[on the issue of a sword enchanted with Humakti and Mostali magics]
>In many ways I think of this as a cultural/religious issue more than
>a rules mechanics one.
I think saying that theistic enchantments are incompatible with sorcery is a statement about gloranthan reality rather than rules mechanics.
Now I can see a case for extending this principle further by restricting enchantments to being available by only pantheon or deity, but run into problems when trying to describe a good rule of the thumb.
For instance, are Ernaldan enchantments incompatible with Orlanthi enchantments? Can one enchant a scimitar with Yanafali and Irrippi magics? What about Jakaleel witcheries? Are Yelmalion and Elmali magics compatible?
One can arrive at a consensus answer for each of these problems but deriving a general rule is too complicated.
>The sword is the very symbol of Humakt - sure,
>handing it to some soulless mostali to paw over might lead to a
>sharper tool, but what does that say about your faith? Are you saying
>that you don't think Humakt's magic is enough? Would you be happy to
>see the mostali re-engineer your god? Next thing you'll be saying
>that in some combats you'll use an axe or a mace because they might
>be more effective in those circumstances!
Which is what the followers of Kargan the Warrior (Storm Tribe p103) do.
>Cult(ural) constraints are often the most effective controls on would-
>be minimaxing.
In a culture which has Javern Spithorn, I don't think Cult constraints are all that effective to prevent freethinking magic use.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail