But what would this achieve? What would it add to the game? Would it help someone better visualise the role that they are playing? Personally I think not (but YGWV). All it would do would be to bog down a game in needless minutiae.
> I remember an example where practitioners of three different magic
> systems tried to move a big rock. The GM was supposed to give
> completely different vivid descriptions of what their magical efforts
> felt like. But they used the exact same rule mechanics.
> Boring.
What? It boring because they had the same rules system? If you follow this logic, then we need different combat systems for hand to hand combat, ranged combat, unarmed combat, mounted combat etc. etc. Just because the mechanics are the same doesn't mean it has to be boring. You don't need rules to allow you to vividly describe something. IMHO the rules are just a framework to hang your imagination on.
> PS Players who won't study for their rpg-sessions... why should they
> play in Glorantha?
Because playing in Glorantha is not an exam. That's why......
Darren
Powered by hypermail