> > Although the rules allow illegal combinations, you'd definitely need
> > to convince your GM that you can pull it off
>
>Thanks David, I am wondering what "illegal" means in this context
>though. Illegal in the terms of the culture, or illegal in the terms
>of the rules (of which I am still almost entirely ignorant - save what
>has been said in the various lists).
Elemental runes are described as incompatible with each other. But there will always be some player who decides he's going to play Pottery Boy, with Fire and Earth runes. Maybe he can convince the GM that he will use this illegal combination only for good (making pottery) and not evil (driving himself crazy).
Part of the problem is that internal struggle is difficult to pull off in a typical RPG session. Normally, we talk to each other. But the runic conflict is pretty much internalized. It would probably be a lot easier to do in a play-by-writing game, and more appropriate in a solo. Of course the rules want to support these styles as well as sitting around a table. But even then, it's a tricky situation. So the default is that you can't play certain combinations. (Note to Trotsky: not accounted for in boxed text.)
LC
> So are elemental runes the only ones with personalities associated with
>them?
Well, that would certainly make Humakti cold fish. Oh wait, they are. Oh wait, one of the personality traits of the Death rune is Unemotional.
-- David Dunham Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
Powered by hypermail