Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Craig S Dohmen <dohmen@*******.CSE.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grounding Spells (ad infinitum)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 15:46:18 -0400
On Mon, 9 Oct 1995, Georg Greve wrote:

> The ACTIVITY of spellcasting can NEVER create a bridge that's
> sufficient for grounding, right ?

Right.

> What is created via the activity of spellcasting ? Spells, right ?

Right.

> So the rule is "Everything that is created by spellcasting (which
> means: spells - sustained or not) are NO valid bridges for grounding
> spells".

No No No! That's a pretty big jump of logic. *deep breath* All the
rules say is that the act of spellcasting, ie, that momentary link
to astral space to synchronize the auras, is not sufficient. They
don't say a darn thing about the spell itself.

> (Before you start discussing this one: I was NOT serious, O.K. ?)

Good, because that was ridiculous. :)

--Craig
Message no. 2
From: Georg Greve <ggreve@*******.HANSE.DE>
Subject: Re: Grounding Spells (ad infinitum)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 10:43:05 +0100
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 10:43:02 +0100 (MET)

> > The ACTIVITY of spellcasting can NEVER create a bridge that's
> > sufficient for grounding, right ?
>
> Right.
>
> > What is created via the activity of spellcasting ? Spells, right ?
>
> Right.
>
> > So the rule is "Everything that is created by spellcasting (which
> > means: spells - sustained or not) are NO valid bridges for grounding
> > spells".
>
> No No No! That's a pretty big jump of logic. *deep breath* All the
> rules say is that the act of spellcasting, ie, that momentary link
> to astral space to synchronize the auras, is not sufficient. They
> don't say a darn thing about the spell itself.

*SIGH* Again. *take by the hand* You have to seperate activities and
consequences of activities. O.K. - synchronizing the auras is ONE
of the things which are created by spellcasting and hence isn't valid
for targeting. But they didn't say "the synchronizing part is not a
valid bridge", they said "spellcasting cannot create the bridge,
right ?"

Example:
*thinking deeply*
Rule: "It's not possible to create a motorcycle by throwing stones at
the wall."
You say: "The act of throwing does not create the motorcycle, but
maybe the motorcycle is created when they bounce off the wall or land
on the ground."

Sorry - that was not the best - I'll try it another way:

"If A cannot be created by the act of B, this automatically means that
anything that WAS created by the act of B is NOT A."
This is not a jump of logic, IT IS logic itself - maybe you got it now.

> > (Before you start discussing this one: I was NOT serious, O.K. ?)
>
> Good, because that was ridiculous. :)

But only a little bit more than grounding through spells...

Bye...
Georg
Message no. 3
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Grounding Spells (ad infinitum)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 13:47:56 +0100
On Mon, 9 Oct 1995, Craig S Dohmen wrote:

> > The ACTIVITY of spellcasting can NEVER create a bridge that's
> > sufficient for grounding, right ?
>
> Right.
>
> > What is created via the activity of spellcasting ? Spells, right ?
>
> Right.
>
> > So the rule is "Everything that is created by spellcasting (which
> > means: spells - sustained or not) are NO valid bridges for grounding
> > spells".
>
> No No No! That's a pretty big jump of logic. *deep breath* All the
> rules say is that the act of spellcasting, ie, that momentary link
> to astral space to synchronize the auras, is not sufficient. They
> don't say a darn thing about the spell itself.
>
I guess it depends on how you interpret the first sentence:
'The ACTIVITY of spellcasting can NEVER create a bridge thats sufficient
for grounding.'

Now you could interpret it as 'The process of casting a spell does not of
itself form a bridge to the Astral plane sufficient to ground a spell
through' as I believe you have .

But I believe the other gentleman was interpretting it as 'Spellcasting
creates a spell and drain and possibly an elemental side effect -none of
these *creations of the activity of spellcasting* are sufficient to
ground a spell through.' Hence the second question was asked:
'What is created by the activity of spellcasting? Spells, right?'

I personally believe it should not be possible to ground through a
Sustained spell, and I guess not a Quickened spell either. The reason can
be purely for game balance and to show the advantages of being an
Initiate (and to stop initiates loading up with Spell locks AND
Quickenings!!!! :), and the in game reason could be that sustained spells
and Quickened spells do not have a physical form -a physical effect
maybe, but not a physical *form*.

I personally don't like the explanation FASA give and the term Grounding
Out into the Physical seems a misnomer as a Physical area effect combat
spell does not 'ground out' but instead, once having hit its DUAL target
it travels out IN ASTRAL SPACE to all other targets grounds in through
their AURA and manifesting its physical effect there.

I have come up with my own metaphysical explanation for 'grounding' which
by its own logic *does* allow area effect MANA spells to ground out and
affect other targets. But it also by its own nature gives a description
of what the mage is concentrating on when sustaining a spell, and an
explanation as to why a spell cannot be sustained when fully astral.

I should get round to writing it up for the list, it'll probably be under
the subject heading of 'The Divide', maybe with a little story attached
to introduce the concept, plus some dark thoughts about what happens when
astral energy falls into the Divide, and whether this is where insect
spirits etc come from (remember Bottled Demon and how the Astral trail
seemed to go off at a weird angle?)

The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
Shadowrun Web Site under construction at
http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun.html
Message no. 4
From: Craig S Dohmen <dohmen@*******.CSE.PSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Grounding Spells (ad infinitum)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 18:23:56 -0400
On Tue, 10 Oct 1995, Georg Greve wrote:

> for targeting. But they didn't say "the synchronizing part is not a
> valid bridge", they said "spellcasting cannot create the bridge,
> right ?"

See my previous post on this. We have different understandings of
what they mean by 'spellcasting does not create a bridge'.

> Rule: "It's not possible to create a motorcycle by throwing stones at
> the wall."
> You say: "The act of throwing does not create the motorcycle, but
> maybe the motorcycle is created when they bounce off the wall or land
> on the ground."

No, I say: Going to the parts store and buying all the pieces does
not make a motorcycle. Going to the garage and putting
them together does.

> "If A cannot be created by the act of B, this automatically means that
> anything that WAS created by the act of B is NOT A."


B1 = act of spellcasting
A1 = a valid bridge

A1 is not created by B1.


B2 = a spell already cast
A2 = a valid bridge

A2 IS created by B2.

B2 != B1

--Craig
Message no. 5
From: Georg Greve <ggreve@*******.HANSE.DE>
Subject: Re: Grounding Spells (ad infinitum)
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 10:40:18 +0100
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 10:40:15 +0100 (MET)

> > "If A cannot be created by the act of B, this automatically means that
> > anything that WAS created by the act of B is NOT A."

> B1 = act of spellcasting
> A1 = a valid bridge
> A1 is not created by B1.
> B2 = a spell already cast
> A2 = a valid bridge
> A2 IS created by B2.
> B2 != B1

*GIGASIGH* Your premise is that B2 was NOT created by spellcasting -
so how do YOU create spells ???

Bye...
Georg

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Grounding Spells (ad infinitum), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!