> > > method; to wit, sacrifice. It doesn't intuit for me that
a "common-
> > > concentrated" person would be better at such a form of
sacrifice than
> > > a theism-concentrated person -- _and_ simultaneously better at
certain
> > > types of ecstatic worship than an animist, etc, what's more.
>
> > You seem to come to an understanding of this in the next section
but
> > just to make sure, someone who concentrates in theism *can* use
common
> > feats.
>
> I would still be skeptical that the CMer would be _better_ off than
the
> theist, which is specifically what you were suggesting, though.
>
>
> > The problem is that *most* religions frown on this. It's required
> > to get rid of all magic that's not derived from your god to
become a
> > devotee so this would include shedding CM feats. Again, though,
I'd
> > probably make an exception for someone devoting to one of the 7M
and
> > keeping a CM feat they provide, for instance.
>
> Sure, but such stuff is generally going to be explicable in a pretty
> readily understandable 'social' level, I'd suggest, without having
to
> resort to much in the way of Deep Cosmological Otherworldly Matters.
I believe that is what we have been trying to suggest.
I view 'Common Magic' the same way I view folk magic. Its "The Stuff We've Always Done Because Its Useful."
> > Technically, you'd concentrate in innate magic, not common magic
>
> ... which is the very distinction I suggested, a couple of posts
ago...
>
Most concentrations are used to gain better access to Otherworldbased Magic (Sorcery, Theist and Animist). You _can_ concentrate your magic around Talents as well - at which point they start acting as full fledged abilities rather than 'augment only.' You trust to yourself and your own magic.
> > although Selfrock Teaching is a method of concentrating in all
common
> > magic.
>
> That I don't really 'get', though in all fairness I'll wait until I
> get to read it, before shootin' ma mouth awf on the topic.
Probably a good idea. I'd hate to see things run away into wild speculation and recrimination before anyone's even read what is being commented on...
Selfrock teaching lets you concentrate YOUR local brand of Common Magic. Whatever the source/type. But that's _all_ you can use. This could be a good way to reflect some of the wild-and-wolly adventurer types. Griselda, frex.
> > From a game-mechanic point of view, there really isn't much of a
> > difference. From a world pov, there's a lot (where the spirit
comes from
> > and how it's obtained).
>
> That sounds pretty much backwards, I have to say. In both cases
the method
> of obtaining it is ecstatic worship; in both cases the result is a
charm
> (which I'm assuming is a game-world meaningful distinction in some
sense).
> The distinction seems to be one of the Ultimate Nature of the being
> granting the magic, which I wouldn't go so far to say is going to be
> unknowable, but is certainly going to be beyond the immediate level
> of interest of knowledge of most "end-users".
The distinction is how wide spread and how accepted it is. Tradtions are very spirit-o-centric and have the problem of 'being different.' Common magic is just that - commonly accepted by the locals.
"What's that?"
"Its a fetish I got from Drumming Always Thunder. You know, that
crazy old shaman who lives up in the hills."
"I don't want that thing in the house."
"What's that?" "Its a lucky charm. Aunt Hildy made it." "That was nice of her."
> > > Granted it equally establishes the same thing is possible
> > > with Feats, clearly very different from RQ in that respect. (I
imagine
> > > that common magic Spells are still pretty rare in Sartar.)
>
> > For PCs, probably. For "Joe Sartar", probably not. Mixed magic is
> > "inefficient" from an improvement pov (paying double can really
eat up
> > those HP!) but mixed magic is also very useful. [...]
>
> Emphasis on "Spells". Though I'm just guessing, in any case.
Spells, yep. Or in this case, spell-sticks (I like the analogy to the norse magician with his rune carved bundle of sticks). But again, since common magic is local in origin, its considered 'safe.'
Analogy - its like a farmer leaving a bowl of milk out for the faeries or not cutting the last tussok of grain. The church may frown on it as a pagan superstition but for the farmer, its just good policy...
> Cheers,
> Alex.
Jeff
Powered by hypermail