Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Witches
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1993 15:06:59 -0500
Oh Oh . . . I was thinking.....

How could/would you define a 'witch' type of magic wielder? That is, a
person that is using the inherent magic in material components (eye of newt,
wing of bat, blood of virgin, etc) to wield magic as opposed to acting as
a conduit for Astral powers.

Yes, we know that FASA thinks messing with the occult is 'bad', so we
need to define it ourselves, but is this type of character sufficiently
different from magicians or shamans ro qualify as a seperate form of
magic, or would a witch in this sense be nothing more that a 'burned out
mage' forced to use foci and other materials to wield magic?

Comments? Idea? Flames?

{[> Robert A. Hayden ____ <[} Question Authority
{[> \ /__ <]} -=-=-
{[> aq650@****.INS.CWRU.Edu \/ / <]} Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key
{[> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu \/ <]} # include <std_disclaimer.h>
-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GSS d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 2
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Witches (fwd)
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1993 15:34:58 -0500
Sent to just me...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 93 14:32:12 MDT
From: Jim Tyler <pherble@*****.com>
To: "Robert A. Hayden" <owner-shadowrn@*****.nic.SURFnet.nl>
Subject: Re: Witches

I would probably go with the burnt out mage, or maybe a hermetic mage with
a geas that they need to use a formula/medicine lodge thingy.

Jim Tyler
CNS/Internet Customer Service
pherble@*****.com
Message no. 3
From: Ben Acosta <BACOSTA1@*****.BITNET>
Subject: Witches
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1993 16:20:23 CDT
>Hmm..this has potential. Anybody for going outside the bounds of the already
>wrritten rules and define a THIRD type of magic?

Actually, it would be a fourth type. In an issue of White Wolf, there was an
article called "Magic Over Bourbon Street" which gave rules for Voodoo and
Hougan characters for Shadowrun. It was pretty interesting. The rules
included a new class of spirits which only houngan's can summon: The Loa. Also
included were a lot of neat spells like Full Stomach which makes a targets
stomach fill up with bugs and has it coming out of his mouth (the target takes
no damage but is very freaked out and gets a major penalty to his actions if
he fails a Willpower roll.) Another interesting spell it had was change sex,
which is a great way to inconvenience someone you don't like but don't hate
enough to kill. It also makes a great disguise.

All in all, I think the system was a viable addition to the Shadowrun game and
successfully captured the flavor of Voodoo Magic. I don't have the Issue with
me so I don't know which issue it is. I can find out later and post the issue
number if any one is interested.


P.S. I was wrong. Voodoo would be the fourth type of magic. I forgot about
Druids.

+-------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
:Benjamin J. Acosta : "When dog bites man, it's not a story. :
:BACOSTA1@*****.UA.EDU : When man bites dog, it's a story. :
:Science Fiction Fan : And when man and dog slug it out for :
:Comic Book Reader : twelve issues and the dog turns out :
:Role Playing Gamer : to be a mutant and Wolverine has a :
:Renaissance Man : guest appearance, It's a Marvel story!" :
:THIS SPACE FOR RENT : --A saying in the Marvel Comics Bullpen :
+-------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
Message no. 4
From: The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU>
Subject: Witches
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1993 18:13:42 -0500
I thought the VooDoo system in White Wolf was a bit Superfluous. Srun Magic
is open and flexible to account for just about any magic myth you can think
of, including witches. Do we need a witch archetype? No. Can we make one
anyway? Yes.

It ssems to me that the focus has been on the Witch's use of materials to
work her magic. Fine, that's a mage or shaman with fethishes and foci, you
say. But what about a witch who MUST use such toold? That's a witch with
a Geas. Hmmmm. . .but how about a witch who must use such tools without a
Geas? I believe what we're talking about is, for lack of a better term, a
Focus Adept. . .someone who can only work magic when using Foci.

Now wouldn't you know it, I left my books at home today? So here I have 5 hours
all by myself to work on something like that, and no reference material. If
someone beats me to the punch, fine. Another thing way of defining a witch
would be as a variation of an Enchanting Adept.

Well, have at it.

J Roberson
Message no. 5
From: Andrew Freese <AFREESE@****.UMKC.EDU>
Subject: Re: witches
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1993 20:13:31 -0500
Do get too mad at FASA about that one!
It the religious nut cases that have made such things automatically brain
warping when associated with RPGs

VY
Drew
Message no. 6
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Witches
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1993 10:41:01 -0500
On Sun, 3 Oct 1993, The Deb Decker wrote:

> It ssems to me that the focus has been on the Witch's use of materials to
> work her magic. Fine, that's a mage or shaman with fethishes and foci, you
> say. But what about a witch who MUST use such toold? That's a witch with
> a Geas. Hmmmm. . .but how about a witch who must use such tools without a
> Geas? I believe what we're talking about is, for lack of a better term, a
> Focus Adept. . .someone who can only work magic when using Foci.

That's an awful term, but I suppose as good as any. If you look at
'witch' in the mythopoeic sense, you will see that these soothsayers have
often had access to what would be termed in SR sense to be the astral space.

One thought I had was that if a witch lays a curse (which witches did a
lot of), what it actually involves is summoning a spirit or elemental and
then the conjured/summon critter is the one that makes sure the curse is
carried out. For example, if Bruhilda (heh) the witch curses me with the
inability to ever fire my weapon straight for three moons, for the next
three months I have a spirit or elemental hanging out with me who always
at the last second bats my gun out of the direction I want to fire.
Lifting the curse actually involves getting a mage or someong to dispell
the malicious spirit.

If course, if I curse you with a nose that will grow whenever you lie (ye
olde pinnochio syndrome), I actually summon a manipulation spirit who
causes your nose to grow.

The hardest part about this magic system is deciding exactly how witch
magic would work. The witches of legends had very very little inherent
magical power. They would almost always have to rely on herbs and rocks
and animal parts to concoct a spell, although periodically they would
whip something up off the cuff in an emergency.

--------
*ding* <-- that's a thought

Let's pretend that a withc has a magic rating of 1/3 essence, round up.
This give the maximum magic rating of a witch of two. Now, whenever a
witch casts a spell, the maximum level of the spell is equal to the
witches magic rating + modifiers for materials.

Now, each and every spell MUST be cast as a seperate entity and
seperately considered (ie, if I cast invisibility with certain materials
one time, and the next time I have different materials, the spell must be
refigured).

Witches are going to have little combat use because they have to fumble
with materials for nearly every spell, but where they can come into play
is their ability to concoct powerful spells that take time and expensive
materials.

Of course, the difficulty is coming up with a table or way to quantify
materials. Each spell must have components in it that are somehow
related to the spell, either through actual use or through legend.

For example, if I wanted to concoct a potion of invisibility, I might
need such things as:
Blood of Jellyfish
Mountain Spring Water
Crushed Charcoal (a purifier)

Somehow, each of those parts would fit into the spell as some + to the
rating of the spell.

Perhaps all witch spells must have an animal, vegetable and mineral
component to it, or CAN have all three, or something.

I'm becoming confused, so I'm going to stop writing. Was anything I was
saying making sense?

{[> Robert A. Hayden ____ <[} Question Authority
{[> \ /__ <]} -=-=-
{[> aq650@****.INS.CWRU.Edu \/ / <]} Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key
{[> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu \/ <]} # include <std_disclaimer.h>
-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GSS d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 7
From: The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU>
Subject: Witches
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 1993 12:19:46 -0500
>Lighten up and go with the convention? Oh, and while we're bringing up words
>to call people, let's bring back nigger, kike, spic, wop, Christ-killer,

You don't need to bring them back. They are, unfortunately, stil used by
members of our society. Furthermore, those terms are not so intertwined
with popular and classical mythology, as is the case with the term warlock.


>I've made it very clear that yes, I understand that this is a game world,
>and that it's different from ours, but people would not tolerate the
>language I cited above in a game and I flatly will not tolerate the language
>that Carter is advocating.

Ask me which game you're playing. I know a historian here running, for lack
of a better term, a GURPS Slavery campaign, with the characters (black & white)
operating as agents of the Underground Railroad. They face the first of those
terms quite often, in real life as well.

Furthermore, we are all aware that such terms are offensive to many people.
That is not the case with the term Warlock. Now that you have educated us, I
don't think it's too much to expect from others restraint from using the term.
Mage and Magician will do nicely.

Now, for the real deal:

>That's an awful term, but I suppose as good as any. If you look at
>'witch' in the mythopoeic sense, you will see that these soothsayers have
>often had access to what would be termed in SR sense to be the astral space.

I was thinking of Astral Perception, but not Projection.

As for the definition of a curse, I would call it a spell, not a spirit
service. Probably a variation of Locking or Quickening a spell, so that
the witch wouldn't have to sustain the spell over whatever period of time.

>The hardest part about this magic system is deciding exactly how witch
>magic would work. The witches of legends had very very little inherent
>magical power. They would almost always have to rely on herbs and rocks
>and animal parts to concoct a spell, although periodically they would
>whip something up off the cuff in an emergency.

Which is why I called them Focus Adepts (or Fetish Adepts if you prefer).
They are magicians, but limited in the sense that they require tools to
work most if not all of their magic.

I think we're coming back to the fact that you can emulate a witch with
the existing rules. But we can also come up with something different. I
love thi--it's how game companies make their money, by publishing things
that you don't need but which are nice to have anyway. :)
--------
How about saying the witch has a full Magic rating, but has to use materials?
Sort of saying she has Magic 0 but is technically active; she must uses
materials in order to work her magic.


>Now, each and every spell MUST be cast as a seperate entity and
>seperately considered (ie, if I cast invisibility with certain materials
>one time, and the next time I have different materials, the spell must be
>refigured).

Does this mean Karma must be spent to re-learn each version of the spell?
Or just that I have to use the same materials each time?

>Witches are going to have little combat use because they have to fumble
>with materials for nearly every spell, but where they can come into play
>is their ability to concoct powerful spells that take time and expensive
>materials.

I agree. In this sense you could call them "Ritual Sorcery Adepts"

>Of course, the difficulty is coming up with a table or way to quantify
>materials. Each spell must have components in it that are somehow
>related to the spell, either through actual use or through legend.

ACK! Let's stay away from tables, please. I'd like to keep this down to
the extent of other adepts; just a few paragraphs of rules, otherwise the
same as full mages/


J Roberson
Message no. 8
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Witches
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1993 20:54:47 -0700
You know guys, it sounds to me that the witches your aiming for are Hermetic
Mages who buy all their spells with fetishes. No need for an entirely new form
of magic to cover them.

See Ya in Shadows, "I can count the number of days I've worked
Jason J Carter since graduation on one hand." - ME!
The Nightstalker Carter@***.EDU

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Witches, 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!