Re: Are 3 worlds and concentration a "new truth"?

From: David Dunham <david_at_...>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:59:55 -0800


>You mean like PCs in my game or in David Dunham's? I can't speak
>for David, but I am just fine with the concentration requirements.
>Makes perfect sense to me. In my group, half the players are now
>devotees (after five years of game time), the other half are
>concentrated initiates, except for the kick-ass weaponsthane, who is
>a non-concentrated initiate. In David's game, none of the players
>are devotees, and several are not concentrated.

Well, there are ways in which I'm not completely happy (mostly the precise costs involved), but I do think the rules are quite playable. In my game, I think the decision whether to accept clearly useful -- but blatantly weird and foreign -- magic was one that players had to make in character terms as well as simply by the rules, and that's the important thing. The fact that one player essentially waffled on this shows to me that it wasn't an easy decision, and I think that reflects Glorantha very well.

(I may be running one of the more 3-world games at present, or would if Pam still could make it, what with theists, wizardrists, and animism-users running around.)


David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page:
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein

Powered by hypermail