With all the fuss around the Adept rules, the other chapters besides Culture Shock have mostly gone ignored and I'd like to see if we can spawn some threads about them now that the sub-forum is up.

Since I've got a vested interest in the Euromagic section I'll kick off by asking for opinions and constructive criticism on that section.

BTW - My thanks to those who've already commented on Wicca.

I'll tell you tomorrow when my books finally arrive

I thought it was excellent. I'll be more specific when I have the book available, but I give you an enthusastic pat on the back for this chapter.

Things I liked...

• Introduction of more schools and paradigms. The more the merrier!
• The art. I know its a minor aspect of the chapter, but there are several pictures here that really inspire me. I'm totally in love with the one on page 109. That's so my type of character (I love including mythology and ethnic styles of magic into my characters).
• The flavor and source material to help guide players in creating more interesting magicians.

The things I'm not crazy about include...

• Charms. A wasted opportunity in my opinion.
• Witches in general. While having some guidance is good, this take on witches is just too two-dimensional to my tastes. (Okay, I admit it, I just wanted to use too, two, and to in one sentence... but I do still feel that way.)
• The lack of more "stuff" beyond descriptive text. I like a healthy mix of both, just like I like a healthy mix of roleplaying and gaming. Too much of one without enough of the other always comes across badly to me. But this is an ongoing issue for me with recent publications anyway and isn't specific to SOTA:2064 or the Old World Magic chapter.

I was pretty indifferent to everything else. Lots of good stuff here, just not all that much useful stuff from a gaming point of view.

Well, I already mentioned it but I like the chapter. I really like the paradigms (other than the fact that they are called Paradigms). I did find it rather disappointing that in fleshing out European Hermeticism, North American Hermeticism was written off as being virtually monopolized by one tradition--which strikes me as nothing short of insane. I'd even write it off as bias by the characters writing about it, much as I did in accepting their biases of North American shamanism, but it seemed to be reinforced in the rules, too.

But then again, North American magic in general is quite strange. How else do you explain the widespread amalgamation of magico-religious beliefs of 3 million Native Americans while still retaining their ethno-tribal and geographic identities? (Well, except for the Navajo...)

I am ambivalent towards the Old World Magic chapter. While I like the witches and charms section (taking away regular spellcasting and replacing it by Anchoring) and the various paradigms like the Pythagoreans and the Alchemist and even the UMTs, I was really shocked that Canon gave Hermetic Druidism the bonuses that regular(shamanic) druids get from sacred circles (hermetic circles/shamanic lodges).

With the hermetic mages summoning elementals beforehand and placing them on standby, hermetic druids (initiate or not) can summon a complement of Great Elementals without the need for Invoking. Taking this to the extreme, this could give a chargen character 8 Great Forms (*barf* remembers the 8 elemental melee rush).

Just as a side note, simply because someone follows a hermetic tradition, that doesn't mean they're not religous or using "sacred" rituals or techniques to work their magic. They just don't delude themselves into thinking they have some silly totem guiding them (and even that's not always the case -- such as hermetic mages of the Black Magic school).

That's partially true. Hermeticism as a tradition (based on the Codex Hermeticum) is almost devoid of elements you would identify as "religious" in its cosmology, hence none of its elements are really "sacred". It does boast celestial references and correspondences and recognizes higher forces and enlightened transcendence. However no faith (except in oneself) or superior force is at work in Hermetic workings.

In SR it is assumed by default that a standard Hermetic mages' magic is unrelated to his faith. So you can have a Catholic Hermetic mage or a Buddhist Hermetic mage and ones religious belief has nothing to do with the magic one practices.

However you are correct in that several schools or "paradigms" similar to Hermeticism do have integral religious and theological elements: Orthodox Qabbalah and Christian Theurgy being the most obvious ones, Black Magic and hermetic Wicca are others. Note - these require that the character establish that he practices that particular school from the outset and not "general" Hermeticism (which is represented by either the Classical or Renewed schools).

So it is a semi-Canon position(since Synner co-wrote the chapter) that Sacred Circles are limited to those Sacred Circles established by Druids? For Hermetic Druids to make use of these Sacred Circles they must make use of one that was established by the Druids and "usurped" by the Hermetic Druids?

The game mechanics of Hermetic Druidism with regards to sacred circles needs be clearer. For that matter, the rules regarding sacred circles for Celtic/Wild Druids needs be clearer too, can any normal(shamanic) druid set up a sacred circle?

What exactly is a Sacred Circle in game mechanics terms? Is it analogous to a Shamanic Lodge? A place where a Druid(shaman) can set up? Are these areas fixed or limited to Europe?

To make things clearer, is a Druidic Shamanic Lodge a Sacred Circle? In order for a Hermetic to use a Sacred Circle to conjure, he needs to establish a Hermetic Circle in a Sacred Circle?

Alrighty then. So Sacred Circles are Shamanic Lodges, which brings me to the point... Why can't they share the place in the first place before the area is aspected, in terms of pure game mechanics?

Run that by me again? How is the Background Count(higher than normal) going to be there?

The Sacred Circles of druids are usually set up on power sites or ley lines aspected towards druidic magic (or at least they become aspected when the sacred circle is created). The background count works against hermetic magic so it has to be re-aspected to set up a useful hermetic druidic circle.
So assume that a Sacred Circle always has aspected background count. IMHO it should be possible to create a sacred circle without background count, but those shouldn't give any advantages.

To add to what Audun has said.

As I've mentioned above there is nothing technically impeding you from putting up a Hermetic circle in a druidic Sacred Circle (though since these are normally relatively exposed to the elements a GM may consider that a permanent hermetic circle needs to be made of more expensive and resistant materials).

However, as Audun pointed out established Sacred Circles (especially those on powersites and leylines) tend to be aspected in favor of druidic (shamanic) magic. This aspecting begins when a Circle is consecrated and gradually comes to affect the ambient background count of the power site. Obviously the process doesn't happen overnight, but all but the most recently laid Circles will be aspected in this way.

Obviously if a Hermetic group (including Hermetic Druids such as members of the NDM) takes over and uses the Sacred site, it will gradually become Aspected towards their magic. This is why the Lay War is being fought in England and why the Wild Lay was such a shock (ie. it reAspected all the sacred sites along its path which the NDM thought it had nailed down).

Rest assured Audun and I will look into having a rules section on druidic Sacred Circles, as well as a few other odds and ends, included in the planned SOTA web supplement (which I will be getting to as soon as I finish some prior commitments) as well as any future errata.

Do the rules ever specify that they're aspected only to shamanistic Druidic Magic? If it's aspected to Druidic Magic it'll work equally well for hermetic-, shamanistic-, and even wujen (those who focus on faeries)-style druids. I don't see any reason why it particularly would, let alone should.

The rules section lacked the wordcount to properly detail Sacred circles. It was decided that rather than present them compressed or incomplete, they would be included in the aforementioned SOTA web supplemental which would be offered for free on the official website (and which would be ready now if my HD hadn't melted down last month, and will be revised and updated as soon as I wrap other assignments). Note - this was my call as writer and not a development decision so I take full responsability for the choice.

In brief, Druidic Sacred Circles are indeed Aspected towards traditional Druidism (ie. both forms of shamanic Druidism). As SoE indicates many Sacred Circles under the control of the New Druidic Movement have been Aspected towards Hermetic Druidism.

The important part of the Aspecting here is the fact that magic is percieved in an entirely different way by shamanic druidism and Hermetics with a druidic bent and hence the background count is "imprinted" in very different ways.

I apologize if I wasn't clear when addressing this before, but as the book states "Hermetic Drudism is an off-shoot of Classical Hermeticism" - this is why they are always refered to as Hermetic druids and never simply as druids. Hermetic Druidism is Hermetic magic incorporating druidic symbology and imagery without any of the religious connotations. Much like Chaos mages might incorporate religious elements and symbols, they remain Hermetic and use such tools not for their inherent relation with the divine and because these invoke the power of higher entities, but for the potence as symbols and correspondences of metaphysical forces. Simply put the element of faith is missing.

I supposed that it is possible for a Druid(shaman) set up a Sacred Circle so that both he and his Hermetic Druid friend use that Circle aspecting towards non-denominational Druidic magic?

Yes. It is possible. Aspecting occurs when magic practice of one type or another is dominant. If a mixed group shares a circle (more common outside the polarized UK scene) then the background count will eventually aspect towards the group rather than one tradition or another.

It also presents one of those "Odd Coven" ocassions to roleplay the differences between mindsets. For the Celtic or Wild Druid the Circle is sacred ground as a Church to a Catholic plus it is integral to his relation with his deity. For the Hermetic chum however it means trekking out to the woods and though his magic has mixes druidism and hermeticism its very likely he's not a practicing Druid and he's going to have a slightly different persepective on his mate speaking to the Gods...

For re-cap, in the last edition it didn't matter what flavor of druid you were -- Idol-worshipper, Totem-called, Element-respecting, Druid-Hermetic, Druid of the Path --a ley line was a ley line was a ley line and anybody with "druid" in their title could use it equally. (Don't think Cornish Bards count.)

Particularly with the advent of SoE, it becomes much more apparent that the usurper Hermetic druids tried to gain control of and aspect as many of the leys as possible, and that the "wild" druids-those who follow an idol or totem-are fighting back, in some cases by re-aspecting specific sites or lengthening natural leys.

No books right now. Can someone walk me through the idiosyncracies of the UMT (the one with the interchanging traditions?) so I'm sure I have it right for an upcoming character I'm working on?

Game mechanics wise or just flavour?

Game mech is just that the UMTs do not have bonuses or penalties using tools from other traditions./paradigms or their own. Grade 3 initiates can change from summoning elementals to summoning nature spirits.

One kind of elemental/spirit only? Is it a specific Metamagic? I remember the flavor, but I can't remember the exact damn mechanics.

Toturi has it right. UMT is relatively new to the academic rat race and currently its biggest breakthrough is allowing magicians (mages and shamans) to change their Conjuring orientation when they hit an advanced initiate grade (3) - however due to an as-yet-unexplained wrinkle in the technique you lose your previous ability.

In rules terms this means you get to change from calling Elementals (any elemental) to Nature Spirits (any nature spirit) in the process losing the ability to call Elementals. Or vice-versa if you could originally call Nature Spirits.

UMT is one of the most promising paradigms (though I'm still keener on the Mathmagicians and the Concordance Alchemists) but it's still very young. As SOTA advances expect more breakthroughs to open the field in this and other paradigms.

So there's no half measure? Someone can't give up just Conjuring Water Elementals and gain just Citiy Spirits, for example? Damn!

Do what I do: Come up with variations of the Path Magic tradition. There's no good reason why it should be some lame "elf only" tradition, at least not as far as the rough abilities go. (Or just use UMT to gain Path Magician-style conjuring abilities instead of your old one.)

Hell, I still use the 2nd-edition Summoning Talent edge for those who really, really want their shaman to be able to conjure, say, Ancestor Spirits /and/ Spirits of Man; or for wujen who want to make zombies without the Corps Cadavre spell; or for elemental-minded mages who froth at the mouth that they can't summon manitou. Thought projections are popular too; loa spirits aren't.

Don't get me wrong ... I'm not afraid of house-ruling. I just wanted there to be something official that was worded exactly as I wanted.

I once had a player who sent his Shaman to U-Dub all during the game (non-beneficial Day Job Flaw) to learn Conjuring in the Hermetic way ... without giving up his normal method. I just charged him triple the normal Karma for it. He was happy.

By the way, both of those ideas are really good.

we use metamagics to do it. one of our users broke all magic abilities down into a list of metamagics--one for casting Manipulation spells, one for summoning City spirts, etcetera. anyone can take them, even adepts; however, it's very difficult (read: impossible) to find someone who can teach them, and also very difficult (see above) to actually learn them.

I finally got a copy of this book and I absolutely love the section about paradigms. It's not just the UMT stuff, it's the whole concept of it I love. I like that added depth and detail to magic. It's going to make me rethink some of the work I've been personally doing on North American shamanism, in a good way.

It's been helping me nail down a couple of character concepts that I've been having trouble wrapping my head around.

Bit late on the post, here, but Synner... Whoever was responsible for the Pythagorean mages? Please buy them something shiny and nice on my behalf?

I love the concept of a mathemagician. If I weren't such a decker fiend, I'd _so_ play one. I might just have to get one, and get an abacus power focus. T'would be awestastic.

Credit there goes entirely to Audun Bergwitz, it was something he'd been playing with since before SoE went into development.

make a decker/pythag mage, dissonance. they're pretty compatible.

The basic principles of the UMT are that, well.... basically all magics are created equal. More precisely, all magic stems from the same source, wether Shamanic, hermetic, or the hundreds of in betweens. It's premise is that the different traditions are basically just different styles or interpretations of doing magic.
It's been said different ways for as long as I can remember. I think awakenings had some reference to some kid who's magical tradition had something to do with blue tights, a red cape, and lots of flying. Weird, but still magic.
In game terms, a grade 3+ initiate can learn a metamagic technique that allows him to switch what he conjures. A hermetic can learn to summon Nature spirits, a shaman vice-versa. Only problem is, if I understand it correctly, they'd have to do the same metamagic at the next grade of initiation if they want to change back. kind of like shedding a geasa.
Bings up some other interesting points though. Could a hermetic learn to summon ancestor spirits, or a voodoun learn to conjure say... a sylph like a WuJen? it doesn't state it specifically, but if the UMT is right, and you can swap out one type of conjured spirit for another, what's to stop you from conjuring something more ... off center than nature spirits.

Hermetic mage summon and binds zombies. Shadowruns first Necromancer.

gives me a character concemagician who has no spell casting but can conjuring on ANY spirit type

i've done that. made a Path of the Righ mage, then took a custom flaw that kept him from ever being able to use the Sorcery skill.

mfb never said it was a player character.

I always thought it would be neat to add a more interesting conjuring adept to my game. Instead of assigning priority B to magic, he/she would assign priority A. The character would only be able to astrally percieve and conjure, but could conjure elementals, nature spirits, and spirits of the elements.

The character would be a big step up from your standard conjurer, but would still be fairly balanced compared to a full mage/shaman/wujen.

I couldn't think of a good reason why they would be able to conjure all three, but UMT would be a good idea.

Sounds interesting. Try it in your game and give us a report how balanced it happen to be. I mean, being able to cinjure elementals as well as nature spirits is a big advantage.

Indeed, but no more than having physad powers and being able to cast spells and conjure within your tradition.

I'd be interested in hearing how this turns out, as well. Please, do keep up informed.

The only problem I could see is that due to the cap on spirits, no more than your charisma, it may be difficlut to balance what spirits are around.