Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Justin Pinnow <jpinnow@***.IM.MED.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Spell Locks on Mundanes
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 15:44:30 -0400
Rat wrote:

>Marc is correct; the mage who casts the spell must spend the karma to
>bond the lock. The act of spending the karma point is what causes the
>bond to occour.

Actually, the wording in the rules is a little ambiguous on this one. It does
state that the spell must be cast and the karma must be spent simultaneously
(presumeably to prevent re-casting without repaying karma if it doesn't score
the desired number of successes), but the rules never state that only the
casting mage can pay the karma. Now, there is always the possibility that
there is a rules clarification somewhere that I haven't seen, but as far as the
Grimmie and the main book are concerned, I don't think it's clarified any
further than that.

Now, as it's been stated, it may not be a good idea to allow *anyone* (btw: I
do agree that karma isn't freely transferrable, but the rules allow limited
forms of this, however) to pay the karma for a spell lock. It could very
easily lead to lots of spell locks (not that this problem isn't easily solved
in a number of ways...). Perhaps (and this is only a suggestion) only a mage
can pay the karma, but not necessarily the casting mage (still done
simultaneously, of course). Say Joe mage wants an armor spell, but does not
know the spell....he has his contact cast the spell, but he pays for the lock,
and pays the karma point....it's now astrally bound to him....

Just a thought.


Justin :)

_______________________________________________________________
(jpinnow@*****.edu)

Geek Code (version 2.1):

G!>ED d----(d+/d++$) H s-: !g p? au
a23 w+(+++) v?(*)>!v C+(++) U- P? !L
!3 E? N+ K- W+ M+ V+ po---
Y++(+) t+@ 5 !j R+(++) G' tv-- b++>+++
!D B--- e+ u+ h- f? r+(*) N----
Y++

It all starts from within you.

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.