| From: | SHADE <MFN6430@*****.TAMU.EDU> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | adepts and metamagic |
| Date: | Wed, 30 Jun 1993 12:46:05 -0500 |
my Grim with me. Shamantic adepts as well as elementalists can perceive
astrally and can therefore use most of the metamagic. Only centering for
spellcasting requires astral perception. Dispelling does not require
astral perception. Anchoring doesn't either, but the item must be enchanted
and I wouldn't trust a talismonger to do it.
As for conjuring adepts with low magic attribute. Dispelling is almost
certain to cause physical drain. They cant use shielding because it is based
on magic pool which they don't have. This leaves the adept with the centering
to drain and masking. Not too unbalancing in my opinion. The other adepts
have similar drawbacks: Sorcery because they don't have perception they can't
quicken, or center to spellcasting, or anchor without enchanting which they
can't get. They can shield and dispel assuming they know some spell is
active because they can't see it. While this makes them fairly strong it
is still not nearly as strong as a full mage.
Shamantic adepts and elementalists have their fair share of problems
Elementalists can't even get health spells. The earth elementalist is the
only one with any variety of spells to choose from. Shamantics are better, but
they loose their totum bonuses and are basically stuck to one type of spirit.
These types of adepts also loose in the areas of meta magic in that they are
not as deversified in what they can do.
In short while adepts look appealing the price they pay for half-magics
barely makes up for the loss of money or skills given to street samurai, or the
versatility of a full fledged mage. These are only my opinions, yours may
differ, but those are the facts as I see them.
Isbin and Thurmite
<hermetic mage:his ally>
