> How equipment modifiers work is a function of the system. The system
> is just an engine, and engine that's designed to accomodate all
> levels of play. Jane is right. The "norm" is very dependent in
> context, both here and in the standard usage of the word.
I think this is where we agree to disagree. I think Glorantha is too big to fit into a single scale. So you have to choose a focus for your game. The focus gives you the norm. There should be no special rules and no modifiers for the norm. These are for what lies outside the norm (and thus is interesting to meet). I would never run a game with mixed parties of adventurers. I prefer a narrower range anyway.
The game system must be flexible enough to suit the focus. But it should also be tweaked to enhance it. For example, I liked the way theist magic rules were made more specific (without altering them, just by implementing them) to give the flavor of Heortling magic. Or the way the foes are presented in BA/OiD: always from the Heortlings' viewpoint. Not only the norm sets the defaults of the game, IMO, but it's also the lens through which the setting is viewed.
By way of comparison, think of WW's games. There's one setting and one grand theme (the World of Darkness). But each game approaches it form a different point of view. The game system is basically the same, but every game implements it in a different way, emphasizing certain things and neglecting others. The description of vampires in, say, Werewolf, is different from the description of vampires in V:tM.
Playing in Sartar or in Dagori Inkarth is not just playing in two different places, it's almost like playing different games. One of the strength of Glorantha, for me, is the cultural relativity. I want my games to enhance it, not flatten it. And I think that allowing for sliding scales helps.
-- Regards, Alexandre. "Cinq Milliards de races d'hommes sur Terre Est-ce assez pour croiser le fer...?"
Powered by hypermail