Re: Mundane Supermen versus Supernatual Supermen

From: Philippe Krait <philippe.krait_at_...-csf.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:18:47 +0100


> From: Mikael Raaterova <ginijji_at_...>
>
> >The problem is in the interpretation of this ability as
> >something powered by magic or whether it is just the
> >result of some heavy training and exercise. If it is just
> >a mundane ability, then is it sense in Glorantha that a person
> >using no magical ability can outrun a horse across an open plain?
>
> Part of this problem i think stems from the Greg-determined Mastery
> Inflation. Since an ability isn't 'heroic' until you get your third
> mastery, two masteries isn't very exceptional.

But only part of it, as I personnaly believe that mundane "skills" don't become "magical" just by being increased in an "everyday" manner.

> If, OTOH, your first mastery represents a step into the extraordinary
> (i may be a bit odd, but i interpret a 1-point increment in HW as
> equal to 5 percentiles in RQ; hence 1w equals 105%) then i have no
> problem with humans outrunning horses, since at those levels the
> mundane ability has ceased to be 'mundane' in any meaningful sense of
> the term.

First, having 105% in a skill was not "heroic" in any sense in RQ. There were 27 Rune Levels in Pavis, meaning that possibly 50 or more people had around 100% in some skills. And you did _not_ see people outrunning zebras or leaping over walls without powerful and visible magic. Second, in RQ, you could have 200% in running and still get beaten by a horse in a flat out race (without magic) because his MOV was greater than yours. This meant that mundane and magical training were very much separate, the way they still seem to be in HW (see my other posts on the subject). Third, the usual conversion rate (the only one I've seen discussed around here) does not equate 1 HW point to 5 %. The ratio and the base are quite different.

So far, you are the only person I've heard from that says that Masteries are steps into the extraordinary. Starting characters would start by being extraordinary in three attributes ! It just meands that they are simply not so extraordinary, quite ordinary in fact.

And this is why I don't like seing high abilities allowing magical like effects : I believe that the extraordinary magic of some cults gets diminished if everybody can get the equivalent by training only. What I liked about RQ and Glorantha was Magic characterisation (especially compared to AD&D at the time), i.e. the fact taht if you worshipped one god you had only that god's magic, instead of being a priest-of-all-trades-but mainly-healing-with-cure-light-wounds in AD&D.

By saying that you only have to raise your skills to get magical-like effects, you acomplish two things (both of them bad in my opinion) : you diminish the importance of the myth and the cultural links and you get a "super-hero" world where people accomplish incredible things everyday, thereby diminishing the impact of the magic and creating (if you are not incredibly careful) a great number of inconsistencies.

On the other hand, the approach of keeping magic where I think it belongs, i.e. feats and spirits, your world is better characterised but it does not prevent it to be as magical as you want.

But, as always, YGMV...

Philippe

Powered by hypermail