Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Dark <H961BUC@******.SEMO.EDU>
Subject: Re: idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 11:28:48 CDT
That's odd... where are all the mages anyway? Our local group has
about ten members (fortunately, never more than five or six show
up for any given run). I am a street mage; there are two other mages,
a shaman, one physical adept, two sammies, and a rigger.
And although Paul (a raccoon shaman) and I believe in subtlety,
the rest of the team seems ignorant of the concept. Even the
other mages carry heavy pistols. I certainly can hurt people
(ask about the twenty-dice manabolt), but I feel that if you
ever have to fire a killing shot on a run then you've really
screwed up somewhere along the line. (FYI, our GM seems to
agree with that philosophy...)
P.S. Thanx for posting the Geek Code. New sig in progress. :)


Beware the Dark <h961buc@******.semo.edu>
Message no. 2
From: Mark Sawko <sawk6112@****.GMI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Idle poll:ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 15:47:26 EDT
> I was just wondering whether more people play magically active
> characters on non-magical ones.
>
> So, in the group(s) that you play in, what would you say the
> ratio of mages (+adepts) to non-mages was?

In my group, the ratio is 2 magical to 4 non-magical. We have
a mage and a wolf shaman. We also have a rigger, and 3 street samarai.

---
Mark Sawko
sawk6112@****.gmi.edu

Remember, the answer to all questions is:

----------------
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
_______________________
----------
|
|
|
----------
|
|
|
---------

Geek Code (v2.1) GE>$ d? H+ s+:- g- p? au>au++ a- w+ v
C+ US+ p? L !3 E? N+ K- W+ M V--
po Y
t+ !5 j R+>R++ G+>+++ tv b+ D++ B-
e+>++ u** h- f? r--->++ n---- y+
Message no. 3
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@****.CAIS.COM>
Subject: Re: idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 23:17:24 -0400
Mages are rare in the Sixth World (at least, so far) so it makes
sense that they'd be rare in the games. But Shadowrunner teams are by
their very nature made up of above-average people (at least, the
successful ones are), and any ratio could make sense IMHO.
Probably part of the reason that the group I'm gaming with has
been short on mages until recently is that everybody overdosed on AD&D
(exponential levels, killing Dieties on their home planes -- just the
usual stuff for the power AD&D'er) and was, in the campaign just before I
joined in, very happy to be involved in major machine-gun fire.
Currently, we've got two mages, and very often use the old routine
where one of our mages will disorient the target in one way or another,
our mage/medic will run in and say "I'm a doctor, I'll get this person to
the hospital!" and suddenly we're guilty of kidnapping in broad daylight.
*grin*
Unfortunately, neither of our mage players could make it to a
recent session, and we had to kill our targets instead of just
incapacitating 'em.
And all this to gather some information....

/-----------------\
| J.D. Falk | "You're going to that happy land
| jdfalk@****.com | to play some volleyball."
\-----------------/ -A policeman making an arrest
Message no. 4
From: Brett Ryan Brown <calvinoi@*******.SCRI.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 23:26:10 18000
Just a question: has anyone 'round here ever played a conjuring adept?
I have used a shamanic (Otter totem) conjuring adept for a while now,
and it's really quite interesting. Following Otter, my character
always plays little pranks on friends through the use of spirits like
Watchers, and all of his spirits (the ones that get to know him, at
least) become playful pranksters as well. He even has an ally (I've
played him as the "I'd rather have a spiffy ally than raise 2
Initiation Grades" kinda' char.) that he's had for while. The ally is
one of those really fun spirits to be with. It's really fascinating
being a conjurer. As opposed to directly affecting things with spells,
you work through spirits, and this can offer (and has offered) some
wonderful potential for ROLE-playing (not roll-playing). Also, he has
a Charisma of 8 (being an Elf) which of course helps him make new
friends. (It's not bonding spirits, that's far too formal! It's
_making_ _friends_. :) Well, I've carried on enough, but still, I'm
interested.

-L8TR,
-Calvinoi MindFlyer

P.S. Spirits are peop...errr...sentient forms, too! (except some of
those dumb-ass Watchers. Oh well!)

--
_/_/_/_/ _ calvinoi@*******.scri.fsu.edu
_/ | | _ _ NOTE: All of the above
_/ __ _ | | __ __ (_) _ _ ___ (_) text put there by me
_/ / _` | | | \ V / | | | ' \ / _ \ | | is SOLELY my _own_
_/_/_/_/ \__,_| |_| \_/ |_| |_||_\ \___/ |_| worthless blather.
=============================================== ----------------------
(Geek Code 2.0) d+ h- s !g !au a-- w++ v+(-) c++(++++) US>US++ P? !L 3
--------------| N++ K++ !W M++ !V -po+(---) Y+>++ t++ 5+ j r+(++) G+>++
| v+ b++ D+ b--- e u**(---) h! f !r>r n-@ y? |-----------
----------------------------------------------
Message no. 5
From: John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.CC.UTAH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Idle poll:ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 21:54:44 -0600
> I was just wondering whether more people play magically active
> characters on non-magical ones.
>
> So, in the group(s) that you play in, what would you say the
> ratio of mages (+adepts) to non-mages was?

Well, I have an update. In my first group, it's still 0/5, but in the
other one, it's 1/1. I'm waiting for more players.

John IV aka John Moeller <John.Moeller@*.cc.utah.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geek Code 2.1
GM/S/O d H-(--) s+:+ !!g p0 au>+++ a18 w--(+) v+(*) C++++ US P? L- !3
E---- N- K W-- M+++ !V -po+ Y+>++ t++>+++@ 5-- j++@ R++>+++ G(''') tv
b+ D- B--- e+>+++ u--(+) h->++ f+ r---(*) n-(---) !y+
Message no. 6
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 16:37:36 +1000
Calvinoi Mindflyer writes:

> Just a question: has anyone 'round here ever played a conjuring adept?
> I have used a shamanic (Otter totem) conjuring adept for a while now,
> and it's really quite interesting.

Just a question, but don't shamanic adepts get all abilities that they get
shamanic bonuses for? Like Bear (I don't know Otter off the top of my head)
would get all health spells and be able to conjure all forest spirits. Isn't
it only the hermetic type adepts which are either conjuring or sorcery?

> -L8TR,

BTW, what does this thing mean?

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 7
From: Matt <mosbun@******.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject: Re: idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 08:58:22 -0500
>Just a question, but don't shamanic adepts get all abilities that they get
>shamanic bonuses for? Like Bear (I don't know Otter off the top of my head)
>would get all health spells and be able to conjure all forest spirits. Isn't
>it only the hermetic type adepts which are either conjuring or sorcery?

Shamans can either be magical adepts- having sorcery, conjuring, or enchanting
as their only magical ability- OR Shamanic Adepts, who are only able to cast
totem-specific spells and conjure totem-specific spirits, but gain no bonuses
as a full shaman.
At least, that's the way I see it.

Matt

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about idle poll: ratio of mages to non-mages, 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!