[UA] One o' them thar pwernomancers!

[Sean Holland]

> >> Knowing about the various types of magic (pornomancy,
> >> dipsomancy, etc....) is out of character knowledge?  I
> >> kind of got the idea that everything in the UA books
> >> was, more or less, open knowledge to those in the
> >> Occult Underground.  At least, that's how I've end up
> >> interpreting it.  That approach made it the first game
> >> my wife really liked, too.
> 
> Er... it's not the "default" way to play it, and it's not the way I "meant"
> for it to be played, but if you think that would be fun and your players
> think it would be fun, who am I to stand in your way?
> 
> My basic assumption of nigh-universal ignorance is... how would people
> learn this stuff?  Adepts are fearful and secretive.  Avatars are subtle
> and (at higher levels) terrified of being knocked off by a jealous
> Godwalker.

 But if adept are so secretive how come they all have these wacky nicknames (bodybags, cobweb farmers, etc).  I assume that any trained adept, rather than self-taught, has a vague grasp of the OU.  In that there are other schools (only the major one are likely to be mentioned), in general they do this, and you should avoid them because . . .

 Avatars, I would think, are much less widely known about.  They are even more unbelievable are harder to prove than adepts.

 In our camapign we had four adepts (two entropomancers, an urbanomancer and a demourgist), only the last one had been trained and only she had a basic idea about the other schools.  None of the character had any real idea about avatars, though some had a vague understanding of the invisible clergy.

 Just my thoughts,

 -Sean
--
"May St. Serpentine be with you on your journey
__________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua