>Page 132 says that a practitioner must be a member of
>a tradition's core practice, but cannot be a member of
>more than one core practice. I think the most natural
>reading is that, if you join two traditions as a
>practitioner, you are joining two core practices,
>which is forbidden.
>Note that the sentence applies to practitioners, not
>spiritists. So, potentially, you could allow
>practitioners in one tradition to participate in
>another tradition, at the low level of spiritist.
Hmmm. That is problematic. Actually, I believe that spiritists do join the core practice as well. Meaning that I don't think that even the above is possible by a strict reading of what you have above. That is, I think it says somewhere that everybody in a tradition is a member of the core practice of the tradition. So, by this a practitioner cannot be in more than one tradition.
But apparently spiritists can. That is, it seems that as long as one is not a practitioner at all, that one can be a member of as many traditions as will allow them.
This seems like a very odd way to state such a limitation. Why not just say that a practitioner is limited to only one tradition? Is it legalese to avoid contradicting the Independent Practice exception? That is, to avoid making it an exception, they simply say that you can't join a core practice, from which it follows that you can't join any other practice, except for an Independent Practice?
It's internally consistent, however. I mean, if that's the rule, that's the rule. I'm just wondering if something was stated in some way that's having unintentionall consequences?
Rory? Hate to lean on you man, but you're the only guy who knows the intent.
Is there any parallel here with Initiates? I don't recall one, but then I didn't recall the above, either. It would seem somewhat odd to me that Initiates could join cults from other religions and get Affinities from them if practitioners were limited so.
Note that Adepts seem to have no such limitations at all, explicitly (though, again, I may have misread). Though different orders do have their restrictions, sorcerers apparently can use whatever magic they get their grubby paws on. Is that a balance for them being apostate? I see no mechanical problems with a sorcerer becoming an Initiate or practitioner (though I think that those organizations might have strong biases against such a character).
Have I just been putting a blind eye towards such limitations? I mean, I've always been aware of the specific limitations of Devotion, Shamanism, etc, so I didn't think I was biased here.
Powered by hypermail