David Dunham wrote:
>
>
> 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.
>
Ditto.
>
>
> 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.)
>
Yes, I agree that it is not credible that they are as effective, but as
you say, I don't think it needs a separate rule, I think it is just a
credibility test.
I think making any ability unable to be used as an ability (only as a
stretch or an augment) is unnecessary clutter and unnecessarily limiting..
>
>
> >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.)
>
Yes, and this was done in HQ1 as "augment only" when you could use
augments willy-nilly. "Cannot use to produce extraordinary effects" vs
"Can use to produce extraordinary effects" pretty much defines a clear
demarcation of power in my mind. ^__^
In Orlanthi rune-magic, it seems you have three basic levels: Cannot
produce extraordianry effects, can produce extraordinary effects, can
heroform the god. As a continuum of power/levels of understanding, that
works pretty well AND is fun to game.
(Of course, the lines aren't super-sharp, which is also fine by me. Lay
people can, in fact, produce extraordinary effects with their runes in
specific ways if they want to pay a hero point, and Initiates can
perform feats if they want to buy them.)
>
> If anything, they were trying *not* to be HQ1, because we wanted
> playing initiates to be fun.
> * There, wasn't that the guiding principle you were looking for? It
> should be fun to play a typical magician from your culture.*
>
LOL!
Certainly a noble goal. (And yes, absolutely, Orlanthi initiates are
more fun in this version than they were in HQ1.)
>
>
> >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).
>
Right. You and I are in agreement about that. In a different contest,
the whetstone might be used directly.
LC