orlanthumathi wrote:
>
> Perhaps unsurprisingly I am firmly on LC's side here, the fact that
> magic has a distinct feel, origin, or even power level could be
> entirely illustrated by textual description and guidelines as to how
> various peoples and cultures view and cast magic. The only necessary
> mechanics are a colourful description and a number, with more
> colourful or specific descriptions gaining relevant bonuses.
>
Right. That's the basic premise of the system I hope to get around to
putting down in full form sometime after I actually have a job and a
life again.
>
> Sure the runic affinity rules are interesting and colourful, and the
> rules for identity challenges and feats are cool, they can just as
> easily be reduced to genre guidelines. I forsee the various magics of
> Glorantha eventually encompassing a large collection of rules, already
> foreshadowed in discussions of spirit magic and lunar magic.
>
*nod* Identity challenges and such make perfect sense as explanations of
the specificness of feats. Feats get to be incredibly specific as long
as you maintain your link. That's something to help the narrator judge.
Genre rule, as you say.
>
> Not only are the core rules capable of modelling everything, in many
> ways their solution is far more elegant and efficient.
>
That's my view.
>
> Take for example the suggestion that for Theism "an affinity is
> something you are", for Spirit Magic "a spirit is something you have",
> and for Wizards "a spell is something you know".
>
Actually, I kind of hate that split in some ways. ^_^ But your point is
well-founded. That gives you a lot of room for interpreting what makes
sense, without need for extra mechanics.
>
>
> Using this basic guideline you can quickly start modelling theist
> magic as traits (both personal and cultural), spirit magic as
> belongings or relationships, and wizardry as skills.
>
I didn't particularly spell it out that way, although you are, of
course, correct. And since all of those are abilities...
> And, as each of these are mechanically the same anyway nothing more is
> required. Sure we can draw philosophical and theological distinctions
> between the various outlooks and even draw up guidelines as to the
> realms and possible effects of the various magics, but mechanically we
> are sorted.
>
Right.
I'm all for the common magic of your tribe and culture to just be part
of your Keyword. If it makes sense you would have some kind of small
spell/charm/talent/feat that helps with this, you can have it. It is
common magic and should only be allowed to help a mundane activity and
not produce an extraordinary effect (in keeping with Gloranthan genre).
You could say any use of your cultural keyword for magic not already
bought as an ability is a stretch.
But basically, I'm thinking along the lines of having an ability that is
"Initiate of Orlanth". "Wizard of the Church of Ashara".