> Bitching about things in a negative, indeed actively _destructive_
> manner, or alternatively insisting wrongfully that all glitches
> should be played according to the letter of game law and not its
> spirit, is self-evidently a poor method to attain and share in the
> enjoyment of gaming.
But that's the question. Is it a glitch? To me, the rules as written are sensible, what I would expect, something that fits well with my vision of Glorantha. Ignoring or changing the rules as currently written would be detrimental (though not massively so, it has to be said). So why should I do so? I seem to be being told that even if the rules help me, and enhance my Glorantha, I should ignore them, because they are 'obviously' wrong - that Greg, or John Hughes, or whoever it may be, would never willingly write anything that made sense, and that I'm somehow a bad person with my Hurting Wrong Fun for doing what the book actually tells me to do.
I find this a pretty weird attitude, and rather antithetical to YGWV. The idea seems to be 'Your Glorantha *Must* Vary [in this particular way]', and that's as bad, IMO, as 'Your Glorantha Must Not Vary'. Sure, you ditch the rules that don't make sense to you, but why reject the ones that do make sense along with them?
OK, so this is the Immoderate List, and if I took this stuff personally, I shouldn't be here. But I don't understand the attitude that says 'rules are irrelevant, and should be ignored - even if they are helpful'. The attitude that, if the rules as written somehow *support* your vision of Glorantha, its bad form to point this out. Why the fuck not?
Powered by hypermail