wrote:
>
> --- In WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Ellis" <tim@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Except you can learn Talents - Flesh Man, for instance teaches them,
> > so they can't *just* be innate abilities. (Again, this is part of
> > my confusion. Why isn't Flesh man one of the "folk heroes" that
> > provides Common Magic feats rather than talents?)
> >
>
> It *is* confusing sometimes. We're imposing God Learner classifications
> on a natural system, and biologists know the headaches inherent in
> trying to classify natural systems.
>
> A Talent can be taught, sure. Just like riding a bike can be taught,
> without actually having to pretend you're Lance Armstrong when you go
> out to pick up milk. A feat requires emulating a specific entity, a
> talent does not. Additionally, a feat specifically has to come from a
> Divine entity (I imagine a concentrated theist would count?) while a
> talent has to come from an Everything entity.
>
Personally, I think that the examples in the homelands in HQ may have
been assigned between talents, feats, charms, and spells without a lot
of thought. I think the same effects, with slightly different names,
would emphasize the difference more.
That is:
- Long jumps talent
- Mr. Salmon's leaping feat
- Grasshopper jumps charm
- Spell of spectacular leaping
As a general rule, I think CM should have three or more words in the
names, to make them more specific than general. Mahome has a fire
affinity, and gives the light fire feat. Any similar CM ability
should be more constrained than that feat in my mind, as it is coming
from a lesser being.
For the PBEM game I'm starting up, since I wanted to put a bit of
focus on mixed religions and landscape magic I scrapped concentration
and made some mechanical differences between the different types of
common magic (and added CM blessings as the most common essential
common magic).
Regards;
Bryan