Tim Ellis wrote:
>
> In message Digest Number 94, David Cake writes
>
> > Of course, it helps if, like the SFC, you have several
> >players with a vast knowledge of Gloranthan myth and legend.
>
> or, probably, players with virtually no knowledge, since no one will get
> into arguments as to whether the myth is "right" or "appropriate". The
> "nightmare scenario" would be an inventive player with little or no
> Gloranthan Knowledge, and a "by the book" RQ Grognard objecting to every
> new myth. (Fortunately I am likely to play with far more of the former
> than the latter - the games might not end up as "pure" Glorantha, but I
> will be kept on my toes....)
We have that problem. Or rather, we have a very inventive, somewhat rules abusive player (althought, with some justification, he feels he's testing the rules envelope) -- its AMAZING the myths that Humakt was into... Just amazing. We've got some grognards and some newbies. One of the newbies has been making Hedkoranth noises -- which is neat.
> Does anyone have any examples of where the GM needed to adjust a Players
> "new myth", either to make it "more Gloranthan" or just to ensure it
> still provided a challenge and didn't just wreck the scenario they could
> share with those of us who suspect we may want to do this in the
> future....
Yeah. We had a humakti who wanted to have a variant of Humakt in which he had not lost his air powers (this was in character creation). All of them. And stay an ordinary Humakti. We suggested that he should just become an Orlanth Initiate on the side. This was considered acceptable.
One should pay attentionto what the player's want for their subcults. And to make sure that they have their time constraints taken care of. I find that as PC's invent more subcults for their god, they relinquish their other initiation (yes, I allowed a Devotee and Initation if they weren't too diverse in purpose)
Jeff
Powered by hypermail