On 2008-04-18, ravenlynne <ravenlynne@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Gene Ward Smith wrote:
>> William George Ferguson <wmgfrgsn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> news:udih04l3cbsb2gdmgugr19k161p3ra2rvj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>> Witches and Sorcerers seem to be defined by the type of magic they
>>> have the most natural proclivity for. Witches have more natural
>>> ability to work spells that draw on internal power while socerers
>>> have more natural ability to work spells that draw on external
>>> power. It was made clear from the beginning that both sides could
>>> work the other side's spells, they just had more natural ability at
>>> their own types of spells.
>>
>> Of course the basic point is that there's a gender linkage to which
>> sort of spell you are better at. What would happen after a ***-change
>> operation is an interesting question. Also, I think sorcerers
>> are more likely to give birth to sorcerers than to witches, and
>> vice-versa.
>>
>
> Exactly. When a sorcerer has a son, he is usually also a
> sorcerer...if there's a female child, the child is powerless usually.
> Parallel to that, a witch's daughter will be a witch, a son with no
> powers. There was an exception or two, if I remember correctly from
> Industrial Magic, where there were daughters of sorcerers who were
> witches...Eve, a black witch (also half demon), had a daughter with a
> sorcerer (last name Nast, can't remember first name) who is developing
> into a strong witch.
It was my impression that when sorcerers mate with humans, the offspring
is always male, and when witches mate with humans, the offspring is
always female. If they interbreed, as here, I'd expect either *** to
show up.
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
|
