> The other alternative is to allow such super-weapons to be
> acquired by anyone.
As opposed to the epic quest for the Wind Sword giving the exact same benefit as one would get by chiselling the storm rune on one's own sword and calling it the Wind Sword. Having dug up the legend, travelled to Balazar and climbed a mountain defended by a pride of griffins I'd expect something a little better.
> So that instead of it being the PCs' story
> it becomes the story of the collection of objects the PCs have
> acquired. There's also the risk of unbalancing the game between
> players because some have a super-weapon while others haven't.
The Risk of Unbalancin the Game can go jump in a lake as far as I am concerned. If you see it as such a great problem that a humble PC would get his/her hands on a magic item with attributes in the w2 or even w3 range, why not fix it with a more Gloranthan solution. It's not like there won't be a hero along to thank the peasant for finding the sword for him, and take it away.
> If a PC acquires Nose Biter you've got a problem in RQ because
> there's no way of representing any conflict between the PC's
> wishes and those of the Axe.
Huh? Not that I run my games with RQ but I don't think there would be a problem representing that struggle. Heck, representing the conflict by giving the character a "Nose Biter - 13" skill to raise would be right at the bottom of the list, if it would be on my list at all.
> One of the problems with Balastor's Axe and the Windsword are
> that they were both first described when RQ was little more
> than a D&D varient. So the descriptions in Balastor's Barracks
> and Griffin Mountain are in the D&D magic object style.
The exact RQ definition isn't important. They are just starting points for ideas to develop.
-Adept
Powered by hypermail