>Some other things could be described as augment-only (armor and weapons),
I have characters use their weapon ability as the main thing all the time (assuming it's a cool named weapon, of course). And if someone had cool enough armor, I can see that being the main ability used to survive (or even win) a fight.
LC
>Exactly, so why add the "augment only" hedge?
I think Ash's answer was a good one. It is not credible that lay members are as effective at using an affinity as someone with a deeper connection to their god. (This connection being qualitative, not just tied to a higher rating in the rune.)
>Look, a lot of this is probably holdover from that rule being in HQ 1
It's not. I asked Robin Laws to add rules detailing how to use HQ2 in Glorantha -- to play Greg's stories. (Jeff and Neil then developed them a bit further.) But they don't derive from HQ1, they derive from the idea that in Greg's stories, some people worship without being initiates, and that initiates get more magic from their god. (But are not as magically powerful as devotees.)
If anything, they were trying *not* to be HQ1, because we wanted playing initiates to be fun. *
>Todd provided examples where he would also make certain abilities
>augment only,
While I don't agree with him (see above), I just remembered that one of my characters had a magical whetstone. That pretty much limits it to augmenting.
But I say again: this is not a useful rules category. A credibility test is all you need. I can't cut you to death with my whetstone, I have to use my sword (aided by the magical edge).
David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
Powered by hypermail