> Flaws would include:
> 1. deviation from published materials
Though since, sadly, most published material is OOP this is a case for gentle
advice, not flaming.
> 2. switching between objective (godlearner) and subjective (cultist) POV
Always a tricky one. But both sorts of POV are needed.
> 3. inclusion of irrelevant material, or material suited to another cult
Mmm.. depends on what you find to be irrelevant.
> 4. overly broad cult functionality 5. overly powerful magic
"overly" is a matter of taste.
> 6. invading other deity's myths
So, for instance, you can't have Yelm having a version of his return from Hell that
disagrees with Orlanth's, as that would be "invasion"? Or what?
> 7. both rune lords and rune priests in the same cult
???? Eh? A lot of published write-ups have them. The two roles are different, and
require different skills. Sure, you have to think out why they're there, but you have to
do that anyway. What's your problem?
Oh, and by the way:
> an unsupported claim that they're the best thing since pickled walktapus
I've never seen any such claim being made. Where did you find it?
One good reason not to post cult write-ups to the Digest, BTW: too big! Next time, try dropping it to a web page and give a URL (plus an offer to email it to the poor sods with no web access).
Jane Williams jane_at_williams.nildram.co.uk http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~janewill/gloranth/
Powered by hypermail