On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 04:56:54PM -0000, Jeff wrote:
> > Sure, but such stuff is generally going to be explicable in a pretty
> > readily understandable 'social' level, I'd suggest, without having
> to
> > resort to much in the way of Deep Cosmological Otherworldly Matters.
>
> I believe that is what we have been trying to suggest.
Not the impression I've gotten from what Camo's been posting, on his impression/understanding of said rules, I have to say. I'd have been pretty much happy with a "it depends", before we got into all this Otherside Taxonomy stuff, which has more than a little baggage in my mind...
> I view 'Common Magic' the same way I view folk magic. Its "The Stuff
> We've Always Done Because Its Useful."
That'd be a viewpoint I'd be entirely comfortable with, it being necessarily locally (dare I say subjectively?) defined, and not exclusive.
> "What's that?"
> "Its a fetish I got from Drumming Always Thunder. You know, that
> crazy old shaman who lives up in the hills."
> "I don't want that thing in the house."
>
> "What's that?"
> "Its a lucky charm. Aunt Hildy made it."
> "That was nice of her."
Shades of that in my previous game... Redfeather the Shaman? Oh, you mean Mad Old Uncle Conn...
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail