Magic in a Champions game? [Archive] - HERO Games Discussion Boards

RDU Neil

Feb 28th, '03, 09:24 AM

Magic is very important in my campaign. It appears quite a bit... and for that reason, I've gone to great lengths to keep it from being "just another SFX."

For a long time, I dissuaded magical characters, because most folks start out with the "Magic is just my excuse to have a list of every power in the book." Rarely did people explore the concept of magic as arcane knowledge, and that it works by different rules than the rest of the universe, and that the use of it should ALWAYS come at a cost. At best, some folks played it up as just another arcane "science" so it had structure to it like "Light powers" or "water powers" have a conceptual structure.

Eventually though, the players began to accept my main "flavah" idea for magic, in that it needed to be something "off"... something "weird"... something "creepy and dangerous" for it to FEEL like magic, as opposed to just another superpower.

Lately, I've come up with an idea that would introduce "magic" as a new type of power set... based on the "mental powers" concept.

The idea is this... mental powers are scary in a supers campaign, because they affect the player in a different way, often to which thay have no or limited defenses. You get great reactions to charcters when facing a mentalist, because they are truly "other."

I want magic to feel the same way. Sure you can use drains and ego attacks and EBs... and give them the SFX "Magic" That should always be an option... but what if you added in a set of powers called Magic Blast... Magic Control... Magic Defense, etc. Just like Ego Blast can only be defended by Mental Defense... the Magic Blast could only be blocked by Magic Defense. This simple construction, which changes nothing of the rules, and is just a matter of building some new powers... gives a fifth dimension to combat. Right now you have Energy, Physical, Mental and whatever the label is for drains/transfers/transforms. If Magic had it's own power set, it would be scary and unique as well, just like Mental powers are.

Mighty Man can change the course of rivers, but needs Brain Boy to defeat the minions of PSI... 'cause the guy has no Mental Defense. That is an important "flavah" element in Champions.

Well, Ultra Gal can beat off alien invasions with one hand behind her back... but against DEMON... well, that is best handled by Lady Dark, Mistress of Secrets... 'casue Ultra Gal can't defend against Magic.

YMMV on this idea... I realize... but for those of you who might want to take magic away from the the "it's just another SFX" concept, which really rankles me, this might be a way.

Edsel

Feb 28th, '03, 09:38 AM

Magic is very common in our champions game. My own character, Enigma, is a super-mage. I have a couple of mystical enemies and contacts in the mystic world. Currently Morgan LeFay has been relased from a centuries-long imprisonment and has picked up some lackies, such as Black Paladin, and so there is at least one mystical supervillan group.

Most magic in our campaign use VPP. My own character is one of the few who does not have the limitation Known Spells Only. All magic requires skill rolls to use and all of it generally costs END to use.

Hermit

Feb 28th, '03, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?
1. Quite often, not as much as High Tech, but still quite often. It can be quite popular as a source of powers.

2. The answer to both is yes. :) There is a structure to it depending ON the SFX of the magic. Different forms of magic may have different rules. Voo Doo (Houdon? I can't spell the proper term) will have a different feel from a modern Wicca's mystic super's spells... and might have different restrictions, for example.

Derek Hiemforth

Feb 28th, '03, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by EvilGM
1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?
2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx? It appears in virtually every game, as one of the PC's is a sorceress, and another is a demon. However, because the game is really a straightforward supers game, it's treated more-or-less like any other SFX. If the campaign was more magic-centric, that would change.

Superskrull

Feb 28th, '03, 04:54 PM

It wouldn't be the same without magic. I love using the stuff but I tend to at least subconsciously divide it into various categories. So far, almost all of the PC magic has either been empowerment or artifacts but there are several NPC mages running around in my world as well. I've got a player who is just starting out now with a mage. however. Rather than have him just design some monstrosity I can say no to, he asked me how I wanted to make it fit in. Fortunately, I've got just the villain to play off his style of magic, so I fed him some history and structures and he's happy.

JumperPrime

Feb 28th, '03, 05:18 PM

Contrary to what seems to be the majority of Champions games, the Global Guardians universe, a shared PBEM universe containing two dozen campaigns, one of which I expect to be joining soon, has absolutely ZERO magic. The Global Guardians universe has everything else, though. Metahumans, flying cars, fusion power, characters from alternate realities, time travellers, sentient robots, sentient apes, even aliens(one alien race, anyway, colonists from a dying planet whose ship suffered an in-flight disaster long before reaching Earth)

Magic is strictly disallowed though. The supernatural does not exist in the Global Guardians universe. Period. No magic, no ghosts, no gods, nothing that can't be explained by technology or the metagene.

Richard Logue

Feb 28th, '03, 05:19 PM

I've stolen a concept or two from 7th Sea and Deadlands to help me create my Champions world. Essentially, "magic" is an underlying force that allows powers to exist. Its also a corruption that can lead to more and more villains. Sort of the darkside is easier, more seductive routine. My players haven't hit on this yet, but there is a sizable amount of heroes who have turn villainous over the years.

However, I'm attempting to ease these ideas into the campaign slowly so as to draw it out. And then when the players start to put things together they can discover that, although the corruption gave them their powers, they can use those powers to try to correct the world and make it the way its probably supposed to be.

Anyway, that's the extremely short form version of magic in my world. Its present and it greatly effects things. But it hasn't made a large impact in the players' perspectives yet.

Richard

BarryB

Feb 28th, '03, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

It appears rarely. I can't speak for those who run scenarios in the current campaign, but I don't run many magic scenarios because it just doesn't fit with the campaign origin/theme/background. Incidentally, the campaign is a four-color one with some realism.

2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?
Just another sfx.

Law Dog

Feb 28th, '03, 09:10 PM

Magic is one of those things that makes me take pause in a supers game. On one hand, I've got no problem with characters like Captain Marvel where his powers seem to be standard super type, but have a magic base. On the other hand, I get a bit tetchy when somebody want to play a caster who is basically just one big VPP. I really don't mind characters like Doctor Strange or Zatanna because they both seem to fit within the genre. But I've found that some folks aren't creative enough or genre familiar enough to design such a character and play within the conventions of the way magic usually works in a superhero universe.

Thirdbase

Mar 1st, '03, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

Virtually every run of every campaign, as the shared universe that my gaming group has a long standing tradition of magic use.

Originally posted by EvilGM
2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?

There is quite a bit of structure. The universe has a "Sorceror Supreme" type that is in San Francisco. He runs a school that has taught most of the PC mages in the world.
A friend had created a magic system for his fantasy campaign and it pretty much became the standard for all of the campaigns.

Tamashii2000

Mar 1st, '03, 03:53 AM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?

1 - One of my players runs a clone of a certian amazon so her lasso means magic shows up each game, but as a GM i rarely bring it in otherwise. I don't have anythign against it, its just my current storylines are all Techonlogical based.

2- As I don't have much of it past the lasso, I realy haven't developed it much, but should a storyline crop up with magic in it or a new character that uses spells be suggested.. I would definity create different versions and schools of magic.

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 1st, '03, 08:14 AM

I don't allow magic or magical characters in my campaigns since the PCs are supposed to be the good guys and magic is by definition evil and demonic. You can't use the powers of darkness to produce good results.

Graviton

Mar 1st, '03, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?

1) I thought it was rare, until this thread got me thinking about it. I have a winged brick whose powers are magic-based, my wife runs a Cherokee mutant/shaman, my step-daughter runs the mutant/shaman's daughter, and another player has a new PC who's an extra-dimensional witch. That player also has a Dark Champions PC who wears a mask dripping with voodoo magic. All that magic and nobody's got a VPP. (The GM pats himself on the back. ;) )

2) It's for the most part just another SFX, but it's tightly controlled by concept. The winged brick was created by demonic magic, the mutant/shaman characters are mystical/natural magic, the Dark Champs PC is voodoo, and the ED witch is medeival dark arts. It hasn't really come up before, but I would rule those are distinct SFX, rather than treat them all as one broad "magical" SFX.

We did create an entire magical system for our FH campaign under 4th, both secular and religious magic. We haven't upgraded that to 5th yet, and likely won't. It would take forever and we're pretty much supers exclusively.

Blue Angel

Mar 2nd, '03, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
I don't allow magic or magical characters in my campaigns since the PCs are supposed to be the good guys and magic is by definition evil and demonic. You can't use the powers of darkness to produce good results.

Actually the original European pagan concept of magic was as a force for good. It was used for healing, blessing crops and was pretty much in tune with nature. Using magic (witchcraft) for evil was supposed to result in suffering three times as much as you inflicted: the three-fold law. It was a certain religion that convinced the masses that all magic was evil. Which was a good excuse for raping and murdering innocent people that just happened to have different beliefs.

Beside, who else better to combat black magic than practitioners of white magic? Anyone trying to deny the good guys the powers of light is by definition evil and demonic.

...Activates smiting deflection shield.

Law Dog

Mar 2nd, '03, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by Blue Angel
It was a certain religion that convinced the masses that all magic was evil. Which was a good excuse for raping and murdering innocent people that just happened to have different beliefs.

Your argument is fairly uninformed and biased and shows a poor understanding of the actual events that were taking place. You might want to try to take an actual history or religion class or at least read a book or two on the subject before prattling off pop cultural myths.

The thing I try to stress in my students is not to fall into the groupthink trap that most humans seem to. Get educated and informed before embarassing yourself citing nonsense.

Blue Angel

Mar 2nd, '03, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by Law Dog
Get educated and informed before embarassing yourself citing nonsense.

My point exactly. The unnamed body was so good vilifying any differing views that even in this day some holds them as undisputable truth.

Being European, I am in a position to have an opinion on the matter. There is a whole other world of history that you don't usually read about in NA. The things our ancestors did to each other...

Any way, we don't need to be so serious here.

The point was that Magic=Evil is like saying Knowledge=Evil, or Role-playing=Evil. I remember in the seventies when it was believed that Role-playing was a front for devil worship - especially that evil D&D.

Law Dog

Mar 2nd, '03, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Blue Angel

Being European, I am in a position to have an opinion on the matter. There is a whole other world of history that you don't usually read about in NA. The things our ancestors did to each other...

Actually, I did some of my post-graduate studies at Oxford, which if I remember correctly is in Europe.

An uniformed opinion is just his side of worthless. And again, you are just rambling off publically held misconception.

Blue Angel

Mar 2nd, '03, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by Law Dog
Actually, I did some of my post-graduate studies at Oxford, which if I remember correctly is in Europe.

An uniformed opinion is just his side of worthless. And again, you are just rambling off publically held misconception.

Please keep the flames down a little.

Which part, specifically, are you saying is a misconception?

lemming

Mar 2nd, '03, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by Blue Angel
Please keep the flames down a little.

Which part, specifically, are you saying is a misconception?

Probably that if one is in North America, that they don't have an appreciation for history, etc...

At least that's how this North American read it. But then again, I've got a thick skin. :cool:

Blue Angel

Mar 2nd, '03, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by lemming
Probably that if one is in North America, that they don't have an appreciation for history, etc...

At least that's how this North American read it. But then again, I've got a thick skin. :cool:

You are right on that part. I apologize, and thick skin appreciated for keeping a civil discussion.

Actually I live in NA now so obviously it must be a great place to live. Though I am a little farther north.

I was hoping to get a response on my original reply to this post. The part when the flames first started erupting.

Did I mention the part about the smiting deflector?

Law Dog

Mar 2nd, '03, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Blue Angel
You are right on that part. I apologize, and thick skin appreciated for keeping a civil discussion.

Actually I live in NA now so obviously it must be a great place to live. Though I am a little farther north.

I was hoping to get a response on my original reply to this post. The part when the flames first started erupting.

Did I mention the part about the smiting deflector?

No flames, only a statement of fact. Again, I state, you are siting public misconception. Do you have some sort of reputable source for your analysis or not? What you are citing now is modern myth and revisionist history. In no academic circle will you find that such an argument is held anymore. You go on to state a definitive goal of "a certain religion" which you can neither prove or validate. In fact, certain arms of the early church came to the defense of accused witches which were being tried by the courts in countries such as The Netherlands and Denmark, when the people were being accused of things such as ruining crops via magicks.

Fact - the widespread persecution for witchcraft never happened. The events that actually happened were not notorious because they were typical of the times, but because they were exceptional. Same reason why folks will mention Jack the Ripper when talking about serial killing, when Jack's body count was amatuerish compaired to modern day monsters like Pedro Alonso Lopez or Lucas & Toole.

ZootSoot

Mar 2nd, '03, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by EvilGM
A couple of questions for you:

1) How often does magic appear in your Champions game?

2) Is there a structure to it, or is it just like any other sfx?

There are three basic approaches to magic in any Hero system game:

1. It's a special effect than can explain any power set. In Champions this is the easiest route (it is pretty easy in other games, but it does give characters with magic a tremendous advantage over those who don't.

2. A single specific system of magic, encompassing specific skills and powers that interacxt in a specific way. This works pretty well in Fantasy Hero games, it provides a way to measure relative power of mages and limits their power so it can be matched by non-magic users. This is a little inflexible for Champions however, particularly because these limits now exist for mages and for no one else.

3. My favorite method for Champions is to develop a few different forms of 2 above for NPC mages and insist that PC mages either utilize one of those systems or design their own. The limitations of 2 exist, but there is variety and encouragement for characters to develop abilities that are not magic based.

ZootSoot

Mar 2nd, '03, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Blue Angel
Actually the original European pagan concept of magic was as a force for good. It was used for healing, blessing crops and was pretty much in tune with nature. Using magic (witchcraft) for evil was supposed to result in suffering three times as much as you inflicted: the three-fold law. It was a certain religion that convinced the masses that all magic was evil. Which was a good excuse for raping and murdering innocent people that just happened to have different beliefs.

Beside, who else better to combat black magic than practitioners of white magic? Anyone trying to deny the good guys the powers of light is by definition evil and demonic.

...Activates smiting deflection shield.

This is not documentable but seems to be a construction of neo-pagan religious belief. This is not to say that magic was seen as exclusively evil, but we do not know. What we can see is that magic was somehing seen as a danger of the wilderness that people attempted to harness to protect themselves from the same threat. Over time more sophisticated ideas of the advantages of magical power developed. Still there are many traditions that any use of magic to directly benefit the user is innately evil (black magic). Magic is seen as extremely powerful in folklore tales (including fairy, folk, legend and myth) but as a relatively subtle power in day to day life. This fuels ideas of magic fading from the world over time, but not all folklore tales date from the past . . .

Law Dog

Mar 2nd, '03, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by ZootSoot

1. It's a special effect than can explain any power set. In Champions this is the easiest route (it is pretty easy in other games, but it does give characters with magic a tremendous advantage over those who don't.

This is the one that the GM has to watch in a Champions game, but in a Fantasy Hero game it's a must that the GM not allow it. I had a bad experience in a FH game many years back where the casters became what amounted to superbeings while the non-casters were basically reduced to worthless.

Blue Angel

Mar 2nd, '03, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Law Dog
No flames, only a statement of fact. Again, I state, you are siting public misconception. Do you have some sort of reputable source for your analysis or not? What you are citing now is modern myth and revisionist history. In no academic circle will you find that such an argument is held anymore. You go on to state a definitive goal of "a certain religion" which you can neither prove or validate. In fact, certain arms of the early church came to the defense of accused witches which were being tried by the courts in countries such as The Netherlands and Denmark, when the people were being accused of things such as ruining crops via magicks.

Fact - the widespread persecution for witchcraft never happened. The events that actually happened were not notorious because they were typical of the times, but because they were exceptional. Same reason why folks will mention Jack the Ripper when talking about serial killing, when Jack's body count was amatuerish compaired to modern day monsters like Pedro Alonso Lopez or Lucas & Toole.

I never stated any "definitive goal". What I said was that the statement magic=evil is characteristic of the kind of stigmatization used by organized religion to depopularize other belief systems. Persecutions of those with different beliefs have happened and religion has been used as the justification: even if not every day throughout history.

Religious beliefs have been used as the justification for persecutions by the few exceptions you have accurately referred to. It is the mode of thinking characterized by such statements as magic=evil that I am questioning. It is the stigmatizing of something, which is not necessarily an evil concept.

Though it is the definitive goal of any major belief system to become established as the most widely held belief. On occasion some get a little too overzealous. Unfortunately when a few crazies get their hands on religion the consequences can be extreme. This has been no different in the past than it is in the present.

Aside - Did I mention I don't believe in magic?

Just like some Germans protected some Jews during the Second World War there were some who would strive to protect the innocent throughout history. Again you are correct.

I can site an example.

The Cathars were an offshoot of Christianity that existed in Europe around the 11th and 12th centuries. After tolerating them for a while it was decided that they had to go. In the ensuing crusade there were some who sympathized with the Cathars who were their friends and associates. On July 21, 1209 there was a resulting siege of Beziers, France: one of many sieges of that cursade.

'The inhabitants of Beziers bravely refused the offer of the crusaders to deliver up the Cathars. A long Siege seemed to be ahead but the next day a group of those besieged tried a possibly unwise escape. They were pursued by a band of soldiers who succeeded in entering the town. The crusaders set fire to and massacred nearly all the population, almost twenty thousand people, even the seven thousand of them who had taken refuge in the Church of the Magdelene.

Faced with the hesitation of some crusaders to commit such horrific acts, Arnaud-Amaury, abbot of Citeaux, and spiritual leader of the crusade is truly said to have cried: "Kill them all! God will recognize his own!" In any case, this little phrase was reported ten years later by Cesair de Heisterbach, a Cistercian monk from Calogne. And the terrible warnings of Guillaume de Tudele, the author of the song of the crusades against Albigensians rang out: "Any castle which resists, any stubborn town shall be taken by force and reduced to a Charnel-house.. That no living being should be left, even newborn babies. Thus shall be sown healthy fear and no longer shall anyone care to defy the cross of God".' - Michele Aue - translated by Julliette Freyche.

Compared to some of these guys and many others including your modern example, Jack-the-Ripper is a puppy.

Anyway my point was and still is magic does not allways equal evil. That is 16th century's pop culture view.

And I just had to get started on this... Damn psycolocical limitation.

Allright that's it. Can't take it any more. I am turning off the smite shield.

So, go ahead, smite me.

P.S. What does this have to do with the original topic anyway?

ZootSoot

Mar 2nd, '03, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Blue Angel
I never stated any "definitive goal". What I said was that the statement magic=evil is characteristic of the kind of stigmatization used by organized religion to depopularize other belief systems. Persecutions of those with different beliefs have happened and religion has been used as the justification: even if not every day throughout history.

Religious beliefs have been used as the justification for persecutions by the few exceptions you have accurately referred to. It is the mode of thinking characterized by such statements as magic=evil that I am questioning. It is the stigmatizing of something, which is not necessarily an evil concept.

Though it is the definitive goal of any major belief system to become established as the most widely held belief. On occasion some get a little too overzealous. Unfortunately when a few crazies get their hands on religion the consequences can be extreme. This has been no different in the past than it is in the present.

Aside - Did I mention I don't believe in magic?

Just like some Germans protected some Jews during the Second World War there were some who would strive to protect the innocent throughout history. Again you are correct.

I can site an example.

The Cathars were an offshoot of Christianity that existed in Europe around the 11th and 12th centuries. After tolerating them for a while it was decided that they had to go. In the ensuing crusade there were some who sympathized with the Cathars who were their friends and associates. On July 21, 1209 there was a resulting siege of Beziers, France: one of many sieges of that cursade.

'The inhabitants of Beziers bravely refused the offer of the crusaders to deliver up the Cathars. A long Siege seemed to be ahead but the next day a group of those besieged tried a possibly unwise escape. They were pursued by a band of soldiers who succeeded in entering the town. The crusaders set fire to and massacred nearly all the population, almost twenty thousand people, even the seven thousand of them who had taken refuge in the Church of the Magdelene.

Faced with the hesitation of some crusaders to commit such horrific acts, Arnaud-Amaury, abbot of Citeaux, and spiritual leader of the crusade is truly said to have cried: "Kill them all! God will recognize his own!" In any case, this little phrase was reported ten years later by Cesair de Heisterbach, a Cistercian monk from Calogne. And the terrible warnings of Guillaume de Tudele, the author of the song of the crusades against Albigensians rang out: "Any castle which resists, any stubborn town shall be taken by force and reduced to a Charnel-house.. That no living being should be left, even newborn babies. Thus shall be sown healthy fear and no longer shall anyone care to defy the cross of God".' - Michele Aue - translated by Julliette Freyche.

Compared to some of these guys and many others including your modern example, Jack-the-Ripper is a puppy.

Anyway my point was and still is magic does not allways equal evil. That is 16th century's pop culture view.

And I just had to get started on this... Damn psycolocical limitation.

Allright that's it. Can't take it any more. I am turning off the smite shield.

So, go ahead, smite me.

P.S. What does this have to do with the original topic anyway?

The conflict with the Cathars was a response to a specific religious disagreement, it had nothing to do with the morality or practice of magic.

Law Dog

Mar 2nd, '03, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Blue Angel

Anyway my point was and still is magic does not always equal evil. That is 16th century's pop culture view.

Zoot is correct.

Also, the point you have tried to state above is actually a 20th/21st century fallacy about 16th century views. These were not homogenous-thinking, primative screwheads. No matter what movies or television shows you've been watching, they were actually thinking individuals walking the Earth at that time. Most people in Europe, then, like now, didn't believe in magick per se.

zornwil

Mar 2nd, '03, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Law Dog
Zoot is correct.

Also, the point you have tried to state above is actually a 20th/21st century fallacy about 16th century views. These were not homogenous-thinking, primative screwheads. No matter what movies or television shows you've been watching, they were actually thinking individuals walking the Earth at that time. Most people in Europe, then, like now, didn't believe in magick per se.

I'm aware of this re the 16th century and, along those lines, read Durkheim's interpretation of the "witchcraft" crisis of Salem which notes how oddly exceptional the accusation of witchcraft was by then, it was an aberration not just in the colonies but certainly in Europe at that point.

However, wasn't there an extended period during the early Middle Ages (like just pre-Renaissance) where there was ongoing conflict between the Catholic church and the pagan holdovers? If not, would you please cite some sources as I'd like to read more on this. On a related aside, would you also say that the adapatation of preexisting holidays/seasonal rituals by early Christianity did not occur and is either a misconception or purely coincidental? I am not ascribing motive for that - I for one don't see any evidence it was done to displace the pagan religions (at least not early on) but was rather a matter of simple convenience. I am not interested in arguing the points, I am interested in texts (online or paper) from scholarly or otherwise accredited sources.

zornwil

Mar 2nd, '03, 04:34 PM

As far as I could see, I didn't answer this one, maybe it was another thread. Magic is not common among the "regular" world but it is well known as some sort of force among the more powerful supers.

Recently 1 PC is getting more into magic so I've addressed it in more detail in my campaign. Information is at http://www.asterick.com/realschluss/x-champions/x-champions_setting/x-magic.htm

As far as general mechanics, supernatural forces have their own attacks and defenses (Supernatural Defense (SD), based on INT). I've done this for some time. I used to have supernatural attacks as fairly cheap, now I've been told they might be overpriced. That latter statement is probably true among powerful supers but because supernatural powers bypass all but SD, they can be very powerful against most mid-level supers and entirely useful against normals, so I'm not sure. In any case in this current campaign I wanted to discourage magic a little bit so that was another reason to cost it higher.

By the way, I based SD on INT rather than EGO not just to differentiate it from mental powers but also because it always seemed to me that brainy guys like Reed Richards and Batman held up against mystical powers fairly well (though granted they tend to have some considerable EGO too), and moreover some hard-core "science only" guys who might be higher INT ignore magic and aren't affected by it seemingly related to their "grounding" in science. Of course also it seems to me that magic would be the application of quick-wittedness and cleverness and ergo INT.

zen_hydra

Mar 3rd, '03, 09:44 AM

I am dismayed at the obnoxiously Euro-centric views of magic being displayed. Magic as an institution for good has been, and in many places, is still practiced around the world. Magic has always been more about trying to better control / influence ones environment and very rarely about consorting with evil spirits just for the hell-of-it. Would someone please explain to me the overt evil nature of Taoist magic, or Tribal African magic, Shintoist magic, Native American magic, Australian Aboriginal magic, and these are but a very few examples of the worlds magical traditions? How can anyone be arrogant enough to make a sweeping comment about how magic is intrinsically based in evil?

Doug McCrae

Mar 3rd, '03, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by zen_hydra
Would someone please explain to me the overt evil nature of Taoist magic, or Tribal African magic, Shintoist magic, Native American magic, Australian Aboriginal magic, and these are but a very few examples of the worlds magical traditions?
Well, of course they don't tell you it's evil. They keep that secret. As is so often the case, evil and cunning go hand-in-hand.

Blue Angel

Mar 3rd, '03, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by Doug McCrae
Well, of course they don't tell you it's evil. They keep that secret. As is so often the case, evil and cunning go hand-in-hand.

Yeah... Like the one pretending to be showing you what's evil. While all the time plotting... PLOTTING. AAAHAHAHA.

Isn't that right, Evil Doug.

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 4th, '03, 07:03 AM

You answer a simple question about how you run your Champions games and it starts another (grumble, grumble) metaphysical debate outside the "Non-gaming Discussions" secion. MOM! They're doing it AGAIN!

OK, here goes:

Magic is man’s attempt to exercise supernatural power without dependence on God, to counterfeit of the workings of the Holy Spirit. It is a rehash of the original sin, man trying to make himself boss of the world instead of recognizing God’s authority.

With all due respect to the author of the upcoming "Testament" campaign book, individuals who worked miracles in the Bible weren’t just another d20 magic user class. They performed amazing feats but only when a) it brought honor to God, and b) it helped somebody else. The power wasn’t theirs to wield as they wished; in fact, they didn’t have any power in and of themselves at all. Instead, God showed up to back them up when they obeyed his instructions. The focus wasn’t on the human tool but on the God who is there when you need him. Moses, for instance, didn’t go around slicing bodies of water in half whenever he felt like it. And when he did, it was to get the Hebrews out of a jam, not to make himself a celebrity.

Magic, even so-called white magic, is inherently self-centered and selfish. It’s all about increasing one’s own knowledge and power to improve one’s personal control of the surrounding circumstances and people. Where the motive for miracles is service and compassion, the motive for magic is pride, stroking one’s ego: "Look at me. Look at what I can do! I’ve studied the secret writings. I know something you don’t know." The particular culture involved is beside the point. The effect on the magical practitioner is universal.

An example of this difference in perspective can be seen in the New Testament. Simon of Samaria was a witch with powers apparently real and impressive enough to make him a big wheel in town. He converted to Christianity after hearing an evangelist preach. However, when the apostles Peter and John arrived and began praying for the converts to receive the Holy Spirit, Simon fell back on his old way of thinking. He recognized a source of spiritual power, and he was used to buying spell books, magic items, and other tools. So he offered Peter money for the ability to do the same thing. Peter chewed him out, both because Simon’s motives were wrong and because the apostles didn’t have any power to give away. The gift came from God.

You also see this perspective in "The Chronicles of Narnia" and "The Lord of the Rings," both written by Christian authors. The heroes of Narnia are occasionally given gifts to use in the fight against evil by Aslan, the legitimate spiritual authority. But they don’t attempt to gain powers of their own. Those who do, such as Jadis the White Witch, are clearly the bad guys. In the same way, Frodo and friends aren’t spell casters. The elves’ "magic" is essentially a form of technology; in fact, the human concept of magic is alien to them. Gandalf performs feats of power not because he studied at some wizards’ academy but because he is one of Middle Earth’s guardian angels. That’s what makes the corruption of Saruman so terrible; he’s a fallen angel. The big bad guys, Sauron and Morgoth before him, were themselves angelic beings who rebelled against the Creator.

archermoo

Mar 4th, '03, 09:30 AM

Monolith

Mar 4th, '03, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
Magic is man’s attempt to exercise supernatural power without dependence on God, to counterfeit of the workings of the Holy Spirit. It is a rehash of the original sin, man trying to make himself boss of the world instead of recognizing God’s authority.
I always knew Dr. Strange was evil. His good-guy actions were only an act to lull us into a false sense of security. Soon he will strike though, and then all will bow down to Lord Strange! :)

ZootSoot

Mar 4th, '03, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by zen_hydra
I am dismayed at the obnoxiously Euro-centric views of magic being displayed. Magic as an institution for good has been, and in many places, is still practiced around the world. Magic has always been more about trying to better control / influence ones environment and very rarely about consorting with evil spirits just for the hell-of-it. Would someone please explain to me the overt evil nature of Taoist magic, or Tribal African magic, Shintoist magic, Native American magic, Australian Aboriginal magic, and these are but a very few examples of the worlds magical traditions? How can anyone be arrogant enough to make a sweeping comment about how magic is intrinsically based in evil?

The only Person I have seen do that is Kevin Scrivener and, presumably, he does so because it is a part of his deeply held religious beliefs.

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 4th, '03, 01:09 PM

Monolith said:

I always knew Dr. Strange was evil. His good-guy actions were only an act to lull us into a false sense of security. Soon he will strike though, and then all will bow down to Lord Strange!

----

Yep, that pencil-thin mustache always gives 'em away!

Blue Angel

Mar 4th, '03, 01:18 PM

Strangely, Moses did become a celebrity. Maybe that was his secret intention all along.

Even Jesus knew he would be reborn, so, was his submission to crucifiction truly a selfless act.

I am not sure any selfless act has ever been committed. Even honesty is born of selfishness... "People will respect me." or at least "People won't hate/kill me for being dishonest".

Besides, isn't all advanced technology simply a form of magic. Imagine showing a TV to 8th Century peoples. To them an auto would be truly mysterious...

Guess I see magic as just a nonconventional form of technology. It is just more mysterious to us because, being fictional, it's inner workings cannot be discovered.

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 4th, '03, 01:32 PM

Ah, magic is evil in an RPG because it offends your IRL religious beliefs.

And blaming others for responding to your flame isn't particularly reasonable. Had you responded with "I don't allow PCs to use magic because in my game world all magic is evil" would have been one thing. But you didn't limit it to your game world. You simply stated that all magic is evil. That may be true in your game world, and it may be your opinion in the real world. But in game worlds that I have run there are plenty of good guys that use magic.

And by extension of your argument against magic, it should hold true for any superpowered being whos power does not come from your god, whether magic is the source or not. So do you consider all supers with non-relegious based powers to be evil as well? They have supernatural powers (powers beyond nature) without dependance on your god.

Gary Denney
>>>-----The Archer----->

---

No need to get your bowstring tied in knots, archermoo. If you want to allow players to run magical characters in your campaigns, go right ahead. I won't be showing up at your gaming sessions to scold you or to eat an unfair portion of the triple-cheese pizza. I also didn't say that any of the RPGs you enjoy, which may or may not contain pretend magic, are evil. I simply responded to the thread's topic, then explained my reasoning when my initial answer raised a furor.

Law Dog

Mar 4th, '03, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by Blue Angel

Besides, isn't all advanced technology simply a form of magic. Imagine showing a TV to 8th Century peoples. To them an auto would be truly mysterious...

Simple answer for a simple question - No.

MarkusDark

Mar 4th, '03, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by Law Dog
Simple answer for a simple question - No.

Too simple actually, because his response has weight and merit. There were many a witch tried and condemned who 'practiced magic' but actually only did rudementary apothecary formulas that are now accepted as simple fact - like penicillin.

As a society advances, so does their conception of magic. Magic, by definition is to produce supernatural effects, supernatural being a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces. less than 200 years ago, it was beyond natural forces for an airplane to fly, 100 years ago it was beyond natural forces to break the sound barrier. Currently teleportation and the conjuration of flames with nothing more than your voice is beyond natural forces - but in 50 years, who knows?

Modern day "Magic", as in the wiccan sense, is a religious arguement that I prefer not to get into. My personal belief was that those who practice magic are people who feel incapable of surviving in the real world through their own power so they try to conjure supernatural power to aid them.

However, a dear, wiccan friend of mine stated "If I 'cast a spell' to help me find a job, and I go out and find one - was it actually the spell or the belief that the spell would work that gave me the drive and confidence to get the job? Truthfully - who cares? I got the job."

Being a Bay Area Californian, I have adopted the attitude of us 'tree huggers' which is - as long as your ideas don't impact upon mine and you don't force them upon me, then believe in whatever you want.

MarkusDark

Mar 4th, '03, 02:31 PM

In my game world Magic does exist but it is 'kept secret' from the general populace. Before recorded time a contest was held between man and fae and man won. For it, he won the right to live on earth, however, in the contract he could never practice magic. Over the centuries there has been a few violations and finally the creation of a core group of 'wizards' who look out to try and keep the contact solid. If everyday man knew about and learned how to use magic, the contract would be void and mankind's "Lease" upon the earth would be terminated.

Playing a Mage in my Champions game requires a great deal of roleplaying and stealth of his powers in order to not be condemned by the committee.

archermoo

Mar 4th, '03, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
Ah, magic is evil in an RPG because it offends your IRL religious beliefs.

And blaming others for responding to your flame isn't particularly reasonable. Had you responded with "I don't allow PCs to use magic because in my game world all magic is evil" would have been one thing. But you didn't limit it to your game world. You simply stated that all magic is evil. That may be true in your game world, and it may be your opinion in the real world. But in game worlds that I have run there are plenty of good guys that use magic.

And by extension of your argument against magic, it should hold true for any superpowered being whos power does not come from your god, whether magic is the source or not. So do you consider all supers with non-relegious based powers to be evil as well? They have supernatural powers (powers beyond nature) without dependance on your god.

Gary Denney
>>>-----The Archer----->

---

No need to get your bowstring tied in knots, archermoo. If you want to allow players to run magical characters in your campaigns, go right ahead. I won't be showing up at your gaming sessions to scold you or to eat an unfair portion of the triple-cheese pizza. I also didn't say that any of the RPGs you enjoy, which may or may not contain pretend magic, are evil. I simply responded to the thread's topic, then explained my reasoning when my initial answer raised a furor.

My bowstring isn't tied in knots. It annoys me when people look down on others for simply responding to their statements. To refresh memories, you said "You answer a simple question about how you run your Champions games and it starts another (grumble, grumble) metaphysical debate outside the "Non-gaming Discussions" secion. MOM! They're doing it AGAIN!". That was in response to people replying to your initial statement of "I don't allow magic or magical characters in my campaigns since the PCs are supposed to be the good guys and magic is by definition evil and demonic. You can't use the powers of darkness to produce good results." The important bit that several people objected to was the "magic is by definition evil and demonic" portion. Had that part been something to the effect of "magic in my campaign is universally evil and demonic" I wouldn't have had a problem with it. However, you didn't. What you effectively said is that what the word magic means is evil, demonic power, and when people objected to your redefining the word you got huffy.

Personally IRL, I don't believe in magic any more than I believe in any deity. I feel that belief in both through history has stunted the intellectual growth of mankind for thousands of years an affliction that we are still struggling to get past. Sidetracking the quest for knowledge by influencing people to look to the supernatural for answers rather than the wonder that is the natural world around them. However in a world that both magic and gods exist, such as most Fantasy settings, I've got no problem with either of them.

And Kevin, you never answered my question. Would you consider all super powers that do not directly derive their power in a religious fashion to be evil? Or is "magic" the only thing that qualifies as such?

ZootSoot

Mar 4th, '03, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by archermoo
My bowstring isn't tied in knots. It annoys me when people look down on others for simply responding to their statements. To refresh memories, you said "You answer a simple question about how you run your Champions games and it starts another (grumble, grumble) metaphysical debate outside the "Non-gaming Discussions" secion. MOM! They're doing it AGAIN!". That was in response to people replying to your initial statement of "I don't allow magic or magical characters in my campaigns since the PCs are supposed to be the good guys and magic is by definition evil and demonic. You can't use the powers of darkness to produce good results." The important bit that several people objected to was the "magic is by definition evil and demonic" portion. Had that part been something to the effect of "magic in my campaign is universally evil and demonic" I wouldn't have had a problem with it. However, you didn't. What you effectively said is that what the word magic means is evil, demonic power, and when people objected to your redefining the word you got huffy.

Personally IRL, I don't believe in magic any more than I believe in any deity. I feel that belief in both through history has stunted the intellectual growth of mankind for thousands of years an affliction that we are still struggling to get past. Sidetracking the quest for knowledge by influencing people to look to the supernatural for answers rather than the wonder that is the natural world around them. However in a world that both magic and gods exist, such as most Fantasy settings, I've got no problem with either of them.

And Kevin, you never answered my question. Would you consider all super powers that do not directly derive their power in a religious fashion to be evil? Or is "magic" the only thing that qualifies as such?

I am never sure what people mean when they say they don't believe in magic. Clearly much of our behavior is the result of magical thinking, and, for a given value of "works" magic tends to work. Now there is a lot of specifically fictional magic, but otherwise magic is just something we do.

archermoo

Mar 4th, '03, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by ZootSoot
I am never sure what people mean when they say they don't believe in magic. Clearly much of our behavior is the result of magical thinking, and, for a given value of "works" magic tends to work. Now there is a lot of specifically fictional magic, but otherwise magic is just something we do.

"Magical thinking"? I've no idea what you mean by that. And what things do we do that you consider to be magic?

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 4th, '03, 05:40 PM

archermoo said:

And by extension of your argument against magic, it should hold true for any superpowered being whos power does not come from your god, whether magic is the source or not. So do you consider all supers with non-relegious based powers to be evil as well? They have supernatural powers (powers beyond nature) without dependance on your god.

and

And Kevin, you never answered my question. Would you consider all super powers that do not directly derive their power in a religious fashion to be evil? Or is "magic" the only thing that qualifies as such?

---

OK, you do realize that you're asking me to formulate a theology of comic book super powers, right?

Maybe that's not so hard, after all. My answer would be based on the general real-life principle that everything we have -- our possessions, our relationships, our opportunities, our talents, our bodies, our minds, even our very existence -- is on loan to us from God whether we appreciate it or recognize it or not.

Most super powers, then, could be ultimately attributed to God whether the recipient acknowledged the gift or not. Defender and Doctor Destroyer may both take pride in their inventive genius and technical prowess but God gave them their intellects and educational opportunities. Are Batman and Daredevil excellent physical specimens? They can thank God for good health and the self-discipline to develop their bodies (a personality trait not everyone has). Do Ironclad's and Superman's abilities arise from their alien physiologies? Well, God created their planets, too. Is a character empowered by radiation/the power cosmic? It is God who fires the engines of the universe. Did Blue Beetle and Captain America get their abilities through super science? Yes, but it is God who gave the scientists the ability to understand and dominate the world he made.

Whew! Does that satisfy you?

Monolith

Mar 4th, '03, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
Whew! Does that satisfy you?
I don't think that can work. It does not account for all the other "gods" from other dimensions like Tyrannon. :)

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 4th, '03, 06:02 PM

I don't see the confict. There's nothing that says God couldn't have created multiple universes and dimensions. Tyrranon's a villain, right? He's just another false god trying to promote himself, like Lucifer, Sauron, Morgoth, etc. He may claim to be a god doesn't mean he IS a god.

JmOz

Mar 4th, '03, 06:12 PM

Magic in my GAMES always have some basic premices

I use the Force from Star Wars as the basis for Magic in my games, simply put there is an energy field (The setting determines if it has anything to do with life) that people (setting again determines who) can channel into certain effects, this energy can be harnessed into items, etc...

Supernatural beings do exist, in essence they can more easily tap into the energy (Hense forth called Mana), some of them will aid people if called upon (the reasons why varry, again in part do to setting). Some reasons include infighting makes them choose champions, ego boosts, good samaritans, gain more power by people invoking there names, etc...

Also, whilei t has never DIRECTLY come up in a game there is a single being that has created all this, who has a plan, and he is keeping an eye on things, he has a rival, but only because it suits his needs...

archermoo

Mar 4th, '03, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
archermoo said:

And by extension of your argument against magic, it should hold true for any superpowered being whos power does not come from your god, whether magic is the source or not. So do you consider all supers with non-relegious based powers to be evil as well? They have supernatural powers (powers beyond nature) without dependance on your god.

and

And Kevin, you never answered my question. Would you consider all super powers that do not directly derive their power in a religious fashion to be evil? Or is "magic" the only thing that qualifies as such?

---

OK, you do realize that you're asking me to formulate a theology of comic book super powers, right?

Maybe that's not so hard, after all. My answer would be based on the general real-life principle that everything we have -- our possessions, our relationships, our opportunities, our talents, our bodies, our minds, even our very existence -- is on loan to us from God whether we appreciate it or recognize it or not.

Most super powers, then, could be ultimately attributed to God whether the recipient acknowledged the gift or not. Defender and Doctor Destroyer may both take pride in their inventive genius and technical prowess but God gave them their intellects and educational opportunities. Are Batman and Daredevil excellent physical specimens? They can thank God for good health and the self-discipline to develop their bodies (a personality trait not everyone has). Do Ironclad's and Superman's abilities arise from their alien physiologies? Well, God created their planets, too. Is a character empowered by radiation/the power cosmic? It is God who fires the engines of the universe. Did Blue Beetle and Captain America get their abilities through super science? Yes, but it is God who gave the scientists the ability to understand and dominate the world he made.

Whew! Does that satisfy you?

So how do those powers differ from magic powers, which by your theology would also be a gift from your god? Why are those powers usable for both good and evil, but magic can only be used by evil?

Law Dog

Mar 4th, '03, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Too simple actually, because his response has weight and merit. There were many a witch tried and condemned who 'practiced magic' but actually only did rudementary apothecary formulas that are now accepted as simple fact - like penicillin.

And we are back to my original point that this is not a true fact, but pop cultural myth. These cases were few and far between.

You might be surprised at what level of understanding the supposed "primitive screwheads" are capable of. It's kind of fun to believe that they were somehow simpletons, but the historical evidence just doesn't play out when you actually take the time to examine it.

Blue Angel

Mar 5th, '03, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by Law Dog
And we are back to my original point that this is not a true fact, but pop cultural myth. These cases were few and far between.

You might be surprised at what level of understanding the supposed "primitive screwheads" are capable of. It's kind of fun to believe that they were somehow simpletons, but the historical evidence just doesn't play out when you actually take the time to examine it.

The "screwheads" were pretty smart. Our 'advanced' society still can't figure out how they did some of the things they did.

Does your reading suggest that the idea of magic as evil is also a cultural myth. Or has that idea been held prior to recent history?

MarkusDark

Mar 5th, '03, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Law Dog
And we are back to my original point that this is not a true fact, but pop cultural myth. These cases were few and far between.

Define "few and far between," as from my studies there were periods in human civilization where 'witches' or 'those in league with satan' were arrested, tortured or condemned in large numbers.

As for the purly herbalistic healers whom would be charged as 'witches', I would feel safe saying that there was at least one a year in Europe between 5th and 15th century.

MarkusDark

Mar 5th, '03, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by JmOz
Magic in my GAMES always have some basic premices

Congratulations, JmOz, you just described the basics of modern day wiccan beliefs. ;)

Kevin Scrivner

Mar 7th, '03, 07:38 AM

So how do those powers differ from magic powers, which by your theology would also be a gift from your god? Why are those powers usable for both good and evil, but magic can only be used by evil?

---

Thought I'd already answered that. The other powers have a naturalistic explanation, no matter howoutrageous. Magic, on the other hand, is an attempt to illegitimately access and wield supernatural power. Whether it actually works or not is beside the point; it's the motive and attitude that matter.

Law Dog

Mar 7th, '03, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
So how do those powers differ from magic powers, which by your theology would also be a gift from your god? Why are those powers usable for both good and evil, but magic can only be used by evil?

---

Thought I'd already answered that. The other powers have a naturalistic explanation, no matter howoutrageous. Magic, on the other hand, is an attempt to illegitimately access and wield supernatural power. Whether it actually works or not is beside the point; it's the motive and attitude that matter.

Very clear to me. All non-magic based super abilities in Kevin's game run off of "comic-book physics" a standard genre convention. Magic in this universe is a whole different animal and those who wield it are being endowed with the power from a source of great evil. I'd wager that if a "good" character tried to access this power in this universe, no matter how noble the intent, they would find it to be a corrupting experience.

JmOz

Mar 7th, '03, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Congratulations, JmOz, you just described the basics of modern day wiccan beliefs. ;)

Really? weird...

Most of what I know about Wicca I learned from "Charmed"...

I actually based it mostly off of "The Force" with some blatent rip offs from the old Marvel SuperHero Game

MarkusDark

Mar 7th, '03, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by JmOz
Really? weird...

Most of what I know about Wicca I learned from "Charmed"...

I actually based it mostly off of "The Force" with some blatent rip offs from the old Marvel SuperHero Game

Heh, learning about Wicca from Charmed is along the lines about learning Medieval History from D&D. Trust me, most wiccans don't like the portrayl of the religion in the show. There is barely any resemblance to the religion in it.

There is a common belief amongst some wiccans and pagans that George Lucas used wiccan influences in his creation of Star Wars and The Force. I personally see it as 'wishful thinking' of the wiccans. Ya know how you can view something in a certain way and make a connection?

Although I'd love to see a light saber used as an Althalme. (A joke just for the wiccans out there - even if I spelled it wrong). ;)

But the idea that we are all connected and that through that connection a certain amount of change and control can be achieved is quite common. I think my favorite example is someone who used a spell to make their car "invisible" to police so they won't get a speeding ticket. In this case, invisible means that someone will look at it and you really won't think about it - as if it wasn't even there. However, they did it so well that their car became invisible to everyone and got into 3 accidents in one month.

MisterVimes

Mar 7th, '03, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by archermoo
Personally IRL, I don't believe in magic any more than I believe in any deity. I feel that belief in both through history has stunted the intellectual growth of mankind for thousands of years an affliction that we are still struggling to get past. Sidetracking the quest for knowledge by influencing people to look to the supernatural for answers rather than the wonder that is the natural world around them. However in a world that both magic and gods exist, such as most Fantasy settings, I've got no problem with either of them.

FINALLY! A point of view I can support on this thread!

Blue Angel

Mar 7th, '03, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by MisterVimes
FINALLY! A point of view I can support on this thread!

FINALLY, alright. And here I was starting to feel all lonely.:p

MarkusDark

Mar 7th, '03, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by archermoo

Sidetracking the quest for knowledge by influencing people to look to the supernatural for answers rather than the wonder that is the natural world around them.

To a point, I agree. Especially when people rely on them to pull them through everything (or blaming everything on them)instead of just picking yourself up by the bootstraps and doing it.

However, there has been more and more scientific discoveries of things that, again, were thought of as 'magic' that are turning out to have now quantifiable results. The biggest one recently is the body's energy, aura, chi, whatever you wish to call it. Held by mystics and martial artists for centuries, there has finally been enough people willing to open their eyes and explore those areas.

I have personally debunked psychics in the past and always approach the idea of magic as a con. However, some things have happened to me that had me think otherwise. Luckily these things now fall under the above areas of chi so I don't feel too silly anymore. But this is a perfect example of what is taught as magic is now being defined as science.

archermoo

Mar 7th, '03, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Kevin Scrivner
So how do those powers differ from magic powers, which by your theology would also be a gift from your god? Why are those powers usable for both good and evil, but magic can only be used by evil?

---

Thought I'd already answered that. The other powers have a naturalistic explanation, no matter howoutrageous. Magic, on the other hand, is an attempt to illegitimately access and wield supernatural power. Whether it actually works or not is beside the point; it's the motive and attitude that matter.

So is it that you redefine the word magic to specifically mean only power derived from evil forces? Or that if something has the label magic applied to it that it then becomes evil? I guess what I'm looking for is what makes the wielding of supernatural power via magic different than wielding supernatural power via any other method. Superman's powers are as much supernatural (i.e. beyond nature) as any magic. Why is the one evil and not the other?

archermoo

Mar 7th, '03, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by MarkusDark
To a point, I agree. Especially when people rely on them to pull them through everything (or blaming everything on them)instead of just picking yourself up by the bootstraps and doing it.

However, there has been more and more scientific discoveries of things that, again, were thought of as 'magic' that are turning out to have now quantifiable results. The biggest one recently is the body's energy, aura, chi, whatever you wish to call it. Held by mystics and martial artists for centuries, there has finally been enough people willing to open their eyes and explore those areas.

I have personally debunked psychics in the past and always approach the idea of magic as a con. However, some things have happened to me that had me think otherwise. Luckily these things now fall under the above areas of chi so I don't feel too silly anymore. But this is a perfect example of what is taught as magic is now being defined as science.

Ah, but I don't care about the name used, just the mindset involved. People can think of computers as magic if they want, I don't care. It is the mystical/religious mindset that I object to. The idea that there are questions that should not be asked, and answers that cannot exist. That mindset takes resources away from the persuit of actual knowledge. And to my mind, if anything is a sin, that qualifies.

archermoo

Mar 7th, '03, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by MisterVimes
FINALLY! A point of view I can support on this thread!

Heh. Happy to oblige. :)

Colossus

Aug 9th, '04, 12:43 PM

Friends,

In my real life I am a minister in a Main line Christian church. I would certainly not practice "magic," but HERO GAMES is a Game. Play away! Fiction is fiction.

Be careful what you call magic, the term Hocus Pocus comes from a mistranslation from the Latin Mass!

I have always allowed magic, it only makes sense in Champs. I

I have a Magic related question, however.

I have a PC with a “magic sword” Special Effect. The sword is purchased as a Multi-Power with the only limitation being the – ½ No Range. At first this seems weird I know, but the sword can be summoned from anywhere – so the PC can not really be disarmed. Anyway a simple 60 MP with the “No Range” makes the cost 40 – plus 8 for variable or 4 for fixed slots. A reasonable and fair construction if all the powers in the sword were originally ranged; which they were.

When I reviewed the PC I found this slot

Basic Strike (4d6 Ranged Killing Attack; - ½ No Range, fixed) END: 6 COST: 4

Now originally I said no to this, but after thinking it through I think it should be fully legal. A Ranged Killing attack with No Range means the PC can’t add her 15 STR. A Ranged Killing Attack is basically an EB that does killing damage.

Would you allow this slot.

Battlestaff

Aug 9th, '04, 01:28 PM

I have a PC with a “magic sword” Special Effect. The sword is purchased as a Multi-Power with the only limitation being the – ½ No Range. At first this seems weird I know, but the sword can be summoned from anywhere – so the PC can not really be disarmed. Anyway a simple 60 MP with the “No Range” makes the cost 40 – plus 8 for variable or 4 for fixed slots. A reasonable and fair construction if all the powers in the sword were originally ranged; which they were.

I don't know if I would allow the base to have that limitation since, IIRC, that would then apply to all the slots. I would have to see all the slots and get the reasoning behind each one before I would allow it. However, I have allowed use of a focus without taking the focus limitation, which in effect is a focus that cannot be taken away.

When I reviewed the PC I found this slot

Basic Strike (4d6 Ranged Killing Attack; - ½ No Range, fixed) END: 6 COST: 4

Now originally I said no to this, but after thinking it through I think it should be fully legal. A Ranged Killing attack with No Range means the PC can’t add her 15 STR. A Ranged Killing Attack is basically an EB that does killing damage.

Would you allow this slot.

Yes I would. I don't really see this as difference from buying a 4d6 HKA and adding a -1/2 limitation "STR does not add to damage."

Excuse the brain fart, but what does the "fixed" in the slot mean?

Dust Raven

Aug 9th, '04, 01:45 PM

Friends,
When I reviewed the PC I found this slot

Basic Strike (4d6 Ranged Killing Attack; - ½ No Range, fixed) END: 6 COST: 4

Now originally I said no to this, but after thinking it through I think it should be fully legal. A Ranged Killing attack with No Range means the PC can’t add her 15 STR. A Ranged Killing Attack is basically an EB that does killing damage.

Would you allow this slot.
Absolutely! Putting No Range (-1/2) is almost identical to putting Does Not Add STR (-1/2) to an HKA (only you can make cheeper Damage Shields using HKA and HA than you can using RKA and EB).

Battlestaff:

A "fixed" slot is a Multipower slot that requires the full points to be put into to make it work, regardless of how much of it you are planing to use. The 4th Ed term was "ultra slot". It's counterpart is the "flexible" slot (multiple in 4th?), which allows you to vary the number of points in the slot, allow some points to be put into other Powers.