Re: More Luck

From: Kmnellist_at_...
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 00:41:38 EDT


Mike Holmes writes:
<< Second, there are no metaphysical abilities in Glorantha that aren't linked
 to some philosophy. That is, there are no "lucky" people, there are people  who are "Blessed by Orlanth" or are "Mystically Inclined", or whatever. To  include luck would be to create some overarching idea of a philosophy that  isn't supposed to exist.>>

Although it doesn't really fall under the hw-rules banner I think I would disagree with this statement. "Luck" is one of the primal runes of Glorantha. "Masters of Luck and Death" is a very old Gloranthan reference which taken literally would imply that one could have "Luck" and, what's more, be a Master of it.

Despite disagreeing in principle on this point alone I thought you ideas on ability criteria were very clear and useful. I am sure I would not disallow a player from having any ability because I feel that given a little thought most things can be made to meet criteria 2,3,4 and 5. ( I think I could include "Luck" as meeting these criteria - its scope is similar to Tough, how Luck works would clearly be investigated in play, the ability could be refined in play (eg "it is only useful in random events", it could be Bad Luck, or a High Rate of Coincidence - as Albert King sang "if it weren't for bad luck, I wouldn't have no luck at all")

<<1. Does it match the scope of the example abilities? 2. Would you expect the ability to get investigated play (instead of just rolled against with little explanation) such that the character becomes more revealed by it's use?
3. Can the ability be refined in play by finding limits on it's use? 4. Does the ability have the potential to be used as a "fault" in some cases, or at least leave the character beholden in some manner?>>

Anyway, besides my minor quibbles with trivial points, I am in complete agreement.

Lucky Keith

Powered by hypermail