From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer) To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest) Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily) Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 09 Nov 1994, part 1 Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM Content-Return: Prohibited Precedence: junk X-RQ-ID: Intro This is the RuneQuest Daily Bulletin, a mailing list on the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha. It is sent out once per day in digest format. More details on the RuneQuest Daily and Digest can be found after the last message in this digest. X-RQ-ID: index 6871: watson = (Colin Watson) - Re: Spirit taxonomy 6872: 100270.337 = (Nick Brooke) - settlers 6873: ddunham = (David Dunham) - Re:fetches --------------------- From: watson@csd.abdn.ac.uk (Colin Watson) Subject: Re: Spirit taxonomy Message-ID: <199411081800.SAA02783@pelican.csd.abdn.ac.uk> Date: 8 Nov 94 18:00:33 GMT X-RQ-ID: 6871 ____ Alex: > [...] you could bind > a suitably meaty spirit as a _combined_ Intellect/Power/Magic spirit, > which would be somewhat gross. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with this. It's no worse than having 3 different spirits bound into the same object, and I imagine the cost (in terms of POW) would (/should) be much the same. > > You can't bind an Intellect spirit in the same way as you bind a Ghost > > because the former is (I imagine) a Beast-spirit whereas the latter > > is a Man-spirit. > > This seems very odd. Firstly, it seems counter to the intent of making > the Binding Enchantment the determining factor in the taxonomy of bound > spirits and their effects. I think I see the confusion here. As I see it there are two issues: #1/ What it takes to bind a spirit (in terms of simply holding it captive). #2/ What you can do with the spirit when it's in a binding enchantment. I reckon #1 is dependent upon what the spirit *is* (its "species" or whatever; this might correspond to the entries in the Monster book, or it might use broader categories such as Man-spirit, Beast-spirit, Spirit-spirit etc). But anyway, the ritual of binding is specific to a particular category of spirit. (ie. you can't bind a Salamander in a Ghost Binding Enchantment; but you might be able to bind a Wraith in one.) I reckon #2 is dependent on the added functionality of the enchantment. The basic binding enchantment simply holds a spirit captive. You can release it to perform a single service or, if you have a command-spell, send it out to perform several tasks. But I think using a spirit's MP or INT or spells while it's bound should be an optional, additional function of the enchantment (with associated extra cost). The current rules imply that the use of MP/INT/spells is a peculiar quirk of the spirit itself which only manifests when the spirit is bound. That's what I don't like. It's too contrived. Now, I don't think this necessarily calls for a rules re-write; it's just a different way of understanding the underlying process. Consider "Intellect Spirit Binding Enchantment" to be a convenient "package" which binds a (rather dumb) spirit *and* lets you use its INT. This doesn't preclude binding a Ghost and using *its* INT (though this should, of course, be trickier - perhaps requiring different rituals and more POW). > And also: since most Beasts can't know spells, > having fixed INT, why would Beast spirits make very good Intellect spirits? You've got me there. Mind you, I don't see why fixed INT shouldn't be capable of storing spells, although I agree that fixed INT creatures shouldn't be able to cast 'em. ___ CW. Glorantha's disk flowed over, and I wasn't there... --------------------- From: 100270.337@compuserve.com (Nick Brooke) Subject: settlers Message-ID: <941108204848_100270.337_BHL50-1@CompuServe.COM> Date: 8 Nov 94 20:48:49 GMT X-RQ-ID: 6872 Joerg: > Those of the settlers who came for religious or political reasons came > because they wanted to change their life from that accepted at home. Cart before horse. They came because the way of life previously accepted at home (their accustomed way of life) was now being changed. > I believe most fled because they resisted the dominance of the city- > dwellers, and to escape the taxes introduced by the Pharaoh. Que? I believe most "fled" to maintain their traditional way of life and religion. There must be a couple of gods in Glorantha unknown to anyone, but still there... And what's the difference to the people of Glorantha? --------------------- From: ddunham@radiomail.net (David Dunham) Subject: Re:fetches Message-ID: <199411090616.AA04568@radiomail.net> Date: 9 Nov 94 06:16:36 GMT X-RQ-ID: 6873 Dave Cordes writes >Personally I prefer to think of the bond between shaman and fetch as a >conduit through which the shaman can cast spells. This way you could use the >Visability spell to bring a captured spirit from the spirit plane to the >material plane. Yes, this is how I view it. This isn't explicit in the rules, however. ---------------------