Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Talents (Was: Magical Deckers / magic edges)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 17:45:30 -0500
> From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 2:58 PM

<Big Snip>

> Indeed, if minor talents come with a magic rating, It'd be worth having
one just
> to be able to use a weapon focus.

*sigh* Try thinking along the SPIRIT of the Talents, not the letter. As a
house rule with Talents, I rule that you can ONLY use any Foci that are
DIRECTLY related to your Talent. Thus, if you have a spell talent (for
example, Detect Enemies), you could use a Power Focus, Spell Category Focus
(Detection), or a Specific Spell Focus (Detect Enemies). You could NOT use
any other Foci (except Fetish Foci), IMO. Otherwise, you are getting well
over a few character creation points worth of a Talent.

Also, as a house rule, I only allow characters with Astral Perception to
activate/deactivate Spell Locks. If you want to cast a spell into a Spell
Lock, you must also have a Sorcery skill and be able to use it as a
Magician would (i.e. NOT as a mundane).

Thus, with a specific Talent, you won't be able to cast spells and use all
types of Foci. That's just plain ludicrus. Talents only cost a few
points. Keep that in mind when developing house rules for them.

> Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
> of a psycotic - Einstien

Justin :)
Message no. 2
From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Talents (Was: Magical Deckers / magic edges)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:51:46 PST
>> Indeed, if minor talents come with a magic rating, It'd be worth
having one just to be able to use a weapon focus.
>
>*sigh* Try thinking along the SPIRIT of the Talents, not the letter.
<snip of perfectly sensable stuff>

Well, I was thinking of astral perception- A weapon focus is pretty
specificly helpful in astral combat. Although you haveto get prtetty
specific in deciding who afocus is usable byif you resrict it more then
the BBB does. Is a power focus uselss to a minor conjourer? Not for
banishing, it isn't.
On that note, wouldn't a BANISHING focus be cool-? They seem a
common mythological idea, IE a priests croos, a shamans rattles, any
censor usedto burn "purifieng" herbs and incenses). Yes, you could use
a spirit type focus, but those are for all tests withthat spirit type
and don'tincrease your magic rating.

MONGOOSE

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 3
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: Talents (Was: Magical Deckers / magic edges)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 19:11:15 -0500
> From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
> Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 6:51 PM

> >> Indeed, if minor talents come with a magic rating, It'd be worth
> having one just to be able to use a weapon focus.

> >*sigh* Try thinking along the SPIRIT of the Talents, not the letter.
> <snip of perfectly sensable stuff>

> Well, I was thinking of astral perception- A weapon focus is pretty
> specificly helpful in astral combat. Although you haveto get prtetty
> specific in deciding who afocus is usable byif you resrict it more then
> the BBB does. Is a power focus uselss to a minor conjourer? Not for
> banishing, it isn't.

Sure, a weapon focus would be useful to someone with a Conjure Earth
Elementals Talent. But, it could be argued that ALL Foci would be useful
to just about everyone, but the game system doesn't allow for everyone to
use all the different foci. Thus, you should probably change the way you
approach which Foci to allow for which Adepts, Talents, etc.

The question should NOT be "is it useful to the character", but rather
should be 'is it DIRECTLY related to the character's Talent, and is it too
powerful for the points used to purchase the Talent".

Take the Astral Sight Talent for example. Sure, it would be useful to
anyone with Astral Perception to be able to bond and use Weapon Foci.
However, the Talent only costs 3 points, so isn't that giving them a bit
much for their expenditure? Of course it is. Therefore, it would be
reasonable to rule that if you only spend 3 points and take the Talent of
Astral Sight, you can see into the Astral Plane just fine...and can
probably do it well (if you buy an Aura Reading skill). You could create a
character who can tell you things about someone's aura that few Magicians
could, because you spend lots of time training and practicing your Talent.
That makes you quite useful....and all for 3 whole points. Of course, the
points for buying an Aura Reading skill are seperate and will make you even
more useful, but you get the picture. Being able to perceive the Astral
Plane is a BIG advantage sometimes....that's already quite a bit for your 3
points. If you want to bond a Weapon Focus, spend a few more points and
become an Adept of some kind.

BTW: As a house rule, I don't allow PhysAds to purchase the Talent of
Astral Sight. For one, I don't allow multiple Magical Levels (2 Talents, 1
Adept and 1 Talent, etc.). Second, it completely dissuades PhysAds from
spending the 2 magic attribute points for it. And since none of the other
types of Magicians/Adepts can purchase the Astral Sight Talent, it's only
fair that PhysAds can't either....without buying it like all their other
abilities - by spending their magic attribute.

> On that note, wouldn't a BANISHING focus be cool-? They seem a
> common mythological idea, IE a priests croos, a shamans rattles, any
> censor usedto burn "purifieng" herbs and incenses). Yes, you could use
> a spirit type focus, but those are for all tests withthat spirit type
> and don'tincrease your magic rating.

Could be very cool. I am sure you can already find stats for this
somewhere.

> MONGOOSE

Justin :)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Talents (Was: Magical Deckers / magic edges), 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.