Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

From: John E Pederson <lobo1@****.COM>
Subject: Re: The Chromium Mage (was: [SR3] Geasa)
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 22:34:11 EDT
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997 21:43:25 -0700 Michael Paff <mikepaff@***.COM>
writes:
>>Okay, here goes (I used rules _as_written_, not necessarily as
>intended,
>>and did not limit myself to the main book:)
>>
>> With geasa, Magic Rating is a full 6 (8) :)
>>
>Which 5 geasa did you plan for this character?


Well, I was figuring on Incantation and Gesture, Talisman (one of the
foci, most likely:) Domain (or Time, one or the other) and probably he
winds up with the Focus Geas from Awakenings (what with the various
foci:)


>>BIOWARE
>>---------
>>Cerebral Booster 1
>>Trauma Damper
>>
>An official ruling needs to be made as to how the Trauma Damper
>affects
>spellcasters (does it offset drain, is there any risk to Magic like
>stimpatches). Hopefully it will be addressed in SR3.


In the meantime, it's the single most useful piece of bioware for a
magician:):) With the possible exception of the Cerebral Booster (the
only thing on earth that boosts Astral Quickness:)


>>I don't know that the Chromium Mage there is all that munch
>(powerful,
>>but nearly crippled by the low physical attributes), but that's what
>I
>>came up with. I would have sprung for a Panther Cannon:) but I was on
>a
>>budget, and really wanted the foci:):)
>>
>On the subject of foci, with the variable Magic attribute that mages
>would have under the proposed change, which value is used to determine
>focus addiction?


Well, you could go the complicated route and rule that it's based on the
current one:) So that the moment he misses that 5th geas <EGMG>


--
-Canthros
I had rather believe all the fables in the legends and the Talmud
and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind.
--Francis Bacon
http://members.aol.com/canthros1

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.