Re: Deep, not popular

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_DE7VWTQLU1yNswEmEAaDK8CcWQD7-pxQE6ttJXrrb1e655R8wrZF4W1EH9j1G>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 09:21:02 +0100 (BST)

> Paul King:
> If you're making significant
> > changes to Gloranthan background then I think that
> we do need to see
> > some justification as to why it is a good thing.
> And this looks
> > like quite a fundamental change to a well-detailed
> goddess.

Yep. Agreed.

> Oh, it has happened before - Babeester Gor and Maran
> Gor were changed
> so that Maran was the fertile one and Babs was the
> infertile, virgin
> scary one. My Glorantha does vary on that one,

Yes, mine too. Or rather, it doesn't vary and hasn't varied. I saw no reason to re-label my existing PCs and NPCs. Having a greater variety of Gor types was a good, and I'm using them, but they've kept their original names.                 



Inbox full of unwanted email? Get leading protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html            

Powered by hypermail