> I think the whole idea will fall down when you actually try to create a
> system that associates traits with runes (in a non-culturally specific way).
Which is all very agreeable, but: Who (and what) on earth is being replied to here? Nameless quoting is a pet peeve of mine (not that I don't have a whole menagerie, mind you), and here the trail is no obscured that not even grep'ing through the Digest reveals the identity of Mystery Contributer.
> I'm currently inclined to believe that contrary to almost everyone
> elses theories, a well trodden heropath (Hill of Gold, say) is
> intrinsically absolutely no easier (or at least, not much).
Well, the obvious question is, compared to what? Compared to doing the same thing, had there been no Yelmalio cult, ever? Or if there had been no "spark gods" of any kind, at any point? It's hard to say, but I feel that "ease", and come to that having any possibility of the desired outcome in the first place has something fundamentally to do with its mythic significance. This gets back into Myth:Quest :: Chicken:Egg situations fairly rapidly, though.
> Some quests are
> still harder than others, but its not directly correlated to ease.
Well, perhaps some are "harder" because they have Big Goodies at the end (the full HoG quest), or because familiar quests have "hidden depths" to them, implying difficulties that an unknowing quester would not be aware of, unless he accidentally fell in one.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail