Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Sean McCrohan <mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU>
Subject: Starting Magic Rating < 6 (Was: New Chargen)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 08:26:51 -0400
Since I didn't include any numbers in that last mailing, some rough first
guesses:

Priority Full Magician Aspected/Adept
A 6 MR, 25 SP -
B 4 MR, 15 SP 6 MR, 35 SP
C 2 MR, 5 SP 3 MR, 20 SP
D 1 MR, 0 SP 1 MR, 5 SP
E 0 MR 0 MR

Where, of course, MR=Magic Rating and SP=Spell Points. I'm still
not sure it'd work - you might end up with WAY too many magical characters -
but it'd provide some flexibility in starting magical ability, which might be
cool.
It also raises another question - what if someone told you they wanted
to play an Aspected Magician, and could they spend their A priority on it
instead of B, and get some extra Spell Points? What would you say?

--Sean

--
Sean McCrohan (mccrohan@**.gatech.edu) | "He uses his folly as a stalking
Grad Student, Human-Computer Interaction | horse, and under the presentation
Georgia Institute of Technology | of that he shoots his wit."
http://www.lcc.gatech.edu/~smccrohan | _As You Like It_, Act 5 Sc 4
Message no. 2
From: "M. Sean Martinez" <ElBandit@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Starting Magic Rating < 6 (Was: New Chargen)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 09:05:36 EDT
In a message dated 10/5/98 8:27:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
mccrohan@*****.OIT.GATECH.EDU writes:

> It also raises another question - what if someone told you they
> wanted
> to play an Aspected Magician, and could they spend their A priority on it
> instead of B, and get some extra Spell Points? What would you say?

That would seem rather silly to me, since they already get more spell points
with Priority B as an aspected magician. Priority A would mean they are a full
mage, IMHO.

-Bandit

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Starting Magic Rating < 6 (Was: New Chargen), 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!