> > > Oh, come on. Nobody is willfully making Glorantha more vague.
> >
> >No? It sure seems like the new and Vogue design philosophy is making
> >sure of that.
>
> I haven't noticed that Glorantha has suddenly become more vague.
Our orlanthi have powers of which we only know the name, and have no idea from where this name comes from (or wth it means). Our babester Gori either have darkness powers or are expert at fighting darkness...
> >> 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.
> >
> >Just? Why is slingstone magic poor to you? Why does every theistic feat
> >have to "do everything and clean the kitchen sink too"? To me it feels
> >like lazy gamedesign. It's a way of avoiding the work of thinking it
> >out, and leaving the responsibility on each and every GM actually
> >running the game.
>
> My point was that it irritates me that the ritual to enchant a
> Thunderstone can *only* result in a souped-up slingstone. I simply
> don't see theistic magic as being *that* specialized.
>
> For campaign-technical reasons i like to have fluid, versatile magic
> with a minimum of book-keeping and referencing. It takes too much
> effort to keep track of lots of specialized magics.
I like to make the effort. My best analogy on the orlanthi are the Viking age Finns, who had thousands of spells and chants for every situation, from binding swordcuts to starting fires (and cursing or killing your enemies, or making cheese).
> And theistic magic actually does everything and cleans the kitchen
> sink too; you can (and should!) improvise lots of effects from any
> given affinity. Orlanth has the power of Storm in general; not an
> array of specialized storm-related spells.
Yes, but I like to think that the actual feats are referring to spesific _feats_. Vinga leaping over the <insert name here> river, etc. When you need something else, improvice the feat from the affinity. If one is going to allow any old interpretation on the feats, then why have named feats, why not just have the affinities? I like to see a lot of feats, the commonly used ones learned, and the rarely used ones improviced. I'd also let people develop individual feats (with a lower cost), and not just the affinity. So one could have a huscarl character who specializes on fighting with lightning, and so on.
> > What's the allergy with game mechanics anyway. HW has
> >gone so Rules Lite that we are having trouble with simple things like
> >archery or knowing what the "#%"% a given feat is supposed to do anyway.
> >Is that making it easier to run a game in Glorantha. I don't think so.
>
> People are having trouble with archery because they assume it must
> work in a simulationistic manner. It's not a problem with the rules
> per se, but with player assumptions. And on that note i do agree that
> it would have been nice with better examples and suggestions on how
> to use the mechanics in play
This is basically what I'm after. Also would it hurt to give just a bit more info on the feats. Some of us really like to know whether a feat means that Babs has darkness powers or antidarkness powers. It's not like they are the only feats awailable to Babs cultists (nor do they have to be very narrowly defined, but guidelines would not hurt)
> A feat is a suggestion on how to use the affinity. A feat does not
> have a precise, unchangeable effect, not even in Glorantha.
Funny that. I would think it does. It copies or draws on an act of a god or a hero. Sure some powers are wide ranging and flexible (Orlanthi commanding the storm), but some are small things, like enchanting thunderstones, or learning a swordsman hero's sword trick.
> > > Thunderstones weren't even mentioned until GoG, IIRC.
> >
> >But GoG handled them rather nicely. Ready to play and all.
>
> Which misses the point. Before GoG you didn't even know about
> Thunderstone. Did your Glorantha suffer for the hitherto unknown lack
> of Thunderstones?
Um, no? But it got better with the added _detail_.
-Adept
PS. It's been nice to hear about the many positive experiences people, and especially new people have had with Hero Wars. The future may be brighter than I've tought.
Powered by hypermail