> You are right that a talent is magic you have that isn't dependent upon
> any otherworldly factor. I was trying to use the "something you X"
> tests to determine if it is divine, and that test is inadequate. It
> most certainly passes the "something you are" test, which generally
> indicates divine origin.
There's such a thing as going too overboard. The rules clearly distinguish talents from rune affinities. The something you know/have/is part of you was constructed to distinguish feats, charms and spells from each other and omitted talents. I would simply add that a Talent is you or something similarly snappy.
> From a practical point of view, the difference is clear: talents are
> active and can only be taken at creation time.
Again you are binding yourself unnecessarily to the rules. So there's no circumstances whatsoever you would allow a talent to be obtained in game play? What about the rainbow caverns where the heroes who get splashed by the blood of the rock lizard mother get tougher skin? Wouldn't you handle that by a talent or must it always be a spell, affinity or charm? Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes only states that the narrator should not "simply allow" the purchase of new talents in play.
> True divine magic is passive to the uninitiated,
Unless the uninitiated have a breakout ability which as described in Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes, for which I've already given page references for.
> Does this imply that
> there are gods who give out magic to non-believers?
Belief isn't the word. Does an Orlanthi knowing a spell means that the Invisible God hands out magic to theists? Their low level theistic magic is a portion of themselves that is connected to the world of the Gods, not the gods bestowing magic on non-believers.
Now if you can come up with a description on how the Malkioni or Praxians view the possession of low-level theistic powers (I'm thinking of calling them toes to distinguish them from feats), I'm interested but the god learner approach is not.
> If some gods bestow
> gifts to unborn/newborns/kids/whatever, how is that different than a
> talent?
Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes describes Talents. How is that not satisfactory for you?
--Peter Metcalfe
Either way you've got a power and no real strings attached.
> Since I first posted I've noticed the active/passive difference, but is
> that something most gloranthans would realize?
Powered by hypermail