Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: Steve Kenson <TalonMail@***.COM>
Subject: [SR3] Geasa
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 10:13:58 -0400
Hoi, fellow listmembers, it's me again. Got another idea to run by you. I
know it is difficult to discuss ideas and changes to the game system in a
vacuum, since one change often requires changes elsewhere to compensate. I
appreciate the feedback from the list and it's given me some valuable
viewpoints on ideas proposed so far.

The latest idea involves geasa. In 1st edition SR, geasa were part of the
process of losing Magic attribute points, making it more difficult to use
magic the more Magic you lost. A burn-out could still cast formidable spells,
however, because the Resistance of the spell was based on Sorcery rather than
spell Force. In 2nd edition, with the shift from Sorcery to Force, a burn-out
is very limited in casting effective spells. A burned-out mage with a Magic
of 2 cannot cast a spell with a Force higher than 2 without risking physical
drain: a Force 2 spell isn't likely to affect many targets. The burnout could
currently use fetishes and exclusive modifers along with foci to improve the
Magic rating and spell Force, of course.

But it seems to me geasa are something of a double-whammy in SR2. In SR1
spellcasting ability didn't greatly diminish with loss of Magic attribute;
most of the Magic 6 magicians were throwing Force 1-2 spells themselves to
take advantage of lower Drain. In SR2 when you lose Magic, not only are your
spells generally less effective, but you also have to do more to even make
the magic happen in the first place.

So, how about this: instead of the present system, allow magical characters
who lose a Magic attribute point to take a Geas *to get the Magic point
back.* As long as the character follows the geas, their Magic rating remains
what it was. If they break the geas, the lose the use of that point of Magic
until the geas is obeyed again. Each Magic point lost would require a
seperate geas (unlike the present system where a geas is required for every 2
points lost).

For example, our burned-out mage with the Magic rating of 2 has four geasa:
incantation, gesture, talisman and time (night). When he casts spells at
night and can get all of his chants, gestures and trinkets in a row, his
Magic attribute is 6, but has has to (as SR1 put it) "fumble with amulets,
powders and chants to cast a spell he once invoked with a flick of his
fingers." When he casts spells during the day, he can still fulfill three of
his geasa, raising his Magic to 5, but the time geas is broken and its point
of Magic cannot be used.

One advantage to this system is it would allow Magic loss to work more the
same for magicians and physical adepts. A physad could likewise take a geas
on a lost Magic point, applying the geas to 1 point-worth of their powers.
This works like a normal physad geas (from Awakenings) except, instead of a
cost-break, the adept gets to keep the Magic point and the powers as long as
the geas is unbroken.

An initiate who takes a geas ordeal essentially accepts a limit on the bonus
Magic point provided by the initiation. If the initiate follows the geas,
they get the Magic point, if they break it, they lose it until they live up
to the geas again.

This system would make burnout magicians more viable as magical characters
(perhaps too viable). Natrually, a character whose Magic drops to 0 or less
still becomes a mundane. A character can also choose to reject his geasa, in
which case he permanently loses the Magic points associated with them, and
cannot ever take other geasa, the character is on the path to burning out.

Naturally, one of the disadvantages is changing the existing system. I would
like to know what everything thinks about this and what the possible
ramifications might be. Remember, none of this is written in stone (or even
in mud, at this point). We're just tossing around ideas. Mike can (and may)
still decide the only things the SR2 magic system needs fixed are spell locks
and grounding (his personal pet peeves).

Stick to the shadows,
Steve

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.