Re: Common Magic Power Level

From: Mike Holmes <mike_c_holmes_at_...>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:15:27 -0500

>From: Light Castle <light_castle_at_...>

>And that's where I disagree. Because I see just as many things in
>specialized magic that seem like they would fit in with those common magics
>that are "homey" and bunches of common magics that read as "powerful".
>Especially as you branch across the many books and not just the HQ book
>itself.

Well, maybe I'm only paying attention to the HQ book. But this is largely going to come down to personal perception. The only data point that I can provide is that I've never seen the behavior you claim will happen. Everyone I've played with has a vision of common magic that makes it less than the ultimate form of magic.

>>How about this - if you specialize in an otherworld, you can keep all of
>>your common magic.

>Nope. Your solution would be the maximum twinkishness, except for the cult
>restrictions.

Not sure what you're saying. My example is how the rules work now. Using the same logic about restriction that I have, yeah, you could dissallow my version. But then you can dissallow the common magic crock you're suggesting, too.

My policy has been to let players keep all the common magic they like. If everyone can do it, then it's not really "twinkish." It even has an in-game explanation that makes sense (if you were going to devote to a diety, perhaps you, too, would learn all CM feats before then). If it's rare, well, they're player characters. So what?

In any case, you only even theoretically have the problem that you claim if you dissallow this.

>Now, I can agree with that. In fact, that would remove a lot of this
>problem. But apparently the 3 worlds thing is important to Glorantha.

No doubt it's important, but the question is whether or not the structures really add to our understanding of the in-game situation, or just make it harder to understand. The rules don't have any mechanical differences between "ranged combat" and "close combat" yet that works just fine with one system. Why should magical differences have mechanical representation?

Or so the argument goes. I'm pretty sanguine about the whole thing myself.

Mike

Powered by hypermail