Street Magic, So much for one book's enough :( Options

[Garland]

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

The problem is the utter lack of basis for most of the newer totems (I'd say at least half of the totems listed in MitS) in NA beliefs.

Of course, there is still also the GIANT assumption that NA beliefs are in any way the same, or even work the same way, or how they interact with other rules for, say, Insect shamans. It's a good think Spider was never made an Insect totem, because that would be contradictory to the basis of totem magic in NA beliefs.

Of course, this whole "most NA magic is totem magic" idea is ridiculous, as well. So, what can I say except, "Anything else is better."

[Wireknight]

I think that basic initiation rules and a handful of metamagics should be available in the main sourcebook, but that all advanced rules (magical edges and flaws, the lion's share of metamagics, enchanting rules, free spirits, magical threats) should be delegated to a seperate core expansion rulebook. I don't know that I quite agree with the idea of point-based magic purchase as mfb has outlined it. I think the idea itself is promising, but the implementation is flawed.

I think that, if we're going to go with his enumerations, then full magicians should get something like 11 points, universally, while aspected magicians and adepts get 6 points. Otherwise, most people who want to keep their existing characters will have to pick up the "hermetic package" or "shamanic package" and, as mfb stated, lose out on some of the new flexibility and shininess available to characters who avoid buying package deals entirely.

[moosegod]

"Package" sounds a whole like like "class" to me.

SR magic, with it's mostly clear delinations, is enough for me.

[CanvasBack]

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]

[Paul]

[Kanada Ten]

Well, there is the Hermetic Library and so on in the sense of tiny differences (even between toxic and twisted). Personally, I always like the seperation and felt there should be even more of it.

[Paul]

But the actual rules are exactly the same. Sure they way they are used (Modifiers) are different, but the rules are the same basic stuff-D6, opposed tests, etc...

[Wireknight]

Conjuring doesn't really work differently, though, for different types. Durations and trappings change, but in the end, it's all a matter of rolling Conjuring plus bonuses against TN# plus modifiers, then resisting drain with Charisma. Changing it to, say, make elementals able to be conjured as a complex action, or making spirits last until their services run out, to make it "uniform", would damage the good parts of the difference from one summoning tradition to the next. Variety is the spice of life.

[Kanada Ten]

The rules are totally different, just the mechanics are the same. Not so much for Sorcery, sure.

[Crimson Jack]

[Wireknight]

I never used geasa, anyhow. I feel that if you get cyberware and bioware, you should pay the price with a reduced magic rating. If you want to raise it, do it through initiation, not through keeping the magic but doing the chicken dance every time you cast a lethal combat spell. Oftentimes, the limitations of geasa (maybe I've just run under conservative GMs who will use any weakness I display for my character against them at one point or another) are worse than just taking the hit and losing Magic.

[Critias]

[Fortune]

[Jrayjoker]

[Tai-Pan]

[Jrayjoker]

[mfb]

[Smed]

Yep, I agree. I'd like to be able to do more mixing and matching with the magic abilities. There are times when I'd like to play a character that has just a hint of power, not a full Mage or Adept.

[Jrayjoker]

Thanks for the clarification.

[audun]

Some opinions and ideas on which way I think magic should develop for SR4:

Skills, spells and metamagic
I do believe that the magic system of SR is more complicated than it have to be. A full revision may be needed. The thing is that it is built upon the D&Dish notion of spellslinging. (This is indeed a semiotic misunderstanding as you don't throw or sling spells when you cast them. You give them form.)
They added conjuring in addition to the spellslinging. Then they added enchanting. Then they added various metamagic which are attempts to make the magic more "realistic": Divination, Quickening, Anchoring, etc. Then there's the astral, A. Perception and A. Projection and metamagics such as Sensing, Cleansing, Psychometry, etc.
All in all lots of interesting ideas are added, but they are added on top of the spellslinger system. Hence it is very complicated.
What could be done is a complete revison where Sorcery no longer is the basic magic skill. Instead let's do away with some of the metamagic and spells and replaced them with magical skills. Exactly how I can't fathom right now, but to start with I imagine something along the following:
- Divination covers most detection magic (think pendulums) in addition to actual prophecies
- Enchanting covers what it does + anchoring
- Astral sensing for Aura Reading, Sensing, Psychometry, mind reading
- Astral manipulation (requires projection to be used) for Cleansing, Severing, Filtering, Masking and other manipulations of things astral
- Conjuring, as is (but see below on spirits)
- Sorcery for spellcasting as is, though spell categories should be rethought. As is there's a bloat in the Manipulation category.
- More power to the metaplanes, such as introducing the metaplane of Dreaming (something several fan- and author-sites has proposed, but then there's the Dream spell).

[More magical traditions
It doesn't make sense that Voudoun is a Tradition with different mechanics and spirits, while Druidic magic follows the same rules as NA shamans. As pointed out, NA shamans should also be different. Not everyone has Totems. Idols was/is a BAD idea. The rules laid down in MitS (I believe Idols first appeared in the Germany SB) was a serious hindrance when we worked with the European magical traditions.
The rules should be fairly similar regardless of tradition, but the approach should be clearly different for each Tradition. Possible traditions:
- Hermetics (with the paradigms)
- Alchemy (not a paradigm of Hermeticism anymore)
- Psionics (now a full-fledged tradition rather than an oddity)
- various strands of Neo-Paganism
- Traditional Witchcraft
- Quabbala (should definetly not be Hermetics)
- etc.. separate traditions based on different cultures (various Native American, Voudoun, various African, Aborigine)

More diversified spirits
Going with the traditions, spirits should be more diversified. As is they are very general. If you are a Theurgist mage you summon angels, but per SR3 rules these are actually Elementals that appear like angels. Doesn't make much sense to me. Elementals are clearly connected to the Hermetic idea of the four basic elements and has nothing to do with angels. Christian Hermeticism may tie these elementals to a four-tiered heaven or various arch-angels, but won't confuse them with angels.
Why limit conjuring to a few certain types of generic spirits? There could be many more kinds of spirits which the magician may interact and gain services from. In European folklore and New Age myth there's the idea of the follower/guardian angel, there are faeries, ghosts and demons. These are more independent kinds, but not necessarily more than in the relationship between shamans and nature spirits. Then there are all the mythological spirits or gods. Totems can be actual spirits in addition to spiritual guidelines. Why can't you summon them?
Some approaches to this may be:
- all spirits summoned are individual beeings, close to how free spirits are now. Or probably closer to how faeries are now. There's no generic spirits as such. You don't conjure a river spirit, you can the nymph of this specific river. In another river there's no nymph, but a water horse.
- You may indeed conjure any kind of spirits, but your tradition deceides how you treat them and limits what kind of spirits you may services from. (EX: Hermetics would have a very hard time getting any kind of nature spirit to even listen to them and won't get any services from them. Shamans would be overwhelmed by the primalness of Elementals and won't be able to command them.) The main difference from SR3 would be that there are more spirit types available. For instance: Hermetics may learn Demonology in addition to Elemental summoning allowing conjuring and binding of weird spirits from unknown metaplanes. A witch may learn to how to get guidance and help from her "follower" ie conjure it. Though, I think that there still shoud be barriers between the traditions, but it should be clearer that they have to do with different approaches and beliefs rather than laws of magic.

Making spellcasting less "slinging" and more magic
- Reintroduce expendable/reusable fetishes from SR2 (which let's you cast spells at a higher Force for less cost). Add a system where you may learn a spell with ritual (obvious complex action, making casting the spell two complex actions) built-in for much the same effect as fetishes.
IMO spells with rituals or fetishes should be the standard and spellcasting without such constraints should be something awesome and powerful. Beeing able to cast a "Ray of Death" with the mere wave of the hand rather than with a lot chanting and dancing should be the domain of really powerful mages, not the standard for a wiz-boy who've just discovered his talent.
- Dump Sympatethic linking as a metamagic and use it as it was in SR2 (standard for ritual magic).

Hmmm... Been writing on and off on this post for some hours. Hope it is somewhat coherent still. There are many good ideas floating around here which I would have liked to comment on, but can't right now.

[Kanada Ten]

[mfb]

heh, same here. i didn't like the idea when i first heard it, but it's grown on me.

[Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_*]