In other words, is the current "Each of these has a magic system that works this way - regardless of the specific culture in question" a reflection of some Gloranthan reality or just a convenient thing for the sake of game? As it is now, all theists get magic the same way and have the same capabilities - is that a truth of Glorantha or a useful shorthand? This is the World of Glorantha list, not the HQ2 rules list nor the MRQ rules list, so I am trying to tease out which part is representative of Glorantha vs which is just a game convenience.
Given HQ2's rule structure in particular, it seems that if the
"Gloranthan reality" is that magic is approached very differently in
different cultures, regardless of sharing a theist bent, then that is
not beyond the rule system, even if broad-brush strokes may be similar
or a "if you don't feel like making it up from scratch this is the
general pattern for a dominantly theist approach" would be useful.
>
> The three basic methods of worship are, among other things,
> purification magics to gain greater personal/group identification with
> the "stuff", and consequently to rid oneself/-selves of the "other"
> kinds of stuff.
>
I like that, although it seems that this only ever shows up in rituals.
People don't seem to do that split in their personal magic (although I
suppose it could be a "this was necessary when you got the magic in the
first place).
>
> This is unlikely to be useful information for gaming by the way, for
> which : apologies... although Gloranthans with the appropriate magical
> senses *can* tell the difference between these different species of
> magic and otherwordly "stuff".
>
Right. Which is a good point in favour of the "no, they really do think
of these as three unique sorts of beings".
Hopefully my actual question is clearer now. Is there any in-Gloranthan reason to assume that all theist cultures have three runes they get as lay people, rise to initiate status with those specific powers, and then progress to devotee in the same way? Do all forms of Sorcery/Wizardry have the same grimoire and adept stages of advancement, even dwarves?
Because it occurs to me that the "veneration, sacrifice, ecstatc" distinction only seems to apply to rituals, and even then it seems that rituals mix elements of all of those very often.
Even the "A feat is something you are, a charm is something you have, a spell is something you know" doesn't appear to super useful. A magic item is something you have, but could be Theist or Essential. You have to know what to sacrifice. You have a relationship to your god or saint, not just a spirit. Many minor charms involve leaving an offering for a local spirit, which looks a lot like sacrifice. A wizard could summon a demon or a underworld spirit and how is that not looking just like animism?
So what I am trying to ask is whether the split in the magic system rules and mechanics are supposed to reflect fundamental Gloranthan reality (A theist cult looks like a theist cult looks like a theist cult, no matter where on Glorantha it is) or are just a convenience for the game. OR something in between - Theist magic always has to focus on manifesting/incorporating the rune in the form of the specific myths of a god, Essential magic always involves a specific invariant effect, Animism always is mediated through spirits. - but the mechanics of how different cultures get there are different.
Is what I'm asking clearer now?
LC
Powered by hypermail