Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 22:42:13 EDT
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997 17:35:02 -0500 losthalo
<KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU> writes:
<big ol' snipperoonie>
<<You will see far more cybered mages, most likely, since they can lose
magic to cyber and 'get it back' with geasa. Some test characters might
illustrate whether this would disrupt balance, maybe some list members
could work up a few (trying hard as they can to min/max them in this
direction?) and see what we get? And think of what this could do for
Physical Mages (if your campaign allows them...). Mages tend to avoid
things like Wired Reflexes because of the high Magic losses, but with
this rule, you might see a lot of sammie/mage amalgams (not that that
would be bad, they might still remain pretty balanced).>>


Okay, here goes (I used rules _as_written_, not necessarily as intended,
and did not limit myself to the main book:)

Name:
Race: Human
Adept: Hermetic Sorcerer

ATTRIBUTES
----------
Body: 3/4
Quickness: 3
Strength: 3
Charisma: 1
Intelligence: 4/5
Willpower: 6
Body Index: .8
Essence: 1 (1.8, if you use the bioware subtracts from Magic house rule)
Magic 1 (3)
With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)

SKILLS
------
Armed combat/Edged weapons [3/5(7)]
Firearms [5]
Sorcery/Spellcasting [3/5]
Unarmed combat/Martial arts style [2/4]
Etiquette(Street) [1]
Magical theory/Design/Hermetic [1/3/5]

CYBERWARE
---------
Dermal Plating 1
Smartlink II
Eye Cyber replac.
Eye Optical Mag 2
Eye Rangefinder
Eye Thermographic
Wired Reflexes 2

BIOWARE
---------
Cerebral Booster 1
Trauma Damper

SPELLS
------
Increase +4 Strength (1)
Increase +3 Quickness (1)
Personal Combat Sense (1)
Hellblast (5) (reusable fetish)
Fire Bolt (3) (ditto)
Mana Bolt (3) (same here)
Improved Invisibility (3) (expendable fetish)
Flame Aura (4) (reusable fetish)
Heal (3) (reusable fetish, exclusive)

GEAR
----
2 Savalette Guardians (w/ 30 rounds Explosive ammo <kaboom!>)
Ares Alpha Combat Gun (w/ 50 rounds APDS ammo, 8 Defensive HE
minigrenades, 8 Neurostun minigrenades)
Light Military Armor
Power Focus 2
Weapon Focus 2,Reach 1
Spell Lock (Personal Combat Sense, 4 successes)
Spell Lock (Increased Strength +4)
Fetish Focus, Rating 1
4 Expendable Detection Fetishes
5 Expendable Illusion Fetishes
Reusable Combat Fetish
Reusable Manipulation Fetish
Reusable Healing Fetish

3 Contacts

Edges and Flaws (remember, I said 'as written' :)
---------------
Astral Sight
Combat Monster
Vindictive


I don't know that the Chromium Mage there is all that munch (powerful,
but nearly crippled by the low physical attributes), but that's what I
came up with. I would have sprung for a Panther Cannon:) but I was on a
budget, and really wanted the foci:):)

--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 2
From: Michael Paff <mikepaff@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 21:43:25 -0700
>Okay, here goes (I used rules _as_written_, not necessarily as intended,
>and did not limit myself to the main book:)
>
> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
>
Which 5 geasa did you plan for this character?

>BIOWARE
>---------
>Cerebral Booster 1
>Trauma Damper
>
An official ruling needs to be made as to how the Trauma Damper affects
spellcasters (does it offset drain, is there any risk to Magic like
stimpatches). Hopefully it will be addressed in SR3.

>I don't know that the Chromium Mage there is all that munch (powerful,
>but nearly crippled by the low physical attributes), but that's what I
>came up with. I would have sprung for a Panther Cannon:) but I was on a
>budget, and really wanted the foci:):)
>
On the subject of foci, with the variable Magic attribute that mages
would have under the proposed change, which value is used to determine
focus addiction?
>
>-Canthros

Mike Paff
Message no. 3
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:57:18 -0400
On Thursday, July 24, 1997 22:42, John E Pederson[SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
wrote:

> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)

BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability to
initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.

--
Quicksilver rides again
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, I have Attention Deficit Dis - Hey, look at that butterfly!
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Message no. 4
From: TopCat <topcat@***.NET>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 14:01:07 -0500
At 02:57 PM 7/25/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)

>BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
>See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability to
>initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.

True, but I believe this character was being created to illustrate what
*might* be possible under the new Geasa rules suggested for SR3 (hence the
"was: [SR3] Geasa" bit...) in which Geasa would indeed allow someone to
retain their magic rating by taking Geasa. This is not a canonical thread.
Although my contribution works just fine canonically, his Chromium Mage was
made to illustrate what could be done under the proposed system.
--
Bob Ooton
topcat@***.net
Message no. 5
From: Justin Pinnow <vanyel@*******.NET>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:00:24 -0400
> From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
> Date: Friday, July 25, 1997 2:57 PM
>
> On Thursday, July 24, 1997 22:42, John E Pederson[SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
> wrote:
>
> > With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)

> BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
> See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability
to
> initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.

Mr. Hurley, you would do well not to be so harsh about your responses. You
would also do well to read the threads related to this post before making a
response.

This thread was about creating a mage using the alternate Geasa rules that
have been discussed for a little while on this list. According to those
alternate rules, this is valid. Those rules is the entire reason this post
(and thread) was made in the first place.

> --
> Quicksilver rides again

Justin
Message no. 6
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:26:54 -0400
On Friday, July 25, 1997 15:01, TopCat[SMTP:topcat@***.NET] wrote:
> At 02:57 PM 7/25/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >>With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
>
> >BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
> >See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability to
> >initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.
>
> True, but I believe this character was being created to illustrate what
> *might* be possible under the new Geasa rules suggested for SR3 (hence the
> "was: [SR3] Geasa" bit...) in which Geasa would indeed allow someone to
> retain their magic rating by taking Geasa. This is not a canonical thread.
> Although my contribution works just fine canonically, his Chromium Mage was
> made to illustrate what could be done under the proposed system.
> --
> Bob Ooton
> topcat@***.net

Which I realized when I got to the top of my mailbox (I read threads in reverse
alphabetical order)


Apologies to whoever came up with the character..

--
Quicksilver rides again
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, I have Attention Deficit Dis - Hey, look at that butterfly!
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Message no. 7
From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:28:40 -0400
On Friday, July 25, 1997 15:00, Justin Pinnow[SMTP:vanyel@*******.NET] wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Hurley <jhurley1@************.EDU>
> > To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> > Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
> > Date: Friday, July 25, 1997 2:57 PM
> >
> > On Thursday, July 24, 1997 22:42, John E Pederson[SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
> > wrote:
> >
> > > With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
>
> > BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
> > See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability
> to
> > initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.
>
> Mr. Hurley, you would do well not to be so harsh about your responses. You
> would also do well to read the threads related to this post before making a
> response.
>
> This thread was about creating a mage using the alternate Geasa rules that
> have been discussed for a little while on this list. According to those
> alternate rules, this is valid. Those rules is the entire reason this post
> (and thread) was made in the first place.

I apologize. I hadn't realized (due to not reading the title very closely) that the
character was a result of a proposed rules change.

I'm a little trigger-happy about it because of an incident early in my GMing days.

--
Quicksilver rides again
--------------
Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, I have Attention Deficit Dis - Hey, look at that butterfly!
Jonathan Hurley (mailto:jhurley1@************.edu)
Message no. 8
From: Joshua T Brown <spamquat@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 19:12:57 -0500
>> True, but I believe this character was being created to illustrate
>what
>> *might* be possible under the new Geasa rules suggested for SR3
>(hence the
>> "was: [SR3] Geasa" bit...) in which Geasa would indeed allow someone
>to
>> retain their magic rating by taking Geasa. This is not a canonical
>thread.
>> Although my contribution works just fine canonically, his Chromium
>Mage was
>> made to illustrate what could be done under the proposed system.
>> --
Ahhh... Nevermind.... makes sense now.... though he's still pretty
bad-ass w/o all the extra dice to roll for spells... mebbe swap out the
sheathing... bam... powergamer's wet dream.

>Which I realized when I got to the top of my mailbox (I read threads
>in reverse alphabetical order)
>
Don't ya hate that? I made a similar mistake... luckily, we have poor
mailers to blame it all on....
==============================================================
The Kumquat -- Josh Brown -- Kumquat@*****.com -- Spamquat@****.com --
Shadowrun Page Still Under Development -- Coming Soon!
"Support Whirled Peas" -- <smirk> -- "Whatever, Man" --
"Woo Hoo!" --
....Don't hate me Because I'm... ahh, screw it, hate me. <smirk>
Message no. 9
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 22:34:11 EDT
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997 21:43:25 -0700 Michael Paff <mikepaff@***.COM>
writes:
>>Okay, here goes (I used rules _as_written_, not necessarily as
>intended,
>>and did not limit myself to the main book:)
>>
>> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
>>
>Which 5 geasa did you plan for this character?


Well, I was figuring on Incantation and Gesture, Talisman (one of the
foci, most likely:) Domain (or Time, one or the other) and probably he
winds up with the Focus Geas from Awakenings (what with the various
foci:)


>>BIOWARE
>>---------
>>Cerebral Booster 1
>>Trauma Damper
>>
>An official ruling needs to be made as to how the Trauma Damper
>affects
>spellcasters (does it offset drain, is there any risk to Magic like
>stimpatches). Hopefully it will be addressed in SR3.


In the meantime, it's the single most useful piece of bioware for a
magician:):) With the possible exception of the Cerebral Booster (the
only thing on earth that boosts Astral Quickness:)


>>I don't know that the Chromium Mage there is all that munch
>(powerful,
>>but nearly crippled by the low physical attributes), but that's what
>I
>>came up with. I would have sprung for a Panther Cannon:) but I was on
>a
>>budget, and really wanted the foci:):)
>>
>On the subject of foci, with the variable Magic attribute that mages
>would have under the proposed change, which value is used to determine
>focus addiction?


Well, you could go the complicated route and rule that it's based on the
current one:) So that the moment he misses that 5th geas <EGMG>


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 10
From: Chris Maxfield <cmaxfiel@****.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 14:31:57 +1000
At 22:42 24/07/97 EDT, John E Pederson wrote:
>Okay, here goes (I used rules _as_written_, not necessarily as intended,
>and did not limit myself to the main book:)
>
>Name:
>Race: Human
>Adept: Hermetic Sorcerer

<<<snip>>>

>Magic 1 (3)
> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)

<<<snip>>

>Cerebral Booster 1
>Trauma Damper

I just love this bioware for magicians.

<<<snip>>>

>I don't know that the Chromium Mage there is all that munch (powerful,
>but nearly crippled by the low physical attributes), but that's what I
>came up with. I would have sprung for a Panther Cannon:) but I was on a
>budget, and really wanted the foci:):)

And now for the down side. All the following actions/abilities are rated
against a magician's magic rating and are only considered in that light.
I've listed those for which I believe the Chrome Wiz's geasa will not work
or are simply not relevant:

a. the Chrome Wiz's ability to banish spirits is very poor;
b. the Chrome Wiz's ability to command uncontrolled spirits is very poor;
c. ritual magic maximum sustaining time is frag all if the Chrome Wiz is
the team leader;
d. the astrally projecting Chrome Wiz's ability to pass astral barriers is
almost non-existent;
e. an initiated Chrome Wiz's Masking is pretty ineffective versus any other
initiate;
f. the Chrome Wiz's aura reading ability is poor;
g. astral quests are much more dangerous;
h. the Chrome Wiz's risk of foci addiction is serious if he ever uses the
foci without also using his geasa.
... and there are probably more.

So, there are still some solid limitations on the Chrome Wiz under the
proposed new geasa rules.


Chris


_______________________________________________________________
Chris Maxfield We are restless because of incessant
<cmaxfiel@****.org.au> change, but we would be frightened if
Canberra, Australia change were stopped.
Message no. 11
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 12:28:37 EDT
On Sun, 27 Jul 1997 14:31:57 +1000 Chris Maxfield <cmaxfiel@****.ORG.AU>
writes:

<<And now for the down side. All the following actions/abilities are
rated against a magician's magic rating and are only considered in that
light. I've listed those for which I believe the Chrome Wiz's geasa will
not work or are simply not relevant:

a. the Chrome Wiz's ability to banish spirits is very poor;>>


As it should be, since he's not actually a mage.


<<b. the Chrome Wiz's ability to command uncontrolled spirits is very
poor;>>


Again, he's not a mage, I'm sure he would be able to either of those,
anyway.


<<c. ritual magic maximum sustaining time is frag all if the Chrome Wiz
is the team leader;
d. the astrally projecting Chrome Wiz's ability to pass astral barriers
is almost non-existent;>>


He can't astrally project, he has astral perception, but astral
projection. And it's not like he'd be able to spend much time in the
astral even if he could project...


<<e. an initiated Chrome Wiz's Masking is pretty ineffective versus any
other initiate;>>


That's be the price you pay...


<<f. the Chrome Wiz's aura reading ability is poor;>>


Well, other than not having the Psychometry skill, where are you pulling
this one from?


<<g. astral quests are much more dangerous;>>


He can't astrally project.


<<h. the Chrome Wiz's risk of foci addiction is serious if he ever uses
the foci without also using his geasa.>>


Yes and no. He can't actually lose anymore magic, so the worst that could
happen is another geas (note: I would give this kind of character the
Focus geas on general principles:)


<<... and there are probably more.

So, there are still some solid limitations on the Chrome Wiz under the
proposed new geasa rules.>>


Of course there are, but two-thirds of what you suggest don't apply to
this character anyway: he can't astrally project, he can't summon
(normal) spirits, or banish them (IIRC, I don't have the book with me to
check, so I could very easily be wrong there...). And he doesn't have
Conjuring:)


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 12
From: Chris Maxfield <cmaxfiel@****.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 00:50:41 +1000
At 12:28 27/07/97 EDT, John E Pederson wrote:
<<a. the Chrome Wiz's ability to banish spirits is very poor;>>

>As it should be, since he's not actually a mage.

Oops. Just reread the fragment I still have of the original Chromium Mage
post. Somehow, I completely missed the fact that he is a Sorcerous Adept.

><<b. the Chrome Wiz's ability to command uncontrolled spirits is very
>poor;>>

>Again, he's not a mage, I'm sure he would be able to either of those,
>anyway.

<Blush>. What I was referring to here was the Control contest where the
spirit is opposing by rolling its force versus the magician's Magic Rating.
Could get nasty for low Magic Ratings. But, not an issue for Sorcerous Adepts.

><<c. ritual magic maximum sustaining time is frag all if the Chrome Wiz
>is the team leader;
>d. the astrally projecting Chrome Wiz's ability to pass astral barriers
>is almost non-existent;>>

>He can't astrally project, he has astral perception, but astral
>projection. And it's not like he'd be able to spend much time in the
>astral even if he could project...

<Double blush>. Does he have astral perception? (Wishing he still had the
original post.)

><<e. an initiated Chrome Wiz's Masking is pretty ineffective versus any
>other initiate;>>
>That's be the price you pay...

Thank god. That one got through.

><<f. the Chrome Wiz's aura reading ability is poor;>>
>Well, other than not having the Psychometry skill, where are you pulling
>this one from?

Well, this doesn't necessarily apply to Sorcerous Adepts (unless they have
astral perception). I also should have used the word 'reduced' rather than
'poor'. I'm referring to the Aura Reading section on page 90 in the
Grimiore. There it describes how a magician may make multiple attempts to
read an aura but the target number increases by +2 each time. He may not
make anymore attempts once the target number exceeds his Magic Rating. This
will, almost certainly, occur immediately after the Chrome Wiz's first
attempt. Also, an Initiated Spell Wiz will have a tough time penetrating
the Masking of other initiates. Once again, this only applies to Chromium
Mages who have (somehow) gained perception <blush>.

><<g. astral quests are much more dangerous;>>
>He can't astrally project.

Certainly not through his own power. But there are ways, such as the Free
Spirit's gateway power, to bring any character into an astral quest. If he
ends up in the place of magic he may be in serious trouble.

><<h. the Chrome Wiz's risk of foci addiction is serious if he ever uses
>the foci without also using his geasa.>>
>Yes and no. He can't actually lose anymore magic, so the worst that could
>happen is another geas (note: I would give this kind of character the
>Focus geas on general principles:)

Absolutely agree.

>Of course there are, but two-thirds of what you suggest don't apply to
>this character anyway: he can't astrally project, he can't summon
>(normal) spirits, or banish them (IIRC, I don't have the book with me to
>check, so I could very easily be wrong there...). And he doesn't have
>Conjuring:)

<blush> <double blush> Quietly tucks the old Magic Ratings list away. OK.
The disadvantages suffered by the Chrome Wiz for his low Magic Rating are
much reduced compared to a full magician. But what is left leaves
interestin' hooks for a GM to play with. ;-)

Chris

_______________________________________________________________
Chris Maxfield We are restless because of incessant
<cmaxfiel@****.org.au> change, but we would be frightened if
Canberra, Australia change were stopped.
Message no. 13
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 11:39:26 EDT
<<Oops. Just reread the fragment I still have of the original Chromium
Mage post. Somehow, I completely missed the fact that he is a Sorcerous
Adept.>>

Don't sweat it.

<<<Double blush>. Does he have astral perception? (Wishing he still had
the original post.)>>


Yeah, he has Astral Perception via the Astral Sight Edge.


<<Well, this doesn't necessarily apply to Sorcerous Adepts (unless they
have astral perception). I also should have used the word 'reduced'
rather than 'poor'. I'm referring to the Aura Reading section on page 90
in the Grimiore. There it describes how a magician may make multiple
attempts to read an aura but the target number increases by +2 each time.
He may not make anymore attempts once the target number exceeds his Magic
Rating. This will, almost certainly, occur immediately after the Chrome
Wiz's first attempt. Also, an Initiated Spell Wiz will have a tough time
penetrating the Masking of other initiates. Once again, this only applies
to Chromium Mages who have (somehow) gained perception <blush>.>>


I don't know, unless the character intentionally does not use the geasa
when attempting this (or they do not apply or he's physically unable to
fulfill them), I'd let them apply to his magic rating (assuming we're in
a non-combat type of situation and he's not actually tossing spells).


><<g. astral quests are much more dangerous;>>
>He can't astrally project.

<<Certainly not through his own power. But there are ways, such as the
Free Spirit's gateway power, to bring any character into an astral quest.
If he ends up in the place of magic he may be in serious trouble.>>


Again, that's the price you pay.


<<The disadvantages suffered by the Chrome Wiz for his low Magic Rating
are
much reduced compared to a full magician. But what is left leaves
interestin' hooks for a GM to play with. ;-)>>


That would be the idea:)


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 14
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 22:41:31 +0100
|
|On Thursday, July 24, 1997 22:42, John E Pederson[SMTP:lobo1@****.COM]
|wrote:
|
|> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
|
|BZZZT. Thank you for playing. Geasa do *NOT* give you back magic points.
|See p52, Grim II. The only benefit a mage gets from Geasa is the ability to
|initiate. If he gives up on geasa, he may *never* initiate.

BZZZZZZZT! <Even louder than the last one>

This is using an example of Steve Kensons thoughts on updating the Geasa
rules....

Thank you for playing... Better luck next time.
You have won todays booby prize, an apple core....


--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 15
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 1997 22:50:43 +0100
|>Which I realized when I got to the top of my mailbox (I read threads
|>in reverse alphabetical order)
|>
|Don't ya hate that? I made a similar mistake... luckily, we have poor
|mailers to blame it all on....

Can't you set the sort order for time and date instead of alphabetically?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 16
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 17:35:34 +0100
|
|On Sun, 27 Jul 1997 14:31:57 +1000 Chris Maxfield <cmaxfiel@****.ORG.AU>
|writes:
|
|<<And now for the down side. All the following actions/abilities are
|rated against a magician's magic rating and are only considered in that
|light. I've listed those for which I believe the Chrome Wiz's geasa will
|not work or are simply not relevant:
|
|a. the Chrome Wiz's ability to banish spirits is very poor;>>
|
|As it should be, since he's not actually a mage.

Why isn't he a mage?

|<<b. the Chrome Wiz's ability to command uncontrolled spirits is very
|poor;>>
|
|Again, he's not a mage, I'm sure he would be able to either of those,
|anyway.

Again, why isn't he a Mage?

|<<c. ritual magic maximum sustaining time is frag all if the Chrome Wiz
|is the team leader;5
|d. the astrally projecting Chrome Wiz's ability to pass astral barriers
|is almost non-existent;>>
|
|He can't astrally project, he has astral perception, but astral
|projection. And it's not like he'd be able to spend much time in the
|astral even if he could project...

He could spend anything up to 59 minutes safely. That's time enough for a
lot of things...

|<<e. an initiated Chrome Wiz's Masking is pretty ineffective versus any
|other initiate;>>
|
|That's be the price you pay...

Yep....

|<<g. astral quests are much more dangerous;>>
|
|
|He can't astrally project.

Care to explain that?

|<<h. the Chrome Wiz's risk of foci addiction is serious if he ever uses
|the foci without also using his geasa.>>
|
|Yes and no. He can't actually lose anymore magic, so the worst that could
|happen is another geas (note: I would give this kind of character the
|Focus geas on general principles:)

You can always lose that last magic point and become mundane....
(Something any real mage should be terrified of)
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell | |
|Principal subjects in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
|Comp Sci & Electronics | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 17
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 20:27:59 EDT
On Sun, 27 Jul 1997 17:35:34 +0100 Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
writes:

>Why isn't he a mage?

Since the idea was to abuse the system, I decided it would be more
economical to make him a sorceror with the Astral Edge than to make him a
full mage, especially since the big thing gained by status as a full
magician would have been projection and conjuring (in my experience,
neither have been used to any great extent, usually because sorcery is
faster and more easily understood). With access to the astral plane (if
only through astral perception) the character will have full access to
metamagic (excepting metaplanar projection and great form spirits), which
will get him dispelling, quickening, and anchoring. It also gave me
access to a lot more money (didn't use the point system), to buy cyber
and foci and stuff:) Basically, he isn't a mage because I deemed the
disadvantages to be worth the advantages I could get this way.


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 18
From: George Metz <W0lfstar@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 01:17:34 -0400
In a message dated 97-07-29 20:43:12 EDT, you write:

> It also gave me access to a lot more money (didn't use the point system),
to buy > cyber and foci and stuff:) Basically, he isn't a mage because I
deemed the
> disadvantages to be worth the advantages I could get this way.

This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that in
the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater number of
starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly obtain? I've
got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads to power-gaming,
but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a significant flaw in that I can
have quite a few more spells than a more talented magician.
Also, for those of you who (are crazy enough, IMNSHO, to) allow expenditure
of force points for initiating, and since you can buy more force in the point
generation system, what's your response to a physad blowing build points on
force to start as an initiate?

Wolfstar
Message no. 19
From: "M. Sean Martinez" <ElBandit@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 10:43:31 -0400
Greetings!!!

The point based system is a very lose system that the GM should tailor to
his/her campaign. Come to think of it, the whole companion is like that....

Personally, I will not let my players select their edges and flaws. They earn
them during the game sessions or character background creation. (I had one
too many who tried to argue with me as they attempted to powergame...)

I do not allow force points to be spent on initiation, as it can unbalance
the game.

Of course my campaign is more role playing intensive, and not every street
punk is born with wired 2 or 3 in his body.

-Bandit
Message no. 20
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 07:18:28 -0700
> This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that in
> the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater number of
> starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly obtain? I've
> got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads to power-gaming,
> but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a significant flaw in that I can
> have quite a few more spells than a more talented magician.

And that, perhaps, is the key. A sorceror adept can't do much *except*
cast spells. The time a full mage would spend learning how to conduct a
conjuring ritual is spent... learning spells. The time spent learning
the basics of enchantment are spent.... learning spells. And of course,
the time the full mage would normally spend to learn spells is *also*
spent learning spells.
Everyone seeks to enhance their strengths; the sorceror adepts are no
different.

Now, if you rule that the Conjuror adept *still* gets 30 Force, then he
can go out and buy a nice pile of foci and bond them all... though for
what absolute end I'm not sure, but it is a loophole in the system.

Speaking of Conjuring, neither Enchanters nor Astral Adepts rely on
their Magic Rating either, a situation which could be improved upon.
I'd suggest making the "Reduce Time" test a function of Magic Rating.
Not sure how it can be incorporated into Astral Adeptitude, since
Assensing is pretty straightforward. Maybe have it apply a reduction in
target number (Astral Adepts *should* be better at Assensing than anyone
else.)

Now, I do have a problem with the adept who goes out and buys a megayen
of foci and bonds them all. The problem can usually solved by several
NPC mages and a few ground spells....

> Also, for those of you who (are crazy enough, IMNSHO, to) allow expenditure
> of force points for initiating, and since you can buy more force in the point
> generation system, what's your response to a physad blowing build points on
> force to start as an initiate?

How many out there allow initiation for starting characters? Not many.
Physads, incidentally, don't get the base 30 Force in the build system,
and even allowing for the non-Edge purchase of them (Q: Why have the
somewhat-optional Edge when a somewhat-optional rule allows for it
anyway?) means they have to blow a considerable amount of points on
Initiating for a marginal increase in ability. The more experienced
players won't; the beginners usually end up with a dead character.
Message no. 21
From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 12:18:45 EDT
On Wed, 30 Jul 1997 01:17:34 -0400 George Metz <W0lfstar@***.COM> writes:
<snip>

<<This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that
in the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater
number of starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly
obtain? I've got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads
to power-gaming, but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a
significant flaw in that I can have quite a few more spells than a more
talented magician.>>


How is this a problem? I can have my Sorceror adept who is identical to
your mage in all respects except one: he's adept, not a full magician.
Now, I've got five more build points (plus however many points were spent
on conjuring, enchanting and psychometry) I can spend to put into skills
or spells, representing the fact that I a) only needed to know Magical
Theory and Sorcery and b) thus had lots of time left over to improve on
those areas that I was good at. Check the quote on pg18 of the Grimoire.
Completely fictional (hey, it's a game for Pete's sake:) but also totally
consistent. A Sorceror is going to a bit better at sorcery than the
equivalent magician, a Conjuror better at conjuring, an astral adept
can't be beat on the astral plane, and an enchanter is the best
talismonger you're ever gonna find. You're not going to beat an
elementalist or shamanic adept in his area of expertise, either. That's
the advantage of an adept: he's got a narrower focus, but he's better
within that focus area.


<<Also, for those of you who (are crazy enough, IMNSHO, to) allow
expenditure of force points for initiating, and since you can buy more
force in the point generation system, what's your response to a physad
blowing build points on force to start as an initiate?>>


If he really *wants* to spend all those force points on it, and he can
justify it <EGMG>, then sure, I'll let him. But, hey, I once stated that
if one of my players could ever come up with a background that convinced
me of why his PC Great Dragon was running the shadows, I'd sure as heck
let him do it. Back on the physad: sure, if he wants to spend points he'd
probably get more out of with a weapon focus, he can go right ahead. It
just means that something else will suffer...


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1
Message no. 22
From: TopCat <topcat@***.NET>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 13:08:08 -0500
At sometime, someday, someone wrote:
> This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that in
> the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater number of
> starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly obtain? I've
> got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads to power-gaming,
> but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a significant flaw in that I can
> have quite a few more spells than a more talented magician.

Do you find it odd that under the priority-based system, a sorceror adept
can have significantly more force points at chargen than a mage? They can...

A: Resources & B: Magic vs. A: Magic & B: Resources leads to 15 extra force
points for the sorcerer adept. Don't forget the 600,000 extra nuyen either...

However, in the point-based system, a full mage can have more force points
than a sorcerer if he spends more BPs on force points. Of course, this can
happen in the priority-based system too, but it isn't nearly as customizable
from character to character.

I'm perhaps one of the most outspoken supporters of the point-based system,
but it really does work *that* well. The way that system handles force
points is one of it's greatest strengths (they took force points out of
resources). I could go on about this for days though, I just wanted to make
sure that we all knew that such a situation wasn't limited to the
point-based system. :)
--
Bob Ooton
topcat@***.net
Message no. 23
From: "Wendy Wanders, Subject 117" <KGGEWEHR@******.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 18:13:08 -0500
You wrote:
> This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that in
> the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater number of
> starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly obtain? I've
> got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads to power-gaming,
> but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a significant flaw in that I can
> have quite a few more spells than a more talented magician.

A full magician is not necessarily more talented than an adept, just has the
ability to learn more types of magic... A sorcery adept, with a focus on
spells and nothing else, might certainly excel over a full magigian in number
of force points. Look at the quote about not being able to do as much as some,
but no one is better at what I do (in one of the grimmies).

losthalo
Message no. 24
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 23:49:11 -0400
In a message dated 97-07-30 15:11:22 EDT, mbreton@**.netcom.com (Matb)
writes:

>
> Speaking of Conjuring, neither Enchanters nor Astral Adepts rely on
> their Magic Rating either, a situation which could be improved upon.
> I'd suggest making the "Reduce Time" test a function of Magic Rating.
> Not sure how it can be incorporated into Astral Adeptitude, since
> Assensing is pretty straightforward. Maybe have it apply a reduction in
> target number (Astral Adepts *should* be better at Assensing than anyone
> else.)

Okay, from someone whose fave character is an Enchanter Adept, I can say that
this isn't totally correct. Magic Attribute in Orichalcum is a requirement,
as is in the radical tests. And if you are going for the Shamanic Adept
variation on the Enchanter Adept (say for Creator or Ometeotl-EWG), then the
idea of spending more time on the Astral Plane searching for the correct
astral energies of a given raw material is nice as well.

As for making things better, how about letting Astral Adepts spend their
points like a Physical Adept for a couple of "Edges", say Aptitude (Aura
Reading) or for the Enchanter, Aptitude (Enchanting). It mentions Sorcery
and Combat Skill and Computers, but what about the support skills? Why does
everyone and everything have to be about augmenting the one, how about
augmenting the -ALL- as well.

> Now, I do have a problem with the adept who goes out and buys a megayen
> of foci and bonds them all. The problem can usually solved by several
> NPC mages and a few ground spells....

Or maybe a piano falling on someone's head...just as evil...

> How many out there allow initiation for starting characters? Not many.
> Physads, incidentally, don't get the base 30 Force in the build system,
> and even allowing for the non-Edge purchase of them (Q: Why have the
> somewhat-optional Edge when a somewhat-optional rule allows for it
> anyway?) means they have to blow a considerable amount of points on
> Initiating for a marginal increase in ability. The more experienced
> players won't; the beginners usually end up with a dead character.

If I have someone who is joining a given storyline in progress, and an
initiated mage or adept is an option (depending on the group status and/or
feelings), then allowing for someone to start as Grade 0 (Grade 1 for a
PAdept) isn't so bad. Circumstances would make the ruling.
Message no. 25
From: "Joshua M. Kanapkey" <Wakabout@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 11:55:08 -0400
On 97-07-30, Matb wrote:

<<How many out there allow initiation for starting characters? Not many.
Physads, incidentally, don't get the base 30 Force in the build system,
and even allowing for the non-Edge purchase of them...>>

Which brings me to some questions regarding SRComp:
{{If these questions have been asked and/or answered, please go gently on me,
I've only been on the list a week or so. Thanks.}}

1) Using the Point Build System, does _every_ adept _really_ receive 30 FPs
OR a number of FPs equal to his Magic Rating? (This might be a good idea for
those non-spellcasting adepts, that way those FPs not used cannot be broken
down into BPs.)

2) Is _Day Job_ considered an Edge or a Flaw? I recall seeing it listed both
ways in the book.

3) How many people have come up with new meta-human variants? I have, though
they aren't based on Ethnicity, but fantasy literature. I made up Goblins,
Hobbits, Hobgoblins, and Ogres; before SRComp came out, no less.


Anyway, Thanks and Adieu,
Gimli Gloinson, Decker. (also known as Oshe--long O, long E)
wakabout@***.com
Message no. 26
From: TopCat <topcat@***.NET>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 11:42:29 -0500
At 11:55 AM 7/31/97 -0400, Joshua wrote:
>1) Using the Point Build System, does _every_ adept _really_ receive 30 FPs
>OR a number of FPs equal to his Magic Rating? (This might be a good idea for
>those non-spellcasting adepts, that way those FPs not used cannot be broken
>down into BPs.)

Every adept with the exception of physical adepts receives 30 Force Points.
Physical Adepts receive (magic) number of force points to be distributed for
physad abilities alone. Thus, if physads want to bond something to them,
they have to buy force points.

>2) Is _Day Job_ considered an Edge or a Flaw? I recall seeing it listed both
>ways in the book.

It's a flaw.

>3) How many people have come up with new meta-human variants? I have, though
>they aren't based on Ethnicity, but fantasy literature. I made up Goblins,
>Hobbits, Hobgoblins, and Ogres; before SRComp came out, no less.

Bull's the guy to talk to on that...
--
Bob Ooton
topcat@***.net
Message no. 27
From: George Metz <W0lfstar@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 13:46:33 -0400
In a message dated 97-07-30 20:26:03 EDT, you write:

> > This reminds me. Does anyone besides me think it exceptionally odd that
> in
> > the point system you can have an adept with a significantly greater
number
> of
> > starting force points than a full-blown magician can possibly obtain?
I've
> > got a GM who won't use the point based system(says it leads to power-
> gaming,
> > but I don't see it), but to my mind, this is a significant flaw in that
I
> can
> > have quite a few more spells than a more talented magician.
>
> Do you find it odd that under the priority-based system, a sorceror adept
> can have significantly more force points at chargen than a mage? They
can...
>

WHOOPS!!!! Sorry, I meant the priority-based system... I don't know how that
came out as point-based system, although even there to get comparable stats
and the like you've got 10 less force points available. But, that's what
tweaking is for, I suppose. =)

Wolfstar
Message no. 28
From: George Metz <W0lfstar@***.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 14:01:00 -0400
In a message dated 97-08-01 04:08:30 EDT, you write:

> 1) Using the Point Build System, does _every_ adept _really_ receive 30 FPs
> OR a number of FPs equal to his Magic Rating? (This might be a good idea
for
> those non-spellcasting adepts, that way those FPs not used cannot be
broken
> down into BPs.)

Yuppers, every adept, except physad, gets 30 force points. Which essentially
allows Conjurer Adepts to become Magically Active for free - unless they want
to build an Ally spirit, or initiate, or lots of other fun stuff that the
optional rules allow.

> 2) Is _Day Job_ considered an Edge or a Flaw? I recall seeing it listed
both
> ways in the book.

I've only seen it as a Flaw, but depending on the type of job("Oh, my day
job? I'm a shooting instructor at a local gun club!") I suppose it could be
an edge. The idea is that the job can trip you up in the shadows.

> 3) How many people have come up with new meta-human variants? I have,
though
> they aren't based on Ethnicity, but fantasy literature. I made up Goblins,
> Hobbits, Hobgoblins, and Ogres; before SRComp came out, no less.

I tend to leave metatypes alone; otherwise things get sticky.

Wolfstar

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa), 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!