From:	Josh Harrison mataxes@****.net
Subject:	SR vs White Wolf's Mage
Date:	Wed, 14 Jun 2000 17:47:03 -0400

----- Original Message -----
From: Kismet <kismet-sr@****.com>
> I only just started playing and I have the Third Ed rules. They must have
> cleaned things up a lot because the system IMO, is much easier than SR.
> There are no "spells" you can do anything with magic. The game requires a
> lot more imagination on the players part, and this will probably screw up
> the 'plan everything down to the minute detail' GM's.

While the WW system does allow you to do anything, I find (at least in 2nd
Ed.) that the boundaries between the spheres are vague, and it is possible
for the same effect to be done with different spheres (especially at the
higher power levels). this may be the intention, but I don't like it. The
interaction between spheres is a little vague as well, IMO.

If you ask me, the best "do anything" magic system out there is Ars Magica.
It was owned by White Wolf at one point (now Atlas Games has it, and its in
its 4th edition) and is *clearly* the game that inspired M:tA. The
similarities between the magic systems are obvious, save for one crucial
difference -- Ars Magica is fairly clearly defined. You know what the
boundaries of the "spheres" are (called "arts").

But I think my biggest complaint about M:tA is that the magic system doesn't
really get you into the mindset of the spellcaster, and there are almost
*no* limit placed on what you can do, save what you develop for a character
concept. In theory, you can't cast magic that doesn't fit your paradigm, but
the enforcement of this is left *entirely* to the discretion of the GM and
players. In theory this isn't a bad thing, but it invites abuse, and I've
seen more abuses of magic in M:tA than in any other system I've ever
encountered.

At least SR gives clear cut boundaries, and doesn't solely rely on GM
adjudication to limit spell ability.

-- Josh