Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	HALOWEEN JACK <SBC3KCB@*******.ac.uk>
Subject:	physical magician's
Date:	Tue, 7 Nov 1995 11:20:10 GMT

Message no. 1 Someone mentioned that in NAG(M or A) that the physical magician is
being published, if this is true then I have a few questions.

1. Does a PM's mystical armour count on the astral space.
2. What is the astral initiative for a spell as I have a character I
am play testing the PM with in my group that flies astral overwatch
of the group with. And asked if he could attack spells before the
discharge

From:	MENARD Steve <menars@***.UMontreal.CA>
Subject:	Re: physical magician's
Date:	Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:28:31 -0500 (EST)

Message no. 2 On Wed, 8 Nov 1995, HALOWEEN JACK wrote:

> Someone mentioned that in NAG(M or A) that the physical magician is
> being published, if this is true then I have a few questions.
>
> 1. Does a PM's mystical armour count on the astral space.
> 2. What is the astral initiative for a spell as I have a character I
> am play testing the PM with in my group that flies astral overwatch
> of the group with. And asked if he could attack spells before the
> discharge
>
From what I heard, the NAGA's Phys. Mage DOES NOT have free access
to astral space. He can buy it as an adept power(BTW, thats an automatic
geas).

Can I ask why you need a spell's Initiative? Since a instant spell
will ground out in the same phase it was cast(yep, it means the astral
magician MUST be in delayed action), it does not have an initiative. As
for sustained spell, I say always treat them as though in delayed action.
Note that they will never attack or do anything by themselves(they always
be the defendef in an attack).

Hope this helps!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- |\_/| Still The One and Only Wolfbane! ---
--- |o o| " Hey! Why ya lookin' at me so weird? Ain't ya 'ver seen a ---
--- \ / decker witha horn ?" --- Scy, Troll decker with a CC ---
--- 0 Steve Menard menars@***.UMontreal.Ca ---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:	DarkAngelI@******.com
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 10 Jan 1996 12:38:20 -0800

Message no. 3 Alright...These guys are basically the most lethal form of magician created
yet, but just forget about it being anything but human. If you want the
physmage to ever initiate, you have to start out at least with a 4/2 split,
with the 2 points of magic buying astral perception, otherwise forget
initiation altogether. Presently I'm working on my third initiation for my
physmage (yes I played an awful lot over the Christmas break I had) and for
the most part he's only now starting to have any decent abilities. That and
spellcasting at level 5 is just a whore. These characters are simply
Karma-eaters. However, while it is reasonable to say these guys might be too
powerful, try this...Limit the spells types they can cast. As the book said,
they can't astrally project because they are so focused on the physical. Set
it up so that these guys can only use manipulation spells or (my personal
view on these guys) physical based spells only. Add this and it really begins
to cut back on the mojo slinging these guys can do. My character is
personally connected with the elements, though not an elemental adept. He
simply prefers spells that deal with elemental effects. Try it, it can make
the game a lot more interesting.
The Dark
Angel

From:	TopCat <topcat@******.net>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:24:19 -0600

Message no. 4 At 03:36 PM 1/10/96 -0500, The Dark Angel wrote:
>Alright...These guys are basically the most lethal form of magician created
>yet, but just forget about it being anything but human.

They are far from the most lethal (try a cybered mage/shaman sometime, they
have full astral access for free) and they can be just as effective as
metahumans as any full magician (which isn't really effective, so you got a
point).

>[snipped about using a 4/2 split (mage/physad I assume) if you ever want to
initiate]

I, personally, feel that you should probably go with a 4/2 split, but give
the 4 to phys ad. That way you pick up astral perception, maybe enhanced
reflexes, and how about killing hands(M)?

Enhanced reflexes with killing hands makes for one mother of a spirit slayer.

>spellcasting at level 5 is just a whore.

You can cast higher than level 5 spells, but you'll take physical drain
damage. The secret there is only taking high-force spells if they have low
drain.

1) Mana Dart: Hard as hell to resist a force 6 mana dart with any successes
behind it.
2) Increase Attribute(+1): One point can make a huge difference sometimes.
3) Decrease Attribute(-1): See above
4) Physical Mask: One of the most useful spells in the book.
5) Death Touch: I know this sounds funny, but (F/2 - 1)S is only a 2S at
force 6. With a decent Willpower and a couple pool dice, you can shrug it
off easy.
6) Ram Touch: Similar to death touch.
7) Clairaudience/Clairvoyance(extended): Very useful, easy drain.
8) Slay(Race/Species): Ranged, but picky version of death touch.
9) Any Stun spell: Easy drain, keeps 'em alive.
10) Vehicle Mask: Not quite as useful as physical mask, but not bad to have
around.

In short, any spell with drain lower than or equal to (F/2 + 1)M will be
feasible for casting over your magic rating.
Just don't take spells like hellblast and you should be fine.

>These characters are simply Karma-eaters.

No more so than other mages/phys ads.

>[snipped "They're too powerful, cut off some spells"]

If you want to, that's ok. The easiest way to do this without limiting the
players is by saying that there's no-one around who can teach them or
setting up runs too close for the characters to take time to train in new
spells.

>My character is
>personally connected with the elements, though not an elemental adept. He
>simply prefers spells that deal with elemental effects. Try it, it can make
>the game a lot more interesting.

That's why you find yourself hurting for powerful spells, drain's too high
on spells with elemental effects.

(Kudos to you for roleplaying it up a bit with the elemental theme, though.
I'm speaking from a number-crunching perspective.)

-- TopCat

From:	Dust <rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG>
Subject:	Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 10:34:59 -0400

Message no. 5 So anybody using any physical magicians out there? I just started
one and I like him. I'd like any input on how to enhance playing of such
characters.. I put 2 points of the magic rating for physical adept
powers, and 4 for spellcasting etc. I bought him inc ref +1,
thermographic, lowlight, and 1 point of pain resistance. He is a snake
shaman also. He has opened up a detective agency and also offers magical
healing services.
So I'm just curious on whether I should initiate as a physical
adept or a shamang first. I was figuring on getting myself up to Grade 2
as a physical adept so I could use enhanced centering but being able to
use metamagic in the shamnic category is very useful also.

Later,
Dust

P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of initiation?

From:	David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 17:16:03 -0400

Message no. 6 At 10:34 AM 5/13/97 -0400, you wrote:
> So anybody using any physical magicians out there? I just started
>one and I like him. I'd like any input on how to enhance playing of such
>characters.. I put 2 points of the magic rating for physical adept
>powers, and 4 for spellcasting etc. I bought him inc ref +1,
>thermographic, lowlight, and 1 point of pain resistance. He is a snake
>shaman also. He has opened up a detective agency and also offers magical
>healing services.
> So I'm just curious on whether I should initiate as a physical
>adept or a shamang first. I was figuring on getting myself up to Grade 2
>as a physical adept so I could use enhanced centering but being able to
>use metamagic in the shamnic category is very useful also.
>
I've been playing a physical mage for awhile (though not recently), and the
way we've handled initiation is a little different. The character is not a
physical adept and a mage/shaman, it is a physical mage. This means that
initiation gives benefits to both abilities. Still, the increase in magic
rating is only applied to one area or the other, but the character gains all
metamagical options available. So, as a grade zero initiate you could use
masking, centering (for stealth, athletics, sorcery, and conjuring),
anchoring, quickening, etc (unless you use the gradual initiation rules).
Of course, in order to do anything other than mask, you are required to have
astral perception (pg 119 Awakenings). So, your character couldn't use any
metamagic unless you got astral perception first. I like to use the
physical adept abilities for things that spells can't do (or at least not
well/easily). So, I also like abilities like thermo vision, and especially
increased skill for unarmed/stealth/etc. The requirement of purchasing
astral perception for metamagic was INCREDIBLY limiting, but with the advent
of the astral sight edge in SR Companion, that was mostly offset (if you
have the edge).

--DT

From:	Tim Serpas <wretch@**.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 17:41:44 -0500

Message no. 7 On Tue, 13 May 1997, David Thompson wrote:

> The requirement of purchasing
> astral perception for metamagic was INCREDIBLY limiting, but with the advent
> of the astral sight edge in SR Companion, that was mostly offset (if you
> have the edge).

That would be great, but the magical edges are not stackable. They are
meant to be the equivalent of a D magic priority or the like. So just as
you can't use priority A to be a full mage and priority B to be a Phys-ad,
you can't be a phys-ad who pays 5 build points to be able to summon fire
elementals. Of course, you can change the rules...

Tim Serpas
wretch@**.com

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 16:14:59 -0700

Message no. 8 Tim Wrote:

| That would be great, but the magical edges are not stackable. They are
| meant to be the equivalent of a D magic priority or the like. So just as
| you can't use priority A to be a full mage and priority B to be a
Phys-ad,
| you can't be a phys-ad who pays 5 build points to be able to summon fire
| elementals. Of course, you can change the rules...

I gotta disagree with you here Tim is clearly says on page 33 of the
companion that "Only magically active characters with active magic ratings
of 1 or higher can purchase any of the magical talent edges listed on the
table above. (the table above consists of the spell and conjuring type
edges) A character whose magic rating drops below 1 automatically loses
all magical talent edges." You may have gotten confused with the magical
resistance edge which does require that you are not magically active
though. Again like you said you could always use a house rule to say that
magically active characters can't take the edges.

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	Tim Serpas <wretch@**.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 18:55:22 -0500

Message no. 9 On Tue, 13 May 1997, Caric wrote:
>
> I gotta disagree with you here Tim is clearly says on page 33 of the
> companion that "Only magically active characters with active magic ratings
> of 1 or higher can purchase any of the magical talent edges listed on the
> table above. (the table above consists of the spell and conjuring type
> edges) A character whose magic rating drops below 1 automatically loses
> all magical talent edges."

I know, I know... but a post to this list by Steve Kenson, who wrote most
of the edges section, supports the contention in my previous post. Buying
one of the magical edges *gives* you a magic attribute of 6 (modified by
cyberware, etc.). At least, that's how he intended it and that's how it
works in his campaign where the idea originated. I should have sited
this in my original post.

His post is quite long, and I'd rather not have to resend it to the list.
His list of adept types and point costs included setting Astral Adepts and
Enchanting Adepts at a cost of only 5 points, instead of the 15 you need
to be a typical adept.

Peace, Love and Artichokes.
Tim Serpas
wretch@**.com

From:	David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 20:32:23 -0400

Message no. 10 At 05:41 PM 5/13/97 -0500, Tim Serpas wrote:
>On Tue, 13 May 1997, David Thompson wrote:
>
>> The requirement of purchasing
>> astral perception for metamagic was INCREDIBLY limiting, but with the advent
>> of the astral sight edge in SR Companion, that was mostly offset (if you
>> have the edge).
>
>That would be great, but the magical edges are not stackable. They are
>meant to be the equivalent of a D magic priority or the like. So just as
>you can't use priority A to be a full mage and priority B to be a Phys-ad,
>you can't be a phys-ad who pays 5 build points to be able to summon fire
>elementals. Of course, you can change the rules...
>
Are you sure about that?
The only reference I can find is that it says that only characters with
active magic ratings can purchase the edges in the table (spell casting,
summoning, perception, etc) -- that means the opposite of what you said.
The character must be some kind of adept already in order to have any of
those edges. If they have no magic attribute, because they didn't spend
build points on either being a mage or adept, they can't take the edges.
Presumably that means they are stackable, otherwise that limitation would
make no sense (pg. 33 SRC bottom left under magical talent).
If they meant what you said, they would have put all those options under the
build points, but they didn't, they are under edges, and edges aren't
exclusive like that (unless it says so, like for education edges).
But aside from that, we have a bunch of house rules for magical characters
in my game.

--DT

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 17:23:41 -0700

Message no. 11 | I know, I know... but a post to this list by Steve Kenson, who wrote most
| of the edges section, supports the contention in my previous post.
Buying
| one of the magical edges *gives* you a magic attribute of 6 (modified by
| cyberware, etc.). At least, that's how he intended it and that's how it
| works in his campaign where the idea originated. I should have sited
| this in my original post.

Ohhhhhhh ok well that makes alot more sense to me then. I either missed
that post or have completely forgotten it (either is total possible).
Giving them a magic attribute could be a little extreme, but c'est la vie.

| His post is quite long, and I'd rather not have to resend it to the list.
| His list of adept types and point costs included setting Astral Adepts
and
| Enchanting Adepts at a cost of only 5 points, instead of the 15 you need
| to be a typical adept.
|
| Peace, Love and Artichokes.
| Tim Serpas

I love artichokes. Thanks.

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	tom Cone <Brother-1@*****.NET>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 15:21:02 -1000

Message no. 12 >Just as you can't spend...Mage and >then.Adept.
Why not? 7 pts in character gen toward magical abilities is, IMO,
suicidal, but if you can make a Phys Mage with 4 pts, why can't you
spend another 3 to close the gap? Game balance is easily achieved.
You're either REAL short on skills or attributes, or even both, and then
look at money...one way or another, you're suckin'.

Brother-1. Decker for hire.
>Visit Dot's Deck Technologies! Just north of the Sea-TAC!

From:	"Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 23:49:32 -0500

Message no. 13 From: Dust [SMTP:rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG]
Subject: Physical Magicians

> P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of initiation?

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
ICQ UIN: 514986
Microsoft Sitebuilder: 531896
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/

From:	Tim Serpas <wretch@**.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 13 May 1997 23:55:35 -0500

Message no. 14 On Tue, 13 May 1997, Caric wrote:

> Ohhhhhhh ok well that makes alot more sense to me then. I either missed
> that post or have completely forgotten it (either is total possible).
> Giving them a magic attribute could be a little extreme, but c'est la vie.

Well, consider what they get for it. About the only hidden benefits are
that they can bond weapon foci (and others, if they apply to the talent)
and they can initiate, gaining any initiate abilities that can be
accessed with their meagre talent. It seems, though, that everyone gets
masking. I couldn't get a straight answer out of Steve about his opinion
on Shielding (I sent him one message; I need to reply if only to thank
him).

So let's sum up: weapon foci - way cool if yer paranoid about bugs, etc.,
but quite pricey; masking - no need to let everyone know that you're
different; and MAYBE shielding - I'd almost take a magical edge just for
this, so maybe this falls into the realm of 'more powerful than intended'
and so it should be excluded.

I'm very interested in hearing for and against arguments on shielding, so
let's all break out the source books and go hunting for precedents...

Peace, Love and Artichokes.
Tim Serpas
wretch@**.com

> I love artichokes. Thanks.

You're very welcome.

From:	Mark Steedman <M.J.Steedman@***.RGU.AC.UK>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 13:20:08 GMT

Message no. 15 Dust writes

> So anybody using any physical magicians out there? I just started
> one and I like him. I'd like any input on how to enhance playing of such
> characters.. I put 2 points of the magic rating for physical adept
> powers, and 4 for spellcasting etc. I bought him inc ref +1,
> thermographic, lowlight, and 1 point of pain resistance. He is a snake
> shaman also. He has opened up a detective agency and also offers magical
> healing services.
> So I'm just curious on whether I should initiate as a physical
> adept or a shamang first. I was figuring on getting myself up to Grade 2
> as a physical adept so I could use enhanced centering but being able to
> use metamagic in the shamnic category is very useful also.
>
>
ok grade zero gives you access to grade 0 physad and shaman.
ie masking, permission to buy centring etc.
The power you need is astral perception, best bought using the astral
sight edge if the GM will let you though its 3 points and physad is
only 15 and gives a lot more than just 6 magic points in potential so
not badly priced.
I have had a physhamen PC wandering about in my game and had no
problems and have designed a few myself and noticed only a few things.

1) you really have to get astral perception somehow, your magician
abilities are too limited, especially initiation without it. A
physical magician with astral perception however is supurb magical
backup for lower powered games as they are a full spell user for
understanding magical adventures (theory and sorcery) have perception
to look at auras but don't have projection which could destroy say a
gang campain where the opposition have no magical defenses.

2) You have potential access to physad and magician reflex boosts,
opinions on comibining them vary but even so this is not likely to be
too abusive as more than 1 dice of physad boost is too much. You have
too be careful about magic rating not getting too low but i recon on
astral perception and +1D6 initative as two of the best power to go
for, you can then have a reasonable initiative with no spell locks
and no cyber, its not grand but 2 actions most of the time is enough
for reasonably powered games, you might not be first but at least you
will get the chance to have a reasonable number of actions.

3) Physmagicians are karmic sinks. To develop magic, and decent non
magical combat skills to account for your limited ability to kill
with magic (low magic attribute = low spell force typically, an
limited magic pool dice) and/or defend yourself magically (that
limited dice addition from low magic attrubute to utillity spells is
a real killer, more so than the offensive spells)

> P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of initiation?
>
No, but then in my experience folks have trouble finding enough
ordeals as it is. I don't see why you couldn't allow it though though
beware someone trying to take lots of ordeals on grade 0 if it looks
like they only want to ever be grade 0 or 1 or so.

Mark

From:	Mike Hartmann <hartmann@***********.M.EUNET.DE>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 16:13:09 +0000

Message no. 16 > Well, consider what they get for it. About the only hidden benefits are
> that they can bond weapon foci (and others, if they apply to the talent)
> and they can initiate, gaining any initiate abilities that can be
> accessed with their meagre talent. It seems, though, that everyone gets
> masking. I couldn't get a straight answer out of Steve about his opinion
> on Shielding (I sent him one message; I need to reply if only to thank
> him).

I guess, Shielding would only apply for spellcasting-talents and even
there only for the spell you have the talent for...

> So let's sum up: weapon foci - way cool if yer paranoid about bugs, etc.,
> but quite pricey; masking

Am I completely wrong, when I have something in mind that everyone
can use a weapon focus (like everyone can have a spell lock)?

To use masking -- again I am not sure -- you have to have at least
astral perception. So no go for talents.

Actually I think that those talents -- according to the spirit of the
talents-rules which makes them usable only for "mundanes" -- are fun,
but an expensive one...
See, as a mundane you usually have at least 3 points of essence
and another 2 or 3 of bodyindex installed. That lowers your
magic-rating to 0 and removes that talent.

Bye Mike

From:	"MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 00:39:51 +1000

Message no. 17 > > So let's sum up: weapon foci - way cool if yer paranoid about bugs, etc.,
> > but quite pricey; masking
>
> Am I completely wrong, when I have something in mind that everyone
> can use a weapon focus (like everyone can have a spell lock)?
>
Nope; You have to be magically active to some extent (ie have a rating)

Which means that king Arthur would have to have been magically
active to weild Excalibur, assuming that it goes by the same rules as
normal foci (and that it was more than just a damn sharp sword).

I was thinking about running an adventure where the characters get to pull
Excalibur out of the lake (or out of the stone) and give it to
Harlequin......It'd sure as hell be memorable. *sigh*

Marty

From:	Dust <rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 11:07:28 -0400

Message no. 18 On Tue, 13 May 1997, David Thompson wrote:

> At 10:34 AM 5/13/97 -0400, you wrote:
> > So anybody using any physical magicians out there? I just started
> >one and I like him. I'd like any input on how to enhance playing of such
> >characters.. I put 2 points of the magic rating for physical adept
> >powers, and 4 for spellcasting etc. I bought him inc ref +1,
> >thermographic, lowlight, and 1 point of pain resistance. He is a snake
> >shaman also. He has opened up a detective agency and also offers magical
> >healing services.
> > So I'm just curious on whether I should initiate as a physical
> >adept or a shamang first. I was figuring on getting myself up to Grade 2
> >as a physical adept so I could use enhanced centering but being able to
> >use metamagic in the shamnic category is very useful also.
> >
> I've been playing a physical mage for awhile (though not recently), and the
> way we've handled initiation is a little different. The character is not a
> physical adept and a mage/shaman, it is a physical mage. This means that
> initiation gives benefits to both abilities. Still, the increase in magic
> rating is only applied to one area or the other, but the character gains all
> metamagical options available. So, as a grade zero initiate you could use
> masking, centering (for stealth, athletics, sorcery, and conjuring),
> anchoring, quickening, etc (unless you use the gradual initiation rules).
> Of course, in order to do anything other than mask, you are required to have
> astral perception (pg 119 Awakenings). So, your character couldn't use any
> metamagic unless you got astral perception first. I like to use the
> physical adept abilities for things that spells can't do (or at least not
> well/easily). So, I also like abilities like thermo vision, and especially
> increased skill for unarmed/stealth/etc. The requirement of purchasing
> astral perception for metamagic was INCREDIBLY limiting, but with the advent
> of the astral sight edge in SR Companion, that was mostly offset (if you
> have the edge).
>
> --DT
>

I thought that physical magicians were a full mage or shaman in
whatever category they chose.

Dust

From:	Tim Serpas <wretch@**.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 11:10:30 -0500

Message no. 19 On Wed, 14 May 1997, Dust wrote:
> I thought that physical magicians were a full mage or shaman in
> whatever category they chose.

A full mage might be considered to be a combination of sorcery adept,
conjuring adept, enchanting adept and astral adept. The phys-mage gives
up th astral part in exchange for phys-ad abilities, and there's that
split-your-magic-attribute part as well. Every type of magician must
choose a tradition, so besides shamanic adepts, you can also be a sorcery
adept with a totem and receive all those wonderful totem modifiers. Most
adepts are already limited enough, so most don't bother with totems. If
you don't mind the totem disadvantages, they can be a great way to give
your char just a tad of personality. "They great and mighty Bear has
given me the ability to summon watchers to make your life miserable!"

Tim Serpas
wretch@**.com

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 10:00:56 -0700

Message no. 20 |
| I was thinking about running an adventure where the characters get to
pull
| Excalibur out of the lake (or out of the stone) and give it to
| Harlequin......It'd sure as hell be memorable. *sigh*
|
Uhhhhh didn't that adventure already get written?

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 14:56:26 -0400

Message no. 21 At 11:55 PM 5/13/97 -0500, you wrote:
>On Tue, 13 May 1997, Caric wrote:
>
>> Ohhhhhhh ok well that makes alot more sense to me then. I either missed
>> that post or have completely forgotten it (either is total possible).
>> Giving them a magic attribute could be a little extreme, but c'est la vie.
>
>Well, consider what they get for it. About the only hidden benefits are
>that they can bond weapon foci (and others, if they apply to the talent)
>and they can initiate, gaining any initiate abilities that can be
>accessed with their meagre talent. It seems, though, that everyone gets
>masking. I couldn't get a straight answer out of Steve about his opinion
>on Shielding (I sent him one message; I need to reply if only to thank
>him).
>
>So let's sum up: weapon foci - way cool if yer paranoid about bugs, etc.,
>but quite pricey; masking - no need to let everyone know that you're
>different; and MAYBE shielding - I'd almost take a magical edge just for
>this, so maybe this falls into the realm of 'more powerful than intended'
>and so it should be excluded.
>
One thing you are missing. Anyone with a magical edge is not likely to be
able to rely solely on that. However, once they have a magical edge, with
the accompanying magic rating, that means that they are very limited on the
ammount of cyber and bioware they can install. In order for the edge to
work, the 'ware has to be limited just as for a full mage or adept, and that
is a serious drawback that probably more than makes up for weapon foci and
the ability to cast one spell.

--DT

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 11:55:03 -0700

Message no. 22 | >So let's sum up: weapon foci - way cool if yer paranoid about bugs,
etc.,
| >but quite pricey; masking - no need to let everyone know that you're
| >different; and MAYBE shielding - I'd almost take a magical edge just for
| >this, so maybe this falls into the realm of 'more powerful than
intended'
| >and so it should be excluded.
| >
| One thing you are missing. Anyone with a magical edge is not likely to
be
| able to rely solely on that. However, once they have a magical edge,
with
| the accompanying magic rating, that means that they are very limited on
the
| ammount of cyber and bioware they can install. In order for the edge to
| work, the 'ware has to be limited just as for a full mage or adept, and
that
| is a serious drawback that probably more than makes up for weapon foci
and
| the ability to cast one spell.

Good points here, but can't a mundane use a weapon focus if they double the
bonding costs?
Could be a house rule I suppose...

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	David Thompson <david.s.thompson@****.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 15:15:58 -0400

Message no. 23 >
> I thought that physical magicians were a full mage or shaman in
>whatever category they chose.
>
>Dust
>
Almost, but not quite. They have full sorcery, conjuring, and enchanting
(limited by the part of their magical attribute assigned to mage
abilities), as well as a number of physad powers (up to the portion of their
magical attribute assigned to physad powers), BUT they have no astral
abilities. They can neither perceive nor project (unless they buy the
physad power of astral perception or, in some games, have the astral sight
edge).

The reasoning according to the book is that they spent too much of
their time working on their physad powers, so they never developed astral
abilities. By that argument, IMO it does seem to make sense to allow phys
mages to have the edge for astral sight (just charge them build points to
reflect the extra time), or perhaps even to allow them to develop astral
perception/projection during the game (for lots of karma, and the right
training). After all, they are full mage/shamans, they sust spent time
perfecting physical abilities instead of astral, one could argue that the
inherent potential for astral abilities lies dormant. (But then, does that
mean that mages have the dormant ability for physad powers... probably not,
but that is just because that sounds wrong to me.) Of course, none of this
latter part is in the rules.

--DT

From:	Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 15:37:18 +0000

Message no. 24 On 14 May 97 at 15:15, David Thompson wrote:

<on phys/mages>
> they have no astral abilities. They can neither perceive nor
> project (unless they buy the physad power of astral perception or,
> in some games, have the astral sight edge).

Except for the fact that you cannot take the magical edges on top of
other magical abilities. See the recent reposts by Steve Kenson on
the topic. The magical edges are to create characters that are
sub-adepts. He wrote the rules, so he should know what he is talking
about.

Doing it any other way is just munchkin, and doesn't make any sense.

--

#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
# DREKHEAD - drekhead@***.net, drekhead@***.com - Tim Kerby #
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
# --- http://users.aol.com/drekhead/home.html --- #
#@&%*===========================================================*%&@#
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot
stomping on a human face...forever. -George Orwell

From:	L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 17:56:07 EDT

Message no. 25 On Tue, 13 May 1997 10:34:59 -0400 Dust <rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG>
writes:
<snip early stuff on character>
> So I'm just curious on whether I should initiate as a physical
>adept or a shamang first. I was figuring on getting myself up to Grade
2
>as a physical adept so I could use enhanced centering but being able to
>use metamagic in the shamnic category is very useful also.

First, until he picks up Astral Perception, the Metamagic that the
character will be able to use is limited to Centering and Aura Masking.
Once he gets Astral Perception (that's two Magic Points out the window),
he has access to any and all metamagic _except_ metaplanar projection and
the things that go with it. Second, the Grade goes for all his powers,
whether Physad or magical, you'll just have to decide which way to
allocate the Magic points you gain.

>P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of initiation?

No. Not that I know of, anyway.

--
-Canthros
And ye shall know the truth, and lobo1@****.com
the truth shall set you free. canthros1@***.com
--John 8:32, KJV
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/

From:	L Canthros <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 14 May 1997 21:11:04 EDT

Message no. 26 On Tue, 13 May 1997 23:49:32 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
<gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
>From: Dust [SMTP:rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG]
>Subject: Physical Magicians
>
>> P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of
>initiation?
>
>Sounds like a good idea to me.

I don't like the idea, myself. One could, essentially, get a free
initiation by doing enough ordeals beforehand. I'd stick one ordeal (or,
no bonus for more than one ordeal) per initiatory grade.

--
-Canthros
And ye shall know the truth, and lobo1@****.com
the truth shall set you free. canthros1@***.com
--John 8:32, KJV
http://members.aol.com/canthros1/

From:	"MARTIN E. GOTTHARD" <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 20:24:41 +1000

Message no. 27 > |
> | I was thinking about running an adventure where the characters get to
> pull
> | Excalibur out of the lake (or out of the stone) and give it to
> | Harlequin......It'd sure as hell be memorable. *sigh*
> |
> Uhhhhh didn't that adventure already get written?
>
Not unless it's a really new one. Harlequin was bequeathed King
Richard's Armor and Excalibur in Dunkelzahn's will.

Check the post under 'Last Knight of the Crying Spire'

Marty

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 11:04:26 +0100

Message no. 28 Caric said on 11:55/14 May 97...

> Good points here, but can't a mundane use a weapon focus if they double the
> bonding costs?
> Could be a house rule I suppose...

It's a house rule. To the best of my knowledge, only magicians can bond
foci, and bonding them is necessary to use them. A mundane with a club as
a weapon focus would just get to roll his/her normal Armed Combat skill,
and not any of the extra dice from the focus, for example.

The only focus a mundane has any use for is a spell lock, and even then it
has to be bonded and activated by a magician; the mundane can't even see
the thing after it's been switched on.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Everybody's tired of something.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	"Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr." <gilmeth@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 00:05:38 -0500

Message no. 29 From: L Canthros [SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
Subject: Re: Physical Magicians

| On Tue, 13 May 1997 23:49:32 -0500 "Boyd Stephen Smith, Jr."
| <gilmeth@*********.COM> writes:
| >From: Dust [SMTP:rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG]
| >Subject: Physical Magicians
| >
| >> P.S. Does anyone allow multiple ordeals for one grade of
| >initiation?
| >
| >Sounds like a good idea to me.

| I don't like the idea, myself. One could, essentially, get a free
| initiation by doing enough ordeals beforehand. I'd stick one ordeal =
(or,
| no bonus for more than one ordeal) per initiatory grade.

I think that the bonuses and penalties weigh out, if you only
allow the multiplier to go as low as x1. Most ordeals you
cannot take twice (or have a penalty for doing so). That way
*increasing* the difficulty of getting higher levels. Now, for
people that only want grade 0 or 1...Well, I'd allow that to. I
mean if they want to go through a lot of crap just to lower a
wimpy 18/12 karma points. Kudos to them. Like I said, if they
ever change their mind... it'll be hell on karma. Think... to
lower the multiplier to x1 they'd have to take four ordeals!!!
(or two AND join a magical group!0 I really think that it balances
things out. Really.

Twinkie
gilmeth@*********.com
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/3759/
ICQ UIN: 514984
Sitebuilder Number: 531896

Do NOT use this or any other of my e-mail addresses in a for-profit =
e-mail database. The usage of such an address is bound by the terms =
listed at http://www.rahul.net/starowl/email.html

From:	Dust <rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 08:45:49 -0400

Message no. 30 On Wed, 14 May 1997, Tim Serpas wrote:

> A full mage might be considered to be a combination of sorcery adept,
> conjuring adept, enchanting adept and astral adept. The phys-mage gives
> up th astral part in exchange for phys-ad abilities, and there's that
> split-your-magic-attribute part as well. Every type of magician must
> choose a tradition, so besides shamanic adepts, you can also be a sorcery
> adept with a totem and receive all those wonderful totem modifiers. Most
> adepts are already limited enough, so most don't bother with totems. If
> you don't mind the totem disadvantages, they can be a great way to give
> your char just a tad of personality.

Yes, but shamanic adepts are only allowed to cast spells which they get
advantages for. SR2 only said that adepts could not perceive
or project. However that would be extremely inconvenient for conjuring
adepts, elemental adepts, and shamanic adepts.
Anyone care to clarify this for me?

Dust

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 08:41:35 -0700

Message no. 31 | > Good points here, but can't a mundane use a weapon focus if they double
the
| > bonding costs?
| > Could be a house rule I suppose...
|
| It's a house rule. To the best of my knowledge, only magicians can bond
| foci, and bonding them is necessary to use them. A mundane with a club as
| a weapon focus would just get to roll his/her normal Armed Combat skill,
| and not any of the extra dice from the focus, for example.

Hmmm ok...now that I think about it I know it is a house rule.

| The only focus a mundane has any use for is a spell lock, and even then
it
| has to be bonded and activated by a magician; the mundane can't even see
| the thing after it's been switched on.

Do you play that they disappear only when they are active or as soon as
they are bonded? We say only when bonded, which seems to make more
sense...

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 09:01:39 -0700

Message no. 32 | Yes, but shamanic adepts are only allowed to cast spells which
they get
| advantages for. SR2 only said that adepts could not perceive
| or project. However that would be extremely inconvenient for conjuring
| adepts, elemental adepts, and shamanic adepts.
| Anyone care to clarify this for me?

SR2 does say that scorcery and conjuring adepts as well as physads cannot
astrally project or percieve. It also states that Shamanic adepts do get
full access to astral space. The grimmy says that Elemental adepts get
full access to the astral also.

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	Tim Serpas <wretch@**.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 16:35:55 -0500

Message no. 33 > Yes, but shamanic adepts are only allowed to cast spells which they get
> advantages for. SR2 only said that adepts could not perceive
> or project. However that would be extremely inconvenient for conjuring
> adepts, elemental adepts, and shamanic adepts.

Yes, a Shamanic adept can only cast spells and summon spirits for which he
gets bonuses. And he can astrally perceive and project. A Sorcery adept
who has a totem can cast any spell, but he gets all the totem modifiers
and cannot summon or access astral space.

Am I just repeating myself or have I clarified things?
Tim

From:	"Arno R. Lehmann" <arlehma@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Thu, 15 May 1997 23:52:27 +0200

Message no. 34 On Wed, 14 May 1997 15:15:58 -0400, David Thompson wrote:

>they have no astral
>abilities. They can neither perceive nor project (unless they buy the
>physad power of astral perception or, in some games, have the astral sight
>edge).
>
> The reasoning according to the book is that they spent too much of
>their time working on their physad powers, so they never developed astral
>abilities.

Here I see a different reasoning: Their aura is more firmly bonded to
their bodys, thus making their body extremely controllable, but as a
side-effect they can't separate the two.
Perhaps they could, if they wanted, but then they'd lose the PA-powers.
With higher initiation it would be perhaps be possible. Just an idea
for a houserule:
Every time a Physical Mage tries to project the following happens:

test (Magical side magic rating*) vs. 2*(Magic Rating of physad side)
any success means a projection occurs
In any case make a test of PhysAd-Rating vs. 2*(conventional Magic
Rating)
if no success, then the mage loses all his PhisAd-abilities**
Every two grades of initiation modify the TNs in the mage's favour.

Example:
PhysAd-Rating 2, Magical 4
first test: 4 dice vs. 4, (1, 2, 5, 5)=2 successes -> projection
second test: 2 dice vs. 8, (1, 7 :( no success -> goodby PA
abilities...
an initiate grade 3 would need (4-1)=3's and (8-1)=7's, so he
would keep his PA abilities.

Notes:
* perhaps use willpower instead, since the mage must do something very
unpleasing
** or loses one PhysAd Magic point, and of course the related abilities

Sounds reasonable, I think.

--
Arno
*********************************************************************
Be careful when replying to this mail - check the address !!!
(And send me a note when you notice that
the reply-to-address points to the list!)
*********************************************************************

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Fri, 16 May 1997 12:03:15 +0100

Message no. 35 Caric said on 8:41/15 May 97...

> | The only focus a mundane has any use for is a spell lock, and even then it
> | has to be bonded and activated by a magician; the mundane can't even see
> | the thing after it's been switched on.
>
> Do you play that they disappear only when they are active or as soon as
> they are bonded? We say only when bonded, which seems to make more
> sense...

When activated, though I don't have any magician PCs at the moment so it's
not really an important point. I also use as a house rule (it's more of a
house guideline really) a paragraph from what we called the NAGM/NAGA a
few years ago, concerning why and how a mundane can't see active spell
locks.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
In another place, in another time, I'd be driving trucks
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Fri, 16 May 1997 12:03:15 +0100

Message no. 36 Dust said on 8:45/15 May 97...

> Yes, but shamanic adepts are only allowed to cast spells which they get
> advantages for. SR2 only said that adepts could not perceive
> or project. However that would be extremely inconvenient for conjuring
> adepts, elemental adepts, and shamanic adepts.

Shamanic and elemental adepts can use astral perception and projection,
while conjuring, sorcery, and enchanting adepts cannot. Physical adepts
have astral perception if they buy the right power, but cannot astrally
project (since there's no power that allows that).

For conjuring a spirit, you don't need access to the astral plane except
probably for some subconscious awareness that it's there, and that you
send out a call into that plane for a spirit to come to you. The
disadvantage naturally is that you can't really give any orders to your
spirits that require them to affect something on the astral plane, unless
you have someone with astral perception helping you.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
In another place, in another time, I'd be driving trucks
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Fri, 16 May 1997 12:00:49 -0700

Message no. 37 Gurth Stated:

| When activated, though I don't have any magician PCs at the moment so
it's
| not really an important point. I also use as a house rule (it's more of a
| house guideline really) a paragraph from what we called the NAGM/NAGA a
| few years ago, concerning why and how a mundane can't see active spell
| locks.

Hmmm i'd like to see a copy of that paragraph if it's floating around
somewhere.

-Caric

Word to the wise... Never anger a dragon, for you are crunchy, and would
be good with brie!!!

-Karl Teranssen av Drakkar

From:	Dale Talbert <LuvsAmanda@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Sat, 17 May 1997 01:53:15 -0400

Message no. 38 In a message dated 97-05-16 15:16:25 EDT, caric@********.COM (Caric) writes:

<< I also use as a house rule (it's more of a
| house guideline really) a paragraph from what we called the NAGM/NAGA a
| few years ago, concerning why and how a mundane can't see active spell
| locks.

Hmmm i'd like to see a copy of that paragraph if it's floating around
somewhere.
>>

So would I. Why don't you post it for all to see and comment on.
Dale

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Sat, 17 May 1997 10:50:14 +0100

Message no. 39 Caric said on 12:00/16 May 97...

> | When activated, though I don't have any magician PCs at the moment so it's
> | not really an important point. I also use as a house rule (it's more of a
> | house guideline really) a paragraph from what we called the NAGM/NAGA a
> | few years ago, concerning why and how a mundane can't see active spell
> | locks.
>
> Hmmm i'd like to see a copy of that paragraph if it's floating around
> somewhere.

This is what I found in the file on my HD. Since it doesn't appear in
Awakenings, I hope nobody minds me posting this here...

SPELL LOCKS

As described in the Shadowrun Second Edition Rulebook (p.138) a spell lock
'...vanishes once it is in place. It is still there, and operating, but
mundanes cannot see it, touch it, or affect it.' When a spell lock is
attached to a target and activated, the lock's physical properties do not
change, instead the spell lock creates a magical effect that causes
mundanes to ignore, rationalize, or otherwise take no real notice of the
spell lock's presence.

Normally, this 'see-me-not' effect is automatic and requires no test;
mundanes simply don't notice the lock and react as if it weren't there. If
the spell lock is in the form of something particularly outlandish or
unusual like a neon propeller beenie, mundanes might take notice of the
item, but find themselves wondering about it only after the wearer has
left the immediate area.

This effect of spell locks does not work against magically active
characters (i.e., those with a Magic Attribute of at least 1). However,
an awakened character will not necessarily know an item is a spell lock
simply by looking at it. They must assense the object using astral
perception in order to be aware of its magical properties. Of course,
being able to see an object that no one else can is certainly a hint to
most that something is up.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
In another place, in another time, I'd be driving trucks
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

From:	woneal@*******.NET
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Fri, 6 Jun 1997 16:34:58 -0005

Message no. 40 On 16 May 97 at 12:03, Gurth wrote:

> For conjuring a spirit, you don't need access to the astral plane except
> probably for some subconscious awareness that it's there, and that you
> send out a call into that plane for a spirit to come to you. The
> disadvantage naturally is that you can't really give any orders to your
> spirits that require them to affect something on the astral plane, unless
> you have someone with astral perception helping you.
>
While that's true, I still think conjuring adepts get a raw deal. The
have no access to the metaplanes, so they cannot conjure great form
spirits, nor can they go on a quest to find the true name of a spirit or
banish/destroy a spirit. Since dealing with spirits is what a conjuring
adept is supposed to be best at (and since most spirits prefer to stay
astral, it's safer for them), it seems to me conjuring adepts are at a
severe disadvantage. As a house rule, I've always given them full access
to the astral.
On a related note, since physmages don't have astral projection, they
cannot create wards. This doesn't sound like much, but it gets to be
important if you are worried about ritual sendings. In the games I've
played in, corps made fairly active use of ritual magic. So from my POV
it's a real concern when playing one.

Just my two (be-lated) bits worth.
--

Ashlocke
(woneal@*******.net)

"We shall never be able to remove suspicion and fear
as potential causes of war until communication is
permitted to flow, free and open, across international
boundries." -- Harry S. Truman

From:	Dust <rogan@*******.BERGEN.ORG>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Mon, 9 Jun 1997 08:22:43 -0400

Message no. 41 On Fri, 6 Jun 1997 woneal@*******.NET wrote:

> On 16 May 97 at 12:03, Gurth wrote:
>
>
> > For conjuring a spirit, you don't need access to the astral plane except
> > probably for some subconscious awareness that it's there, and that you
> > send out a call into that plane for a spirit to come to you. The
> > disadvantage naturally is that you can't really give any orders to your
> > spirits that require them to affect something on the astral plane, unless
> > you have someone with astral perception helping you.
> >
> While that's true, I still think conjuring adepts get a raw deal. The
> have no access to the metaplanes, so they cannot conjure great form
> spirits, nor can they go on a quest to find the true name of a spirit or
> banish/destroy a spirit. Since dealing with spirits is what a conjuring
> adept is supposed to be best at (and since most spirits prefer to stay
> astral, it's safer for them), it seems to me conjuring adepts are at a
> severe disadvantage. As a house rule, I've always given them full access
> to the astral.
> On a related note, since physmages don't have astral projection, they
> cannot create wards. This doesn't sound like much, but it gets to be
> important if you are worried about ritual sendings. In the games I've
> played in, corps made fairly active use of ritual magic. So from my POV
> it's a real concern when playing one.
>
> Just my two (be-lated) bits worth.
> --
>
> Ashlocke
> (woneal@*******.net)
>

I agree that conjuring adepts get a raw deal. If you are a
shamanic physical adept or elemental physical adept you can astrally
project. But if you are a plain old sorcery adept physmage than you
can't.

Dust

P.S. I was under the impression that there are hardly any benefits for
initiation for conjuring adepts. Why would they need a higher magic
rating or access to the metaplanes when they can't even go astral?

From:	Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Sun, 8 Jun 1997 19:37:20 -0700

Message no. 42 << P.S. I was under the impression that there are hardly any benefits
for initiation for conjuring adepts. Why would they need a higher magic
rating or access to the metaplanes when they can't even go astral?>>

Putting a little room between you and Mundanity once you get all cybered
up, perhaps?

Then there's that mysterious clause on p. 38 ("The initiate also gains
advantages in carrying out various magical operations because, again, he
or she adds the Initiate Grade Rating to his other ratings.") Were the
Initiate grade added to the conjurer's Charisma... slobber.

From:	Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Mon, 9 Jun 1997 19:02:31 -0700

Message no. 43 ---Dust wrote:
>
> P.S. I was under the impression that there are hardly any benefits
for
> initiation for conjuring adepts. Why would they need a higher magic
> rating or access to the metaplanes when they can't even go astral?

Well, there's the fact that a Spirit resists a banishing test by
rolling against your magic attribute. Higher magic would definitely be
a boon in this case.

===

@>--,--'--- Loki <gamemstr@********.com>

Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/

If in your adventures you happen across the skull of a dragon, turn
and leave that place quickly. Whatever killed the dragon may still be
around.
_____________________________________________________________________
Sent by RocketMail. Get your free e-mail at http://www.rocketmail.com

From:	The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Tue, 10 Jun 1997 11:57:51 +0100

Message no. 44 On Sun, 8 Jun 1997, Matb wrote:

> << P.S. I was under the impression that there are hardly any benefits
> for initiation for conjuring adepts. Why would they need a higher magic
> rating or access to the metaplanes when they can't even go astral?>>
>
> Putting a little room between you and Mundanity once you get all cybered
> up, perhaps?

Quick question, can centering be used to offset Conjuring drain?

The Digital Mage aka Grant Erswell - mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Sadder still to watch it die, than never to have known it"
-Rush, Losing It

From:	Gossamer <kajohnson@*******.TEC.WI.US>
Subject:	Re: Physical Magicians
Date:	Wed, 11 Jun 1997 10:47:58 -0500

Message no. 45 > Quick question, can centering be used to offset Conjuring drain?

Quick answer:

For watchers, yes

For anything else, no.

Love,

Gossamer

From:	adonis <adonis@******.COM>
Subject:	Physical magicians
Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 1997 12:07:18 -0400

Message no. 46 Does anybody have any ideas, opinions on Physical magicians?

In our senario, we define them as: Physads with the ability to use Sorcery,
but can't conjure.

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com
http://members.tripod.com/~SOOiCydE

From:	adonis <adonis@******.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical magicians
Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 1997 16:58:06 -0400

Message no. 47 [lot's o'good stuff snipped]
> If I was creating such a character I'd go the PA/Bear Shaman route. I
> don't know why, it just kinda feels right.
>
> -David

Okay cool. I like the ACCDE priority spread. I'll letcha know if my GM
retches on it.

Oh yeah...PA/Bear shaman huh?....hmmmm...

I think I'd go PA/Tiger Shaman who follows the "Way of the Blade".

In our senario (based in San Francisco), the Japanese influence is majorly
dominant, and a bushido-like mentality is prevalent (but not always! :p
)....

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

From:	adonis <adonis@******.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical magicians
Date:	Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:48:00 -0400

Message no. 48 > At 04:58 PM 10/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
> [Snip]
> >In our senario (based in San Francisco), the Japanese influence is
majorly
> >dominant, and a bushido-like mentality is prevalent (but not always! :p
> [Snip]
> Can you give me a short definition of the bushido-like mentality.
Currently
> I have a japanese PA who is an ex a Kabun (member of a Yakuza). I was
trying
> to write his background with this type of information. The problem I
ran
> into
> was dealing with the single combat, and their code of honor.
[a hefty snip]

Whew! Suffice to say, we don't get that deep with it! :) Thanks for the
in-depth info though.

When I say bushido-like mentality you can pretty much take it literally.
Because of the Japanese influence, San Fran is full of Sammys who are
wannabe pseudo-samaurais (i.e TRUE samaurais). Of course, doing what they
do, they can't truly follow the code of bushido and survive very long, so
it's become mutated and bastardized to fit the shadows. That's why I say
bushido-like...

Also - from what I know of the Yakuza, they don't follow bushido or any
code of ethics but their own, which in most modern Yakuza, is pretty much
whatever the drek they feel like doing.

Hope that helped!

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

From:	adonis <adonis@******.COM>
Subject:	Re: Physical magicians
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 1997 13:10:16 -0400

Message no. 49 > From: Ray & Tamara <macey@***.brisnet.org.au>
> They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
access
> to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical side of
> things, rather than the astral.
>

Okay...but wouldn't that make them damn near "supermen" or magical
"munchkins" ? If we played them like that it would unbalance gameplay I
think. At least in our senario.

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

From:	Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Physical magicians
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:32:57 +0500

Message no. 50 On 9 Oct 97 at 13:10, adonis wrote:

> Okay...but wouldn't that make them damn near "supermen" or magical
> "munchkins" ? If we played them like that it would unbalance
> gameplay I think. At least in our senario.

Please explain to me how physical magicians are supermen, because
frankly, I don't see it. A physical magician is a below average
physad, combined with a below average sorcerer adept. I hear it all
the time that physical magicians are unbalancing, but so far no one
has been able to prove it. Maybe you can. :)

--

drekhead@***.net
++++
Sig file lost.
++++

Message no. 51 > > Okay...but wouldn't that make them damn near "supermen" or magical
> > "munchkins" ? If we played them like that it would unbalance
> > gameplay I think. At least in our senario.
>
> Please explain to me how physical magicians are supermen, because
> frankly, I don't see it. A physical magician is a below average
> physad, combined with a below average sorcerer adept. I hear it all
> the time that physical magicians are unbalancing, but so far no one
> has been able to prove it. Maybe you can. :)

They are not sorcery adepts. They can use all magical skills. They just
can't astrally perceive or project. But other than that, they are
underpowered.

NightRain.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| The universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

EMAIL: macey@***.brisnet.org.au

Message no. 52 ----------
> From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.net>
> To: adonis@******.com
> Subject: Re: Physical magicians
> Date: Thursday, October 09, 1997 5:10 AM
>
> On 9 Oct 97 at 13:10, adonis wrote:
>
> > Okay...but wouldn't that make them damn near "supermen" or magical
> > "munchkins" ? If we played them like that it would unbalance
> > gameplay I think. At least in our senario.
>
> Please explain to me how physical magicians are supermen, because
> frankly, I don't see it. A physical magician is a below average
> physad, combined with a below average sorcerer adept. I hear it all
> the time that physical magicians are unbalancing, but so far no one
> has been able to prove it. Maybe you can. :)
>

Hey...far be it for me to claim expertise in Shadowrun policy!! I've only
actually been playing about 4-5 months (although I have 10+ years RPG
experience in general), and I know I have MUCH to absorb from you "gurus".

To clarify, I think it was Nightrain that said -
"They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
access
to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical side of
things, rather than the astral."

That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I can
see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player into a
major player, so to speak.

But if I'm being short sighted, feel free to enlighten me!

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

Message no. 53 On Thu, 9 Oct 1997 20:06:10 -0400 adonis <adonis@******.com> writes:

<<To clarify, I think it was Nightrain that said -
"They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
access to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical
side of things, rather than the astral.">>

That's not the whole of the situation however, the physical magician is
forced to divide his talents, so to speak. He'll never be as good in
either area as the equivalent physad or magician (respectively, of
course).

<<That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I
can see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player
into a major player, so to speak.>>

Well, they can be. They have a couple of fairly large downfalls, however:
first, the character's magic rating must be divided (in whole points)
between physad and magical abilities, any points allocated to physad
abilities reduce the Magic Rating for any tasks relating to pretty much
anything else (like Sorcery, Conjuring, Enchanting, etc). Any lost Magic
Points come off the magician half first. Second, by nature of this fact,
physical magicians are pretty much the biggest karmic sinks in the whole
game. They have their uses, and you can create a pretty powerful
character that way (using magic to augment or enhance the physad
abilities). But, creating a serioulsy kick-ass physical mage means a heck
of a sacrifice somewhere, whether in money (no foci for you!), attributes
or skills. They have potentially more versatility than any other
character type available, but they pay for it big time, IMO.

Canthros

Message no. 54 On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, adonis wrote:

> ----------
> > From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.net>
> > To: adonis@******.com
> > Subject: Re: Physical magicians
> > Date: Thursday, October 09, 1997 5:10 AM
> >
> > On 9 Oct 97 at 13:10, adonis wrote:
> >
>
> Hey...far be it for me to claim expertise in Shadowrun policy!! I've only
> actually been playing about 4-5 months (although I have 10+ years RPG
> experience in general), and I know I have MUCH to absorb from you "gurus".
>
> To clarify, I think it was Nightrain that said -
> "They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
> access
> to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical side of
> things, rather than the astral."
>
> That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I can
> see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player into a
> major player, so to speak.
>
> But if I'm being short sighted, feel free to enlighten me!
>
> SOOiCydE
> adonis@******..com
>

Well the thing that makes them "below" average is the fact that
they have to "split" thier Magic Attribute between spell casting and
PhysAd abilities... They are not full physads with 6 points to buy
powers with, they can choose between 1-5 points of PhysAd abilities and
between 1-5 vpoints of "effective" Magic Rating. The "effictive" Magic
rating is what is used to decide how much Magic pool Dice you can add. So
they arnt as uber as it seems when you say that they have full access to
both PhysAd and Mage Abilities -Astral. What you come up with in reality
is more of a Jack-of-all-Trades.

Czar- who thinks its a neat idea, but accually thinks PhysMages are weak
:) ;) :)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Czar Eggbert
homepage: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/5648
**Home Page Has Moved**
mailto:czregbrt@*********.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality!? Is that some new game?"
-MDF
"I'll need morphine, lots of it, and a pistol."
-The English Patient
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Message no. 55 adonis said on 20:06/ 9 Oct 97...

> That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I can
> see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player into a
> major player, so to speak.

An experienced player can turn any type of character into a "major
player," as you should know from 10 years' RPG experience... Physical
magicians are IMHO on a level with the other magician types in terms of
power levels -- they don't get all that many adept abilities, and most
will suffer from physical drain if they cast high-Force spells. Add the
need to get a geas on top of that if they take 2 or more points of physad
powers, and it all balances out nicely with other magicians, I feel.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The stupid is always possible.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Message no. 56 > To clarify, I think it was Nightrain that said -
> "They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
> access
> to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical side of
> things, rather than the astral."
>
> That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I can
> see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player into a
> major player, so to speak.

Yes, Physical Magicians ARE pretty powerful in the right hands. But
such powers ARE limited.
1) The starting character simply doesn't have the points to be great
at everything. He doesn't even have the points to be GOOD at
everything. Usually he ends up with good sorcery, passable
conjuring, and sucky everything else (aside from a combat skill)
But that's "usually".

2) That lack of access to astral space isn't minor to a mage. Not
only can he NOT do half the things people turn to mages to do, but he
also doesn't get half the benefits of initiation that mages get.

3) Splitting their magic between their "halves" means that they have
to tread VERY lightly to avoid losing the essential points. If they
lose them, they just lost all their mage side, and those skills they
invested in are useless. Plus, they can only cast low force spells
without physical drain. With many spells that doesn't matter, but
with the resisted ones....

4) If mages are Karma hungry, Phys. Mages are twice as hungry.
First they need karma to raise those skills that were "sub-standard"
because they had to diversify. Then there are more spells to learn,
initiation to raise the magic rating of the Mage half to let them
cast stronger spells and to "buffer" them enough to not worry about
losing that half. Then more initiations to boost their physAd side
to even approach having the "normal" allocation, plus most want to
grab Astral Perception so they can at least get SOME benefits from
these initiations. (that alone requires two initiations for the Phys
Ad side to get.)

In conclusion:

Yes, Physical magicians are potentially the most powerful type of
character....but as starting characters they are balanced well
enough. If a GM pays the same attention to Munchie tendencies as he
does with other "classes", he should have no problem.

BTW, Adonis, you are overwriting the Reply-to Field to the list. If
your mailer has a "reply to" or "send replies to" setting, make sure
it is blank.

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie

Message no. 57 [snip]
> >But if I'm being short sighted, feel free to enlighten me!
> >
>
> Well, your definitely underestimating the benefits of access to
> astral space. Many initiate abilities are worthless without astral
> perception or projection, and its a damn useful trick in general- more
> useful, IMHO, than a few points worth of phys-ad abilities. As a fact,
> astral adepts are quite valid and useful characters.
> Secondly, you may be missing the fact that they SPLIT their magic
> rating- loosing points from general magic ability to pay for phys-ad
> abilities, and picking up geas in the process to boot. I'd personally
> prefer to loose my mages magic points to good old cyber and keep my
> access to astral space.
> With karma, the catch up with and surpass physads or conjuring /
> sorcery adepts, although each of those types will have gotten quite good
> with an equal amount of karma. Physical mages are the magical jack of
> all trades, master of none.
[snip]

I have to agree with you here. The way you guys explain these guys, I'm
thinking I'd rather have a mage with some Skillwires or Boosted Reflexes or
something.

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

Message no. 58 [snip]
> > That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I
can
> > see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player
into a
> > major player, so to speak.
> >
> > But if I'm being short sighted, feel free to enlighten me!
[snip]
> Well the thing that makes them "below" average is the fact that
> they have to "split" thier Magic Attribute between spell casting and
> PhysAd abilities... They are not full physads with 6 points to buy
> powers with, they can choose between 1-5 points of PhysAd abilities and
> between 1-5 vpoints of "effective" Magic Rating. The "effictive"
Magic
> rating is what is used to decide how much Magic pool Dice you can add. So
> they arnt as uber as it seems when you say that they have full access to
> both PhysAd and Mage Abilities -Astral. What you come up with in reality
> is more of a Jack-of-all-Trades.
>
> Czar- who thinks its a neat idea, but accually thinks PhysMages are weak
[and more snip]

Okay....that makes sense once you breakit down. I agree with you.
But hey, can they initiate? And if so, with what restrictions?

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

Message no. 59 [snip]
> > Okay....that makes sense once you breakit down. I agree with you.
> > But hey, can they initiate? And if so, with what restrictions?
>
> They can initiate as normal. But unless they have access to astral
space,
> the only initiate abilities they get are Aura Masking and Centering (but
with
> the same restrictions as a physad, eg it won't work on spellcasting). If
> they have astral perception, then they can use all initiate powers.
>
> Also, the extra magic point they get only applies to one side of their
> abilities. ie it does not improve their spellcasting ability and also
give
> them extra physad powers.
>

So basically, when initiating, you can choose to have the extra point of
magic apply to EITHER spellcasting or adept abilities. Correct?

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

Message no. 60 <SNIP>

> To clarify, I think it was Nightrain that said -
> "They are meant to be physads with access to all magical skills, but no
> access
> to astral space, as they have put their effort into the physical side of
> things, rather than the astral."
>
> That, IMHO is not a "below" average anything! As a matter of fact, I can
> see a player with a bit of SR experience turning that kind of player into a
> major player, so to speak.
>
> But if I'm being short sighted, feel free to enlighten me!

As a player of a physical magician, I can tell you that they are not as
powerful as everybody seems to suggest. The physical mage has the most
powerful POTENTIAL, yes, but how many of us play with the many thousands
of karma needed to take a physical mage that far? In realistic terms, a
physical mage is a jack of all trades, master of none. Meaning that while
a physical mage can do a bit of both physical adept and mage stuff, he'll
never be as powerful as either. The physical mage has to split his karma
between the mage in him, and the pys-ad. Not to mention all those pesky
skills that come in handy now and then, like firearms, negotiations,
stealth, etc.

Guardian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indestinguishable from technology.
So there."
Adam Treloar aka Guardian
s777317@*****.student.gu.edu.au http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1900/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Message no. 61 > > So basically, when initiating, you can choose to have the extra point
of
> > magic apply to EITHER spellcasting or adept abilities. Correct?
>
> Give the man a cigar :)
>
I'll take a Philly Blunt please....or a Cuban if you got the loochie! :)

> No, that is it, spot on. One or the other, not both.
>
> NightRain.
>
Cool. I'm gonna hit my GM up with this and see what he says...

SOOiCydE
adonis@******.com

Message no. 62 > So basically, when initiating, you can choose to have the extra point of
> magic apply to EITHER spellcasting or adept abilities. Correct?

Correct. Two other important points that have not been mentioned
are (or at least not stressed):

1) Any loss of magic is taken from the magician "side". If that side
drops to 0, you are forever only a physAd. (This has been mentioned,
but I wanted to stress it again)

2) The magician "side" takes a geas on the magic for every two points
of the Initial 6 that go to the Phys Ad side.

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie

Message no. 63 Since Awakenings , have there been any further mentions of Physical
Magicians?
Has anyone come up with house rules for their creation? Have they
passed into canon according to FASA?

Thanks

-- BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za>

<hard@****>

Message no. 64 >Since Awakenings , have there been any further mentions of
>Physical Magicians?
>Has anyone come up with house rules for their creation? Have
>they passed into canon according to FASA?

No other mention I know of. I have seen them used as an NPC
once or twice, but no PC's. I'd stick to the rules in Awakening for
their creation to start. Their more or a jack of all trades to start.
I think Kenson mentioned these guys will be revisted in MITS.
As with all things magical, the holy grail will be MITS.
"Patience grass hopper"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker, Unix Admin (704)331-1149
deckerl@******.com Fax 378-1939
Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Pager 1-888-608-9633

Message no. 65 On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:30:00 +0200 Bruce <gyro@********.CO.ZA> writes:
>Since Awakenings , have there been any further mentions of Physical
Magicians?
>Has anyone come up with house rules for their creation? Have they
>passed into canon according to FASA?

Uhm ... to the best of my knowledge, if it's in a FASA sourcebook it IS
canon. It may be a canon optional rule, but it is still canon. :) As
for your other question, nope ... Awakenings is the only book with
mention of Physical Mages. The rules for their creation appear in
Awakenings on page 119.

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
"Coffee without caffeine is like sex without the spanking." -- Cupid
"A magician is always 'touching' himself" --Page 123, Grimoire (2nd
Edition)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Message no. 66 > Uhm ... to the best of my knowledge, if it's in a FASA sourcebook it IS
> canon. It may be a canon optional rule, but it is still canon. :) As
>
What is a canon?

-Toffer

Message no. 67 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker, Unix Admin (704)331-1149
deckerl@******.com Fax 378-1939
Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Pager 1-888-608-9633

>>> "Davidson, Chris"
<Christopher.Davidson@***.BOEING.COM> 01/06/99 01:39pm
>>>
> Uhm ... to the best of my knowledge, if it's in a FASA
sourcebook it IS
> canon. It may be a canon optional rule, but it is still canon. :)
>What is a canon?

in this case canon means legitimate, sanctioned by fasa in its
sourcebooks etc. (i.e. its now a house rule).

Message no. 68 > >What is a canon?
>
> in this case canon means legitimate, sanctioned by fasa in its
> sourcebooks etc. (i.e. its now a house rule).
>
Okay, let me rephrase that then...where does the
term canon come from, now that I know what it
means at this point.

-Toffer

Message no. 69 >Okay, let me rephrase that then...where does the
>term canon come from, now that I know what it
>means at this point.
www.dictionary.com, lists the following.

canon \Can"on\, n. [OE. canon, canoun, AS. canon rule (cf. F.
canon, LL. canon, and, for sense 7, F.
chanoine, LL. canonicus), fr. L. canon a measuring line, rule,
model, fr. Gr. ? rule, rod, fr. ?, ?, red. See
Cane, and cf. Canonical.] 1. A law or rule.

Why am I having this discussion....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker, Unix Admin (704)331-1149
deckerl@******.com Fax 378-1939
Moore & Van Allen, PLLC Pager 1-888-608-9633

Message no. 70 > > Uhm ... to the best of my knowledge, if it's in a FASA sourcebook it IS
> > canon. It may be a canon optional rule, but it is still canon. :) As
> >
> What is a canon?
>

If you are looking for the origin of the word, may I direct you to these
fine links:

http://www.aj.com Ask Jeeves is great. This is the search engine that should
be on the desktop of all new computer systems purchased.

http://www.m-w.com Merriam-Webster

Hope this helps...

-XaOs-
xaos@*****.net
-David Goth-

Message no. 71 > Cane, and cf. Canonical.] 1. A law or rule.
>
That cleared it up. Thanks.

-Toffer

Message no. 72 +AD4-On Wed, 6 Jan 1999 15:30:00 +020- Bruce +ADw-gyro+AEA-SMARTNET.CO.ZA+AD4- writes:
+AD4APg-Since Awakenings , have there been any further mentions of Physical
+AD4-Magicians?
+AD4APg-Has anyone come up with house rules for their creation? Have they
+AD4APg-passed into canon according to FASA?
+AD4-
+AD4-Uhm ... to the best of my knowledge, if it's in a FASA sourcebook it IS
+AD4-canon. It may be a canon optional rule, but it is still canon. :) As
+AD4-for your other question, nope ... Awakenings is the only book with
+AD4-mention of Physical Mages. The rules for their creation appear in
+AD4-Awakenings on page 119.
+AD4-
+AD4---
+AD4-D. Ghost
+AD4-(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)

OK, I don't have the Awakenings Book, and I don't know that much about
physical mages other than that they are physical adepts capable of casting
spells. So...what's the catch?

--
Angelkiller 404

http://www.mindspring.com/+AH4-demipop/

+ACI-I mean, Dunkelzahn is dead...and we can't get Lofwyr into a limo?+ACE- C'mon
folks+ACEAIg-

Message no. 73 At 03:48 PM 1/6/99 -0500, greg basa wrote:
>
>OK, I don't have the Awakenings Book, and I don't know that much about
>physical mages other than that they are physical adepts capable of casting
>spells. So...what's the catch?

Basically, for the cost of being a "full" magician (Magic Priority A), you
get to be a physical adept, a sorcery adept, a conjuring adept, and an
enchanting adept all rolled into one. The catch, as you put it, is that
you have to split your Magic rating between physad abilities and magician
abilities permanently. (I.e., 3 points in physad powers only leaves 3
points for regular magical abilities. Magic loss alternates, IIRC.) And
you can't astrally project, only perceive, which is unusual for full
magician characters.

I never really liked the physical magician as described, it always seemed a
little munchy to me. I did once try to design a full magician version of
the physad myself, only I gave my version variable powers (learned with
karma/spell points and limited to a number of active abilities based on
Magic rating) and free astral perception/projection. I also used the rule
(buried in the Grimoire) that an astrally perceiving (or projecting, by
astral gateway) physad can use his powers on the astral. Unfortunately,
that led to my guy being virtually invincible in astral combat. I couldn't
find a good compromise, so I dropped it.

BTW, your reply-to field is overriding the list.

Starjammer | Una salus victus nullam sperare salutem.
starjammer@**********.com | "The one hope of the doomed is not to
Marietta, GA | hope for safety." --Virgil, The Aeneid

Message no. 74 and thus did Davidson, Chris speak on 6 Jan 99 at 10:48:

> Okay, let me rephrase that then...where does the
> term canon come from, now that I know what it
> means at this point.

Greek: Kanon means rule. It survived up to this day as a word thanks
to the catholic church who used it to indicate accepted books,
saints, whatever.

Martin Steffens
chimerae@***.ie

Message no. 75 :Okay, let me rephrase that then...where does the
:term canon come from, now that I know what it
:means at this point.

Its generally used in reference to Catholic religious debate- church
sanctioned theology is "canon". All else is (officially) considered
heresy...

Mongoose

Message no. 76 In a message dated 1/6/1999 8:31:17 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
gyro@********.CO.ZA writes:

> Since Awakenings , have there been any further mentions of Physical
> Magicians?
> Has anyone come up with house rules for their creation? Have they
> passed into canon according to FASA?

Hey, as far as the rules for Physmages go, they are pretty fleshed out in the
way they are written in Awakenings, and from what I understand, they will be
in MiTS, but I am not sure of it though.

-Herc

Message no. 77 Umm, if this is a duplicate post, sorry about that; my mailer was having
some difficulty

Dave

At 09:30 AM 1/11/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Typically a physical mage does not actually follow a totem. As to
munchie-ness, well
>they can be. I avoided this by making a physical mage / decker type.
Where the
>character is most interested in being a decker, thus is not terribly
thrilled to be the one
>who has to wade into a fire fight (he is a troll) to pull the Sammies
knads out of the
>blender. Of course as a decker he is not doing to well, but resources E
does make it a
>little harder.
>
>
>
Um, actually, a physical mage can be either a shaman or a hermetic. The
following is from Awakenings, pg 119:

"Physical magicans must use their magic skills within either the shamanic
or hermetic tradition. Shamanic physical magicians follow totems and use
totem modifiers just like standard shamans ans shamanic adepts. Physical
magicians purchase and use physical adept powers in the same manner
regardless of tradition"

Thats the exact quote, barring spelling mistakes.

Some other thoughts on physical magicians. If someone was looking to be
excessivelly min-maxed, it would MUCH more sense to be a full magician, but
install some bio/cyberware. The return for the magic lost is much greater,
at least judging by the actuall essence; it becomes even greater if you
use cultured bioware, or alpha/beta/delta grade cyberware. Admittedly, not
all beginning chars have access to this, it depends on the individual
campaign, but even with normal cyberware, and no bioware, you can acheive
the same results, but also, you have the astral projection/perception that
the physical mage doesnt have. Having thought through this even more,
someone said that a physical mage is torn in his use of karma. Some goes
to adept abilities, some to magical skills, some to other things.
Obviously, you could make a real powerfull person with 100+ (or even worse
500+) karma, but then who wouldn't be powerfull with that level of karma?\

So, my final verdict is that I think I will play my physical racoon shaman,
and have fun doing it! :)

Dave

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer