted Adepts, Corrupt Mages, and Toxic Shamans are: sick in the head. Whether or not they are evil or just f*cked in the head is largely a matter of how they are presented and played. An adept could be relatively harmless and practice self mutilation and still be Twisted; that doesn't make them evil. A toxic shaman could capture and torture a logging crew in the Amazon for the greater good-and who is to say that their actions do not benefit the environment? An old shaman could sacrifice a willing victim to bind the spirit that would otherwise destroy his village for the same "greater good." No one says that these actions are right, and many would argue that the latter two at least are evil, but in game terms they are neither Evil nor corruption.

The Path of Blood magic is a twisted path. It has to be. Not everyone can take a knife to themselves, or others, or even a small animal easily; it takes a certain amount of discipline and willpower to do so, and repeated effort to be able to do so as needed in any circumstance. Do you think you could cut yourself on command? Gnaw at your wrist or tear at your flesh with a jagged thumbnail when there's no blade around? That doesn't take in the magical aspects of the act, of course, or the addictive rush of power, only the initial violence. The "Corruption" of blood magic is as much the different mental outlook of someone trained in blood magic as it is any extraplanar influence.

What do you people actually understand as Evil, btw? I'd really like to know.

Evil with a capital E generally refers to cosmic evil, entities or forces that are completely, unequivocally malevolent and willingly so. There's no evil quite like that which chooses to be evil, being evil by nature as a sort of default setting is mundane. Common examples include the Devil and Lovecraft's Cthulhu - although it should be pointed out that even in those cases, evil is largely a reflection of the moral framework that the entities in question are viewed in.

[Zhan Shi]

For what it's worth, in Earthdawn Blood Magic is divided in to two different forms. The first is called Life Magic, used for the sealing of oaths, empowering adept talents, and so forth; the energy is drawn from the caster himself. The second, the "evil" form, is called Death Magic; the energy is taken (willingly or not) from one or more donors. Among other things, it is used by the Therans to create Raw Magic Filters, and to power their floating mountain fortresses (Behemoths). Because it reminds people of the Horrors and the Scourge, not to mention the nasty example of Blood Wood, Blood Magic is regarded with great suspicion by the general populace. The Lightbearers have severe restrictions on its use; for example, they can't make use of Blood Charms. A much more in depth exploration on the subject of Blood Magic may be found in the Earthdawn supplement Magic: A Manual Of Mystic Secrets.

[last_of_the_grea...]

Well, by the official rules, the true downside of blood magic for PC's is that you have to hand over your character sheet to the GM. Character gone. Boom! I'm sure there's a good reason for this in the developers' minds. Perhaps it's "Think of the bad PR if we "advocat" blood magic!"" Perhaps there's other reasons. The bottom line is that you can no longer play a character who gains any blood magic abilities.

Now, assuming you're gonna ignore this little rule, as is the right of the GM in his own game, then all bets are off. Whatever you allow is the rule.

[Mordinvan]

Well, by the official rules, the true downside of blood magic for PC's is that you have to hand over your character sheet to the GM. Character gone. Boom! I'm sure there's a good reason for this in the developers' minds. Perhaps it's "Think of the bad PR if we "advocat" blood magic!"" Perhaps there's other reasons. The bottom line is that you can no longer play a character who gains any blood magic abilities.

Now, assuming you're gonna ignore this little rule, as is the right of the GM in his own game, then all bets are off. Whatever you allow is the rule.

I'm going to have to ask for a page number citing loss of P.C. when learning blood magic, as the book provides explicit instructions on how to learn it, and pg 137-138 say how a P.C. should go about playing one, and when it is appropriate.
So looks like the books permit it just fine.

[Malicant]

Newsflash: A moral judgment is saying whether something is good or evil. Good and evil are moral terms.

As I said, that is the problem here. For me, those are just words. No matter, I will find better words to describe my intent next time.

As far as the Horrors go, I suggest you read up. They're a diverse lot, each with their own appetites and goals.[...]

If by diverse you mean all the same, just with slightly diffrent degrees of blood shed, then we agree.
I like Horrors, but really, diverse is something they are not. They want food, they all gather that food und than eat it. The only one that comes to mind as not food driven is Verjigorm, who instead hunts dragons. Woopdee.

Try to understand: Twisted and Corruption indicate bad but not necessarily evil[...]

Not to want to repeat myself, but I am fully aware of that. Seriously, I just used a word you understand diffrently then I do. A case of bad wording, I guess. I was using Evil not in a cosmic sense, but to diffrentiate from evil (the moral one). Whatever, I'm way to lazy to explain myself right know.

Bottom line:
Twisted and Corrupted mages are different from evil or bad mages. A mage that is twisted might be recognzied as a good guy by some, as a bad guy by others, but he is still twisted, no matter what. That's more or less what I got from all those nifty magicbooks that were published until know. I don't see much that contradicts that, especially not the Perception of evil sidebar.

[Ancient History]

As I said, that is the problem here. For me, those are just words. No matter, I will find better words to describe my intent next time.

The wonderful thing about words is they have definitions. Learn them, use them correctly, and people will give you less of a hard time.

If by diverse you mean all the same, just with slightly diffrent degrees of blood shed, then we agree.
I like Horrors, but really, diverse is something they are not. They want food, they all gather that food und than eat it. The only one that comes to mind as not food driven is Verjigorm, who instead hunts dragons. Woopdee.

You're officially unqualified to continue with this line of conversation then, because it's obvious you know practically nothing about Horrors.

[Fuchs]

If Horrors are not evil by your definition, then devils and demons and such are not evil either. And I can't really imagine anything that would be evil then.

[Malicant]

Name one Horror, that does not fall into the line "it has one favorite food, it corrupts people to produce that food, it harvests". The only one that I can find in Horrors which I am reading right now, is Verjigorm. And his Dragon-corruption scheme could be also broken down to food.

No disrepect, but Horrors are really flat if you break them down.

I still like them, since they are not "Hulk, Smash!" all the time. Corruption is so much more fun than destruction.

[hyzmarca]

Name one Horror, that does not fall into the line "it has one favorite food, it corrupts people to produce that food, it harvests". The only one that I can find in Horrors which I am reading right now, is Verjigorm. And his Dragon-corruption scheme could be also broken down to food.

No disrepect, but Horrors are really flat if you break them down.

I still like them, since they are not "Hulk, Smash!" all the time. Corruption is so much more fun than destruction.

Slipshades. The dark warrior.

[Malicant]

Ah, Slipshades. Minor Horrors that exist for the sole purpose so it's description can have something like "they are mysterious, no one knows what they actually do" written into. Can't seem to find them in ED 2nd. Did they cut them out?

And who is this dark warrior figure you mentioned?

Also, when I asked about a Horror that deviated from my oversimplification, I should have mentioned I was asking for Horrors that matter, i.e. named ones. Slipshades are cool, though.

[hyzmarca]

The dark warrior is a character from Harlequin's Back. He attempted to attack a kingdom that was protected by Thayla, a woman whose voice was so beautiful that she could slay Horrors simply by singing. The dark warrior fell in love with her, however, and instead of killing her so that his breathern could invade as was the original plan, he simply stayed by her side day and night, enduring the excruciating torment of a voice that would have slain any lesser Horror, simply because he wanted to be near her.

[Ryu]

Name one Horror, that does not fall into the line "it has one favorite food, it corrupts people to produce that food, it harvests".

Broad categories, not saying much.

I challenge "has one favourite food" for all horrors that target kaers. "Anyone found inside" does not qualify. Examples: Chantrells horror, Hater

Corruption is a standard, but not done by all horrors. Physical or mental pain are alternatives. Examples: Hirnwühler (Brain Worms?), Kreescra

Harvesting... I´m not sure what you are getting at, but some horrors certainly don´t waste time with "sowing".


All horrors have in common that they feed on negative emotion. Some cause it directly, some indirectly. Some corrupt, some kill, some make life miserable. They might pose a physical threat or hide behind the scenes. Some build constructs or even armies, some act alone. All are "The Enemy".

[Ancient History]

Name one Horror, that does not fall into the line "it has one favorite food, it corrupts people to produce that food, it harvests". The only one that I can find in Horrors which I am reading right now, is Verjigorm. And his Dragon-corruption scheme could be also broken down to food.

The Horror Hunter. Dread Iota. Gnashers. Ristul. Looking at Horrors at critters out for food is just more evidence that you really have noc lue what you're talking about.

[Fuchs]

I still don't get what would be considered evil if not Horrors. Devils and Demons for sure look exactly like horrors.

[Apathy]

I think part of the point is that SR is all about moral relativism. There is no clear cut good-vs-evil struggle. No black and white, it's all shades of grey (and usually very dark grey at that).

I think it would be more helpful to discuss the impacts of things like blood magic in terms of the impacts on more measurable qualities. Like "the use of the sacrificing metamagic often results in a sense of detachment between the mage and the rest of humanity and increasingly sociopathic behaviors. Additionally, the energies released during these magical workings are known to attract shadow spirits, wraiths, and similar hostile creatures as well as the occasionally do-gooder who might attack the mage on principle. The GM should use their own discretion to decide if this becomes the hook for a whole new campaign, or if these influences drive the character insane and turn them into an NPC."

[Shiloh]

I think part of the point is that SR is all about moral relativism. There is no clear cut good-vs-evil struggle. No black and white, it's all shades of grey (and usually very dark grey at that).

I think the whole Gaiasphere aspect of the cosmology, along with the unspeakable results of the Horrors getting out again make for quite a large splodge of retro 60's decor, even if most of the world is bathed in the greys of dusk, dawn, smog and ash.

I think it would be more helpful to discuss the impacts of things like blood magic in terms of the impacts on more measurable qualities. Like "the use of the sacrificing metamagic often results in a sense of detachment between the mage and the rest of humanity and increasingly sociopathic behaviors. Additionally, the energies released during these magical workings are known to attract shadow spirits, wraiths, and similar hostile creatures as well as the occasionally do-gooder who might attack the mage on principle. The GM should use their own discretion to decide if this becomes the hook for a whole new campaign, or if these influences drive the character insane and turn them into an NPC."

That's a good stab, but for it to be a balancer in a metagame sense, there have to be numbers on it, or players will take the mick.

[Muspellsheimr]

If Horrors are not evil by your definition, then devils and demons and such are not evil either. And I can't really imagine anything that would be evil then.

I cannot speak for anyone actually involved in the discussion, but what I would say is, they are not inherently evil. Any sentient being capable of understanding morality can be evil, just as it can be good. Any non-sentient being cannot be either, as it is unable to understand or follow such a code of morality.

The only thing that could be inherently evil would be a sentient being capable of understanding morality, but uncontrollably compelled to perform evil acts without outside influence. I cannot think of anything capable of evil that has "be evil" written into it's genetic structure, so...

On the nature of Blood Magic, it does not matter how many of it's practitioners are evil - the magic itself is not sentient, does not understand morality, cannot make it's own choices, and so cannot be evil, much the same way a standard wolf cannot be called evil.