Having a hell of a day.
David Dunham wrote:
>
>
> LC
>
> >tried to deduce what the setting accepted by
> >way of the rules, not realizing there had been no intention to have the
> >rules describe the setting
>
> I think a better way of describing the intent was that the rules can
> only model the setting to a loose approximation, and only for the
> purpose of telling heroic stories.
>
I'll accept loose approximation, grudgingly. ^_^
>
> >Should one view the mechanical
> >distinctions between Spirit/Theist/Essence magic as reflective of
> >something about the way Gloranthan magic works, or not?
>
> This isn't really a rules issue,
>
Well, it is in terms of how the rules interpret a genre's specifics. (But overall, I say this thread has drifted a bit into a middle ground between this list and the WoG one.)
> but the different Otherworlds is
> established Glorantha. While it would be entirely possible to lump
> them all under "Magic" and have a workable, fun game, Gloranthans
> observe them to be different, which is why there are rules
> distinctions.
>
You misunderstand. There is a HUGE difference between "All Spirit magic follows the same rules, regardless of culture" and "Spirit magic can be detected as distinctly different from the other two worlds." One requires rules distinctions, the other doesn't - especially in HQ.
Since HeroWars, the rules have enforced the idea that 1) Cultures are almost exclusively one thing in their magic. 2) The magic systems of all cultures that share an otherworld work identically in the mechanical sense. All Theist specialist magicians have Initiates and Devotees. All Animist cultures have the same magic and Shamans follow the same rules. All Wizardry is the same. (although there were at one point differences between Wizards and Orderlies).
Now either that's a rules-mechanics convention, or it is a loose approximation of a true idea that all magic of a given otherworld follows the same rules and that transcends the individual cultures using that magic, or it is just a "they have different names so they should have different rules". I honestly don't know, and have reached the conclusion that I no longer care. I don't find the rules-mechanics distinctions particularly useful in illustrating anything important, they are superfluous to HQ2 mechanics. Most discussions I have seen on the magic systems have at some point specified that the systems don't do a good job of approximating Gloranthan magic with its contradictions and diversity anyway. I mean, one can construct arguments for why all Theist magic would have the same structure, etc. etc. - but I don't know if it is helpful other than as a justification for a game mechanic constructed for the sake of the game aspect. (More and more it strikes me that this is the less interesting option.)
> >Or, they are just in the
> >appendix because they were in HW and HQ1 and people expect to see them
> >there
>
> Mechanically, the earlier editions could have lumped them all under
> "Magic" too. All the Gloranthan rules sets have some attempt to model
> this because it's part of Glorantha.
>
I am not objecting to trying to model magic. Of course someone should do that if modeling Glorantha.
>
> >Indeed. I happen to like the Rune Affinity thing in its implication that
> >Orlanthi in some way view themselves as tied to the primal powers more
> >than they do the gods. Your adult initiation doesn't initiate you to a
> >god, it pulls up the connection to the runes in your soul directly.
>
> I think now you're letting the rules color your view of the setting
> -- no surprise since they're always an inaccurate approximation.
>
There seems to be some difference of opinion here. And note that the description I used is drawn directly from the in-text and in-world description of what's going on presented in S:KoH.
>
> As outsiders, we see the rune affinities. An Orlanthi is going to say
> something like "I am drawn equally to Orlanth and Issaries, which is
> why I am a Goodvoice", not "My Air and Communications runes are both
> a Mastery."
>
While I agree about the use of the word mastery, I would say that the Sartar book implies "I am strongly attuned to the Air rune" is very likely how an Orlanthi would put it.
LC
Powered by hypermail