>The players were thrown back on that one thing they have - their
>brains. It was neat to watch folks make do and improvise.
>Relationships and inspiriation from them became incredibly important
>(I'm doing this to save my family!). The players really sat up and
>worked with the problem - they had gottena bit complacent about
>their magic so the sudden Test of Faith the Fimbulwinter caused
>really did shake up some conceptions.
Sounds pretty cool to me.
Anyhow, I think that it would take a pretty open-minded player to make a character who had this sort of challenge from the start, and intentionally, but I can see it happening. Again, my point being that I don't think that there's a problem with playing the Pavis character without having his magic. Would take a certain kind of player, of course, but I don't know that you need to change the restriction just to make Pavis an option for players.
Put another way, I'm just that crazy player who would do it. In fact, in the first Glorantha game I played in, I took a character who concentrated in common magic, but who specialized in charms. When Josh asked me why I didn't make him an animist instead, potentially much more powerful, I responded that I liked the common magic concept more - precisely because the magic seemed sorta rinky-dink.
In any case, as somebody else posted, the real test of "power" is based on relationships, and max level of ability, etc - which my character did just fine in. Because Josh made sure that the play pertained to my character. So, again, I don't see a problem with characters who are "weaker" than others. Not for everyone, but not completely unviable.
Mike
Powered by hypermail