>Me>But Nils's argument was that it was either/or. And that was in
> >response to the question how one can distinguish a common
> >magic feat from a common magic spell etc.
>No, I believe that his argument was that you got X magic from Y sort of
>being.
>Spirits - charms
>Essences - spells
>Daimones - feats
>If somthing is more than one of these, then it seems to stand to reason that
>they could give more than one type.
But he didn't say that something could be more than one of these and I find the concept of labelling something as a spirit/essence, frex, to be hideously unelegant and catergorically pointless.
>And Nils is right,
>it explicitly says the above about where these sorts of magic originate.
In the context of _common_ magic, where does it say these magics originate?
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail