Aaron Denney wrote:
> 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.
>
"Haunted" showed lots of female offspring to sorcerers...several of
which were victims of the killer.
--
Leah: That were a wee bit repulsive.
Buffy: Went okay. 'Cept I feel a little wierd about using a
crucifix to kill someone.
Leah: Yeh dinno much about religion, do yeh?
|
