> > >And whether you called it "battle magic" or "common magic"
> instead is
> > >beside the point - you got it from spirits.
> > Not in RQ2.
> Yes, you learned them over a period of a week or two
> utilising mindlinks with the Runepriest and he would use the
> Runespell Spell Teaching presumably.
> There was nothing explaining how Shamans taught or learnt Battlemagic.
> Still, they are vastly different games and systems
But in the SAME UNIVERSE. And the same characters, in some cases. (I don't know of anyone who went from RQ2 to HW/Q without passing through RQ3, it has to be said, but I bet they're out there.)
Consistency. Remember it?
We managed to go from RQ to HW by saying yes, it's all "magic from your cult", it comes under your affinities, yes, the tattoo that reminds you how to do that spell/feat is still on your arm. And so on. We invented a few more stories about the spirits that teach you the spells, maybe they're the remains of ancestors/cult heroes who were good at that spell/feat. Or something. Spirit, ghost, ancestor, cult daiea(insert vowels)mon, whatever. Who cares? The PCS don't know the difference. The priest summoned it, they argued with it, they learnt a spell/feat.
But now Concentration and "no you can't mix them" comes along, and instead of this happy fuzzy go-with-the-story thing that *works* we find we're having to be precise, and make distinctions. In Glorantha??? Nit-picking rules instead of the story, in HeroQuest??
Look, if you want theists not to use sorcery, it's D20 and so on where you say "according to para 13.2.3a on p1023 of book 3...". In HeroQuest you have an NPC say "evil magic - burn him!" and then deal with it with your "gift of the gab" or something against the "hate sorcery" he gets off his homeland keyword. This just doesn't *fit*.
Powered by hypermail