> The major difference I see between these and the Gloranthan HW
> theist keywords is that your affinity names are extremely poetic,
> while the HW affinity names are extremely prosaic. I think this
Yeah. Initially I wanted to use thoise names as feats in their own right, but in that respect they were TOO obscure.
> Durbadath's?" overlap. However, I do worry that it may be a bit
> too hard to figure out how to invent entirely new feats from an
> affinity named "The Way of the Crane", since cranes really have no
> mythical associations for me. Of course, this may be just because
Sure. Different set of cultural references; they are not really mythic resonances so much as a kind of zoo-symbolism; the crane steps delicately and carefully, it spears its prey with a sharp, sudden, accurate movement. That sort of stuff. There will be enough supporting text to explain this, although I may have to write it myself.
> know nothing at all about L5R. In any case, I urge you to keep the
> runic equivalents as explanatory text, even if you do find a symbol
> set to express them.
Yes, I found that without a clear sense of what kind of function the feat was attempting to fulfill, an idea of the outline of the box in which it appeared, it was tricky to grasp the intent behind the feat name sometimes. So although I had not initially intended to keep the runic structure, I found it necessary, more or less. I could probably find chinese icons to stand in the place of runes, but I fear that would be almost more obscure than the runes themselves; at least, our western eyes are not trained to see the distinctions in individual characters which can be very subtle. On the other hand, the "evolved" form of chinese, modifying one icon with extra strokes, matches quite well with the existing pattern of gloranthan runes and their ancillaries/derivatives.
Powered by hypermail