[UA] Some Thoughts on Fan-Made Adepts and Avatars

[George Guy]

Reading through the adept school and archetype submissions on UA.com, I've
come up with a few general critiques.  Take them for what you will.

~On Avatars~

*Taboos are Central.*  An archetype's taboo is its only defining trait.  All
you have to do to channel an archetype is observe its taboo.  All the
symbols and masks help, but they're ultimately window-dressing.  Make sure
that your archetype's taboo isn't too broad, and that someone antithetical
to your conception of the archetype couldn't follow it.  On the other hand,
don't make it too specific; unexpected thematic variations are always cool,
especially if they lead to ascension wars.

*Having your Cake and Eating it Too Should be Hard.*  Adept/avatar hybrids
are rare for a reason.  Keep it that way.  If your archetype closely
resembles an adept school, put a divider between them.  Make your
archetype's taboo difficult or impossible to observe at the same time as the
school's, or make one's abilities violate the other's taboo.  A good example
of the latter is the Entropomancer/Fool combo, which is virtually impossible
because the Fool's second channel violates Entropomancy's taboo.

~On Adepts~

*No One Expects the Adept Inquisition.*  Adept schools should not revolve
around things that people expect magicians to do without turning those
things on their heads.  This is partially stylistic; Unknown Armies makes a
point of being as different from other occult horror games as possible,
sometimes to an excessive degree.  However, I think it also has a thematic
element; adepts break rules.  Their magick wouldn't work if they didn't.  If
an adept is too much in line with the public consensus on what he should be,
he loses the hole in the cosmos that gives him power over reality.

*Keep it Postmodern.*  I think I've finally come up with a clear definition
of what Stolze and Tynes call "postmodern magick".  *Postmodern magick* *relies
on personalized, egocentric philosophies.*  All of the old schools have
selfish principals, but they don't admit it and try to apply those
principals universally.  Cryptomancy is dying because it relies on objective
truth.  If your magick is based on lies, you need an absolute truth to
twist.  Personamancy is in many ways similar to Cryptomancy, but it relies
on a fluid or absent personal truth rather than a universal truth.
Mechanomancy used to be about observing and applying an all-encompassing
order to the world.  However, mechanomancy received a second wind by
petulantly clinging to the past, replacing world-changing idealism with
individual hubris.  There's not much info on old school alchemists, but I'll
bet they were better at making drugs and medicines that could effect other
people than Narcoalchemists are.  I'd also guess that when Plutomancers
started out, they were more into obsessing over social Darwinist rhetoric
instead of their current raw, honest egotism.  Selfless adepts don't seem to
have a place in the postmodern age, no matter how twisted they are.


All IMHO, YMMV, etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.unknown-armies.com/pipermail/ua-unknown-armies.com/attachments/20060501/cab25ceb/attachment-0001.htm>