Channeller learning spells?

[barna10]

Can a Channeller learn spells? The description of the OCC mentions them having intuitive knowledge, but unlike EVERY other intuitive caster I have come across, the description DOES NOT explicitly state that they CAN'T learn spells in other ways. Has there been an official ruling on this?

[Edit: The description specifically precludes "ritual" magic, but says nothing about learning other spells]

[Nightmask]

Taking time to reread the text to refresh my memory it doesn't seem to give any more allowance for the character to learn spells like a Sorcerer might and is restricted to just what spells he spontaneously discovers than any other intuitive spell-caster (it even compares the Channeler's learning ability to that of a mystic). It doesn't seem like there's any freedom provided for as written for a Channeler to learn spells as you ask.

From how it's written you can spontaneously pick up non-ritual versions of spells from levels 1-6 in the standard sorcerer table starting at level 1 on, without a level restriction beyond that and in extreme situations might access higher spells and spells from other disciplines provided he's got the PPE to power it but those spells must be non-ritual spells and can never be considered to have been learned permanently like the others.

[barna10]

My whole issue and reason for asking the question is the lack of the compulsory intuitive-mage-cannot-learn-spells-by-any-other-means text that is in EVERY OTHER mystic-type I can find. So, it makes me wonder: Is this an oversight or deliberate?

[barna10]

channeler can't learn spells but he can learn rituals ie circle magic.
ANYONE can learn these they just need the proper PPE and instruction.

Actually, the text specifically says they CAN'T learn rituals of any kind.

[drewkitty ~..~]

I think it depends on who is doing the channeling...
Only 1 or 2 types of sources would i allow it, a Nightlord benefactor would be one.

It would depend on the GM and if he lets the char change their class to something else or add a mod to the channeler class.

[barna10]

I think it depends on who is doing the channeling...
Only 1 or 2 types of sources would i allow it, a Nightlord benefactor would be one.

It would depend on the GM and if he lets the char change their class to something else or add a mod to the channeler class.

I just find it odd that this is the ONE intuitive mage without the "can't learn spells by any other means" rule spelled out in the O.C.C. description. Even the Mystic which was reprinted in the same book carries this limitation. Again, was this a mistake or intentional? Does anyone know if Kevin Hassall is on the forums?

[Nightmask]

I think it depends on who is doing the channeling...
Only 1 or 2 types of sources would i allow it, a Nightlord benefactor would be one.

It would depend on the GM and if he lets the char change their class to something else or add a mod to the channeler class.

I just find it odd that this is the ONE intuitive mage without the "can't learn spells by any other means" rule spelled out in the O.C.C. description. Even the Mystic which was reprinted in the same book carries this limitation. Again, was this a mistake or intentional? Does anyone know if Kevin Hassall is on the forums?

I think you're reading way too much into that. The text for the Channeler doesn't state or imply that they can learn spells like a book-learning mage like a Sorcerer, that bit you focus on would be redundant and unnecessary.

[Tinker Dragoon]

While it is stated that they cannot invent or convert spells (TtGD, p. 36), I can't find an explicit statement that Channelers are unable to be taught new spells by someone else. It's possible that this was assumed by the author to be sufficiently implied by the limited methods of spell acquisition given under the O.C.C.'s "Spell Knowledge" heading. On the other hand, page 10 of TtGD seems to say that Channellers would get the Principles of Magic skill at the "practitioner of magic" skill level, which means the Channeller's knowledge of magical theory is only slightly less than a Sorcerer's.

[drewkitty ~..~]

The channeler class is one which the text is intentionally unclear because of the multiple sub-types with in the class. With each sub-type deriving it's power from a different 'Source.'

%'s 16-00 These types are most like the PF Priest class or the PF Witch class, where the power is not a part of the char but has been given (and can be taken away) by something outside the char. And the same not knowing of the principles of magic any better then a non-mage (or at best equal to that of a mystic.)

While channelers are magic 'users' they are not 'practitioners' of magic. (Think about what the root word for practitioner is if you do not get what I mean right off the bat.) (Yes, words that have a similar meaning can have subtextual meaning along with them that make them different from their supposedly same meaning words in the thesaurus.)

an analogy for this line of thought is...
-practitioner is like a Doctor (Md).

-where user is like the person going to an ATM to get money

[barna10]

The channeler class is one which the text is intentionally unclear because of the multiple sub-types with in the class. With each sub-type deriving it's power from a different 'Source.'

%'s 16-00 These types are most like the PF Priest class or the PF Witch class, where the power is not a part of the char but has been given (and can be taken away) by something outside the char. And the same not knowing of the principles of magic any better then a non-mage (or at best equal to that of a mystic.)

While channelers are magic 'users' they are not 'practitioners' of magic. (Think about what the root word for practitioner is if you do not get what I mean right off the bat.) (Yes, words that have a similar meaning can have subtextual meaning along with them that make them different from their supposedly same meaning words in the thesaurus.)

an analogy for this line of thought is...
-practitioner is like a Doctor (Md).

-where user is like the person going to an ATM to get money

While I appreciate semantics, they only matter if the person presenting the words mean to imply such meaning. In other words, unless the author meant the word "practitioner" to mean one thing and "user" to mean another, the semantics don't mean diddly.

What matters to me is the omission of the obligatory text stating they CANNOT learn in any other way. EVERY OTHER intuitive mage, in Every Palladium supplement I have access to (which is nearly all) has this text, except the Channeler. All the logical arguments in the world don't mean anything since this could be an error of omission, or it could be intentional.

Only one way to know for sure, Hassell needs to be respond

[drewkitty ~..~]

Maybe there was the assumption made that we the players are smart.*shrugs*

You really can't tell with PB books because in parts they are written for the newb spelling everything out and in other parts of the same book things are left so vague that even experienced players have trouble agreeing about what was text means.

Yes, you are right that the expected, and needed cause there are newbs, restrictions about not being able to learn spells like studied mages can, is missing.