Douglas Seay wrote:
>
>
> > Hmm.... Why a power rune?
>
> If you can just have a single Element, I think power runes will be
> fairly common, but that is no reason to mandate one.
>
*nod*
I'm inclined to agree with you.
>
> In some cultures, the variations won't make it out of childhood alive.
> I don't know how the Char-Un will interact with runes, but I kinda doubt
> that oddballs live to grow up.
>
Fair point. :)
> Could the driving force of the Lunar Empire be a lack of coherence of
> runes? Lunarization removes the pressure to have just Air or Fire, or
> whatever? Maybe that is part of the liberating influence of the Moon.
>
Now that's an interesting concept. Care to say more? Putting Moon in interferes with the rest? Replaces something?
> >>
> > IMG you can change a rune, although it takes an HQ. One of the
> > characters I submitted to the Rule One contest had her Earth rune
> > changed to a Darkness rune after being dragged into an Uz HeroQuest.
> > (maybe it can be done with less drastic measures)
>
> Good. I'm not the only one.
>
I rather suspect just about all the Glorantha players, once runes came into play, started toying with the idea of what happens when that gets broken. :)
> > As was mentioned in an earlier conversation, do we have any reason to
> > believe (if we are assuming everyone has runes) that everyone has three
> > or that three is the limit?
>
> That's what has been put in print, but who knows what the future holds?
>
Well, exactly. Once upon a time (aka HQ1) the gods defaulted to 3 but it was officially acknowledged there was no real reason to limit it to such. So knowing if that's an actual limit or not helps. HQ in general has a certain amount of self-limiting behaviour, but knowing if 3 is a hard limit or a soft one would help.
> > Also, would it be "add the Lunar rune" or "Transform one into the Lunar
> > rune"? (Same for Dragon.)
>
> That is the question. Although never common, I think the transform
> variant would be more common. The exception being the Infinity rune: if
> you don't have the mojo to add the rune, you don't have the mojo to
> possess the rune at all.
>
Interesting. My default thought is "replace the rune" not add. I can
see an argument for either, though.
>
> > Again, the question becomes whether Runes are a nice bookeeping device
> > for the game and for Theist magic or a part of every character.
> (Even if
> > only Theists learn to ever draw on it directly for magic.)
>
> Unfortunately the official line seems to be theists only. My Glorantha
> will have runes for everyone, and I'm hoping that some guidelines for
> that will be available before I ever need to worry about it.
>
Mmm... It does seem official line is theists only.
I do think many of us thing that unreasonable. Nonetheless, I will see
if I can do theists without runes and other sorceries that match the
Rune advantage.
LC
Powered by hypermail