and
> In my view feats are merely incidences of the power inherent in an
> affinity. Orlanth has the power to imbue stuff with the power of
> Thunder because he is Thunder; that he once enchanted a
thunderstone
> and lobbed it at his enemy is merely a sign of that power. I can
use
> that power to enchant thunderspears or summon storms with a
> thunderstone.
>
Exactly. This was the point I was trying to make in:
http://www.egroups.com/message/hw-rules/4813
and also in
http://www.egroups.com/message/hw-rules/4817
It is why I would only allow interpretations of Snarl Darkness that use th power for Terror because that is the affinity. The affinity is the power of the god tht you are exercising. Th feat is just a way of using it tht a devotee has learned, you can improvise others at a penalty, you can learn others.
Allow the players to create feats to learn that fit the effects they want and don't forget the rules abstract effects out.
For example if you are unhappy that your characters no longer have Bladesharp allow them to take it as a feat or improvise it under the Orlanth Adventurous combat affinity and agree what it does (adds an edge?)
The feats are examples the players conception of the character should decide how he uses that affinity.
I think I remember Greg at a convention in the days of RQ3 saying he was unhappy wiht Divine Magic in The RQ rules, because he saw invoking divine power as more improvised, An Orlanthi should be able to invoke the powers of Orlanth to call winds etc. not through specific leared spells but through his connection with the god and the effects should be individual to the situation - in this way it is a bit more like Divine Intervention used to be than rune spells.
For those worried about how magic works in Glorantha under the new rules surely this is it. Your connection with the god allows you to affect certain areas of reality that he has an influence in and manipulate them to your favour.
Ian
Powered by hypermail