The contents of these two threads are crossing over and have long since ceased to have anything to do with the subject. I for one am hoping all the discussions continue but can the interested parties start new threads with appropriate subject before a moderator comes along and enforces it?
Suggestion: reply to this and the Three Worlds Model thread with the new title(s) (subjects) and then post your continuances in those new threads.
Cheers
M
-----Original Message-----
From: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com
[mailto:WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of L C
Sent: 12 December 2009 00:29
To: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: So now that you have your copies of
Sartar
julianlord wrote:
>
>
> Peter :
>
> The N Worlds business is confusing, although it has become quite
> robust from a deeper cosmological perspective.
>
>
> The game rules that were derived from it in Hero Wars and the earlier
> HeroQuest books were OTOH fairly top heavy and of dubious gameability.
>
I don't object to it as cosmologically important. I object to it for
exactly the reasons you say. The rules seemed top-heavy, of dubious
gameability, and generally constrictive.
>
> The only typically meaningful distinctions are between Our Home ; Our
> Neighbours' Lands ; Enemy Territory. Unless you are playing in some
> VERY strange kind of game with a great deal of activity in numerous
> otherworlds and the actual possibility by the way of the characters
> transcending them up/in to the higher/older planes (LOL), then you
> really don't need any more detailed rule than this.
>
Exactly. If, indeed, things are moving in a "This is our people/lands'
magic" mode, rather than overarching rules for "theist/wizardry/animism"
that trump local distinctions, I'll be very happy. I've always thought
(and retooled some of HQ1 when I played in Glorantha) that things should
be done at a pantheon-based/culture-based level, rather than cult and
otherworld-source level.
LC
Yahoo! Groups Links
Powered by hypermail