Sorry about the misreference.
>Yes, I do worry about the details. The details are what I love about
>Glorantha. The depth and detail of the cultures and religions. I don't
>want it all to degenerate to "whatever feels cool at the moment and
>amuses your gamers goes".
> I want details. I want Glorantha to feel real. I want my gamers to
>feel the hot sand in their sandals and worry about their bronze sword
>getting dull. I don't want Xena vs. Batmat cinematics in gloriously
>vague dreamcolor.
There are world details and game details. I love world details. Game details aren't usually worth the bother. World detail makes Glorantha more real, game details doesn't, and usually paints a wildly skewed picture of Glorantha.
I'd like to see more detail on the cultural meanings of Thunderstones, but game mechanics about it doesn't do it for me.
>But is the current view then that we should cast away all cohesion and
>similarity between our views about Glorantha? What good will the
>published stuff be then?
Same as always. Published stuff constitutes the common, shared Glorantha. Those parts of our Gloranthas that isn't detailed in print (and a lot of same that *is*) will be dissimilar. It isn't a brand new problem that HW has brought into being.
>Are we all just left to our own devices. The
>cults for instance get only the bare outline, with feats named with
>whatever amused the writer at the moment "the names mean nothing anyway,
>they'll just have to make it up themselves"
Oh, come on. Nobody is willfully making Glorantha more vague.
> > The RQ version of Thunderstone was a stone imbued with the power of
>> Thunder, usable only for lobbing it at your enemies. The HW version
>> is that you imbue a stone with the power of Thunder, usable for
>> whatever is appropriate, which includes, but is not limited to,
>> lobbing it at your foes.
>
>And this makes for a more believable and deep Glorantha to you?
Yes. The RQ version of Thunderstone paints a far too simplistic Gloranthan reality, as pertains to Thunderstones. You do this magnificent enchantment and end up with a souped-up slingstone. Is that all there is to it? HW lets me treat Thunderstones far more realistically.
> > Why do you feel this acute need to have everything determined and
> > described? It boggles me.
>
>It's the details that make the world. Othervice we are just playing make
>believe, and we dont need any rules or backround for that. The details
>make Glorantha come alive.
Yes. Details about the world. Not about game mechanics.
> > Remember, just because something was determined in RQ doesn't mean
>> that that description was actually correct or exhaustive.
>
>It's way better than not having any!
Please! How much Gloranthan details were in the RQ2 box? Details about the world came in the supplements. There is far more Glorantha-material in the HW box than there was in the RQ2 and 3 boxes together.
Thunderstones weren't even mentioned until GoG, IIRC.
-- - Mikael Raaterova [.sig omitted on legal advice]
Powered by hypermail