>Arguing against 'my' system, do we actually need to qualify Deezola's
>Life rune for this? Her Resurrection is more costly than Chalana Arroy's
>because she is not the premier healing goddess. Whilst various mechanics
>have come and gone, it has been a constant since early RQ2 at least that
>those other cults which can resurrect people at all, cannot do it as
>easily as Chalana Arroy. (Though back in Cults of Prax, "more costly"
>resurrection usually meant only that the spell was not reusable).
Strictly speaking Deezola does not appear in Cults of Prax - it's the Seven Mothers cult which now does not have resurrection magic at all. There would also have been a game balance issue with RQII. Why bother with these specialist cults when you can have it all with one?
>That said, as the 'Binder Within', whose cult presides over trade in
>agriculturual produce within the Lunar Empire, maybe the 'trade' rune
>would be appropriate for Deezola generally, though maybe as a
>'descriptive' rune rather than as a rune denoting her magical
>competence.
The idea that Deezola heals primarily Lunars whereas CA heals anyone goes back a long way. That could be seen as 'trade' - you get Deezola's help by pledging yourself to the Empire. So yes, trade could be a good general modifier for the harmony rune in her case.
>Incidentally in terms of a phrase to differentiate between runes
>which denote a god/cult's magical power, and runes which just describe
>the god/cult better, I would suggest calling the first kind "Primary
>Runes" (as "core runes" is already taken and means something else),
>and the second kind "Secondary Runes". I would then put a definition
>of both sorts of rune in the equivalent of the 'blank cult outline'.
>Though there may well be an even better term for it.
I think 'descriptive' is the right word for the second kind. I'm trying and failing to come up with something for the first which isn't already in use when talking about runes.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail