Quote Originally Posted by Vael View Post
Ah, I found what I was looking for. Doesn't seem to have any mechanical basis though, which just makes it bizarre.
In the lexicon of the main book, page 18. Under Necromancy and Sorcery it mentions one inhibiting your ability to use the other.
That's an error. Nephilpal (the author of both editions of Abyssals, Infernals, large parts of the core Solar charmset, etc) explained it once.

Basically, really early in 1e, nobody knew what Necromancy was supposed to be. So way back in the 1e lexicon, it had this throwaway line about how learning Necromancy made it harder to do Sorcery.

Then, Neph was assigned to write 1e Abyssals, and they told him he could do anything with Necromancy that he wanted. So he decided to make it so that every splat had a hardcoded limit for both Necromancy, separate from Sorcery, like we have now -- Solars can learn Sorcery 3 / Necromancy 2, Abyssals learn Sorcery 2 / Necromancy 3, Sidereals and Lunars learn Sorcery 2 / Necromancy 1, etc. Neither one blocks advancement.

And that was fine, and those have been the official rules ever since. But when the 2e Lexicon was written, someone mindlessly copy-pasted the obsolete entry from the 1e Lexicon. Learning Necromancy has never interfered with learning Sorcery, and vice versa -- as far back as there have been rules for Necromancy, it's always worked the way it does now. But somehow that one mistaken line in the lexicon keeps getting repeated.