Todd Gardiner wrote:
> I guess my point of view is that changing a rune (rather than just adding
> one), especially if it is to facilitate switching initiation to a different
> god, is game changing. To tread this path is to negotiate as a player first
> with the GM and the other players. At that point, you don't need rules
> anymore, just table agreement.
>
Actually, this entire discussion has made me realize I don't want magic
rules, I want credibility guidelines for table agreement.
I'll wait until I've seen how KoH handles it before making that my final
word on the matter, but I'm leaning that way.
> As for this situation in Glorantha, few people that attempt this will be as
> successful as Arkat. Most will be tormented by spirits of reprisal for their
> few lingering days, unable to fulfill obligations to their (former) god
> because they lack that Rune Affinity now.
>
Well, sure. That seems obvious.
Don't know if Spirits of Reprisal and all are still part of the package,
mind you.
> Dramatically, this story has interest. Especially in a role-playing game,
> since players like to challenge themselves with characters that are often
> unlike the culture that character lives in. (The Lone Wolf; the Barbarian in
> Civilized Lands, etc.) But the likelihood of such an event in Glorantha is
> probably a lot lower than people wanting to play through it. The credibility
> of such an outcome seems low to me.
>
the very fact this is common for players is why I think all rule
books/system books should specifically address the situation.
> But that's the fun of telling a unique story. Something "impossible"
> happens, something wonderful and challenging. No need for rules to create
> such an event.
>
Indeed.
LC