Personally, I tend towards "Alex's" (though writing in the third person always seems like a Bad Sign in any case), but I must confess to being to the sort of Unsophisticate who'd write (and say) "princess's", if not actively striving to be punctiliously Correct. (Another factor is that some pronounce it sans the terminal "s" sound, so take your pick.)
Thanks for the praise, but I have to confess I feel quite a long way from being in a position to propose terribly concrete rules for any of this stuff. (If anyone catches me starting to write "Primal Order II", shoot me swiftly and painlessly).
Writes Carlson, Pam:
> The Sanctify spell description I know is in the Magic Book of the boxed
> set of RuneQuest III, though I don't know if they sell it that way in
> Britain.
They certainly used to, my copy is in that format. I believe later editions (on both sides of the Atlantic?) appeared as a Big Fat Paperback of some sort. Said copy doesn't appear to imply anywhere that it's anything other than Standard Divine Magic Duration, unless I missed it entirely.
Allowing Sanctify to be quasi-permanent isn't unreasonable in itself, but I have a reservation or two about the idea. Firstly, it makes temple-founding rather easy and inexpensive, so a big founding ceremony, or any requirement to have a suitably sacred site, or even to have a minimal congregation would each seem to become a bit of an optional extra. On the down side, if the temple is maintained by one priest's spell, it might be rather embarrassing if he dies off, or has to cancel it for some reason, pulling the rug out from under the other worshipers. Also, it makes anyone with a couple of uses of same pretty much a pan-Gloranthan self-renewing rune magic show. Which brings me to:-
Jane Williams asks, with the merest suggestion of the rhetorical:
> Didn't someone decree, after an experience wth a certain wooden sword,
> that such portable temples were a Bad Thing?
Yes, indeed, Greg, in his "GM feeling Hosed by Powergaming Players, after he was Dumb Enough to give them it in the first place" Aspect. ;-) As presumably he's not Channeling this to the same extent these days, he may well have gotten less het-up about the prohibition. I have mixed feelings about it myself; currently, I suspect that mobile temples only occur where the whole congregation is itinerant (nomadic tribes, legions, etc), or where one travelling priesthood "services" a number of static communities. (I can imagine some Lightbringer hero running a minor temple on such a basis.) A "troupe" of PCs running around with their Own Private Temple _does_ seem a bit on the cheesy side...
Off to find some Irish Edam,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail