That isn't my point. I don't really mind that Lodril has the Earth Rune, in fact it makes sense for him to have Earth/Heat/Disorder. My point was that Lodril was said to have the Earth Rune as a Game Mechanic. "Jeff Richard: However, this is a game rules mechanics question. For game mechanics purposes, Lodril has the Earth Rune (with some unique abilities associated with it)." This is bad, in my opinion. Sure, give Lodril Earth, but as a son of Aether, he should have the Fire Rune, or a derivative of the Fire Rune (Heat) in the same way that Dayzatar has Light (derived from Fire/Sky) and Yelm has Fire/Sky.
Mythically, don't forget that in the Division, Yelm was originally given the Earth/Underworld and Lodril the Sky but they exchanged theoe domains because Yelm thought that he deserved more and Lodril didn't really care either way. The fact that Lodril then embraced the earth gives him the earth rune, but he never turned his back on his fiery nature. Look at some of his children - Caladra, Gustbran, Mahome, Oakfed, the Agimori, all of whom are Fiery in nature. Many of his other children are clearly earthy and many others are defined by his role rather than his nature.
> > One of the reasons behind this [change] seems to be that Greg
> > Stafford's writings do not describe magic use in the same way as has
> > been described in earlier workings of Glorantha.
>
> Actually the split between animism, theism and sorcery has been around
> since Cults of Terror while Pavis: Threshold to Danger actually
> contained a paragraph about the differences in worship between the
> Praxians and the Orlanthi. These differences simply weren't reflected
> in the game mechanics at the time.
The change to using Runes to describe Gloranthan deities has nothing to do with the Animist/Theist/Wizardry split. It is that change that was caused by the differences between Greg Stafford's writings and the Gloranthan nature as we knew it.
> So if you prefer magic to go back to the way it was in the innocent
> happy way that it was in RQ2 that's fine but what you are in effect
> arguing for is the primacy of the game mechanics of that time to reflect
> the spirit of glorantha which sits rather at oddly with your above
> Lodril criticism.
I can't remember arguing that at all. Nope, not a bit.
I believe that I said that HeroQuest V1 described Gloranthan deities fairly well, if rigidly. I also said that I didn't think that HeroQuest V2, or what I have seen of it, did not describe Gloranthan deities fairly well.
I can't remember having said anything to do with RQ2 at all. Perhaps that is you trying to belittle an argument by saying that I am harping back to a golden age of RQ Glorantha. But, that is just me inventing something that you said to argue against it, one of your little tricks, I understand.
Perhaps I should reiterate, in case there is any confusion, because if Peter has misunderstood with his razor sharp undertsanding of things Gloranthan then perhaps I was not clear.
My problem is not with Lodril, or any other deity, being given any particular runic association, but with that association being given just to make the deity fit in with a rules mechanic.
I like my Gloramnthan deities to have a history/mythology, a nature, a role and a set of powers granted to worshippers of the deity. Those powers come from the deity's nature, actions in the God Time and also the deity's role. Those three things combined help define a deity's powers. How a particular Power is described is just a Game Mechanic (RQ2 RuneMagic, RQ3 Divine Magic, HeroQuest Feats - they are all descriptions of a power in a particular game). Where a game mechanic interferes with, or overrides, that process, it irritates me.
Perhaps it is just me. Perhaps I am stuck in RQ2 mode, not caring about modern Glorantha. I am clearly not a fan or supporter of Glorantha, being stuck in the happy ways of RQ2.
See Ya
Simon
Powered by hypermail