Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Georg Greve <ggreve@*******.HANSE.DE>
Subject: Re: Channeling adept.
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 21:35:39 +0200
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 21:35:36 +0200 (MET DST)

> 1) The power is limited to line o' sight.
> 2) An adept of this type may not be initiated (as of yet I still
> have to write those rules)
> 3) Channeling is a mentaly distressing action, adepts don't
> usualy channel. If you would like to
> base this on robert jordans channelers this aplies only for male chaacters.
> 4) Many chaneling adepts die eather in the womb or in early
> life before they learn to controll th
> e power, this leads to a high respect of channeling adepts as they
> are rare, and they usualy have extreme
> mental fortitute (read int)
> 5) anything else you think of.

I don't see why to invent this adept - it just makes no sense. If you
take this adept he would be a dangerous killer, but nothing else. No
magic pool would help and you can't intercept his abiluty from the
astral - there is no way to protect against it. You could kill
presidents without problems, just buy yourself a pair of good glasses
and sometimes you'll get LOS. This would imbalance the system
badly. If you take the Shadowrun-System, your "Channeling-Adept" would
just be a Sorcerer-Adept with a kick-ass Manabolt (a ManaBolt is
nothing else than taking energy from the astral plane and slamming it
into your target).
So you already got an adept like the one you just invented. And by the
way: There would be absolutely NO FUN in playing this adept. He kills
everyone he sees without problems and gets killed as soon as anyone
sees him coming. So you are either a dangerous socipathic killer or
dead - I can't see the fun in it (roleplaying is still a social
activity - you could only play this character as a strict loner),
because everything he can is killing.

Sorry, but this is just my opinion.

Bye...
Georg

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.