Re: Re: Initiates and Devotees

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:12:30 +0100


On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 09:01:34PM -0000, Rob wrote:
> > Basis for this assertion?

> Page 108 HQ rule book

Nowhere on that page does it say or imply any such thing, that I can find.  

> > Concentrating theism saying nothing about giving up 'common magic'.
> > It says you give up _talents_ (i.e. innate magic). (As well as
> > sorcery and animist magic.)
 

> Further, the flesh man common magic are ALL talents.

... and so?

> Talents are not innate magic per se (in the sense glowing red eyes or
> being a Hsunchen)

In the sense the rulebook uses (ignoring the disclarification of the term perpetrated in re 'natural magic'), they _are_ innate magic. What else do you imagine the whole section I just quoted on "Innate magic concentration" is banging on about?

Powered by hypermail