Re: Ho Much Rule fiddling Is Tolerable?

From: Dan Guillou <dguillou_at_Ou_e2xoLou8s_PNSo3Oyb5DLzGOxFeji1Ljg_YDvalyBWLgiABFD3Pq-O5g7D4-YWlJ>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 08:33:14 +0200


Roderick:
> You seem to be wanting a "magic system" where this particular abilty
*always* adds a bonus, that one *always* gives a edge, etc. The way the rules
  are written, it's up to the player to decide how the bility will be used, and the
  narrator to approve (or "Yes but", or "No but" or not approve it). So somtimes
  this feat is merely an augment, sometiumes it is the "active" ability, sometimes
  it just gives an edge - all depoending o how the players describe it being
  used.

I don't understand why you get this impression... I tried to be clear that although the rules allow a player to use an ability in any way the Narrator approves, we are unsure of how much the Narrator should approve. So, I never wished for detailed lists of what every spell _always_ does! I asked for a few (like two, or three, or maybe four) examples of what spells might do, to give the narrator a sense of standards, of how much is reasonable to allow.

Me:
  >> If you want to get your bureacracy on (to run your empire) Lankor Mhy
  >> doesn't have a thing on Buserian.
Rod:
  >That's because of the affinities available - LM would be taking penalties to
  >his feats trying to do the same sort of Bureaucratic magic as a specialised
  >Bureaucratic God

Well, duh. And if you're trying to locate a stolen book, a Lankor scholar is probably going to make a Buserian look kinda floundering and clueless. What I was trying to convey was that, as far as I understand how Glorantha works, some deities specializing in violence and destruction, have magic that is more effective, in the same way that some specialized deities are better at bureaucracy than generalists, who can do a bit of bureaucracy too.

Rod:
> There is no such thing as a "straight-up fight"

Channelling my half-darjiniite character Napat: "Oh, I beg to differ. You see, every century or so, those half-demonic baby-eating mad bastards over in Alkoth starts chanting `We Hate Darjiniite Usurpers!´ and beating the ground with their clubs, mouths foaming, and so on and so forth, whereafter they come running in huge mobs to my mothers homeland, and then we find that there is too, such a thing as a straight fight with a gaggle of Alkothi." Of course, I'll grant you that most of his mothers people melt away out in the swamps, and survive. But my point was that those who get cornered, or chose to stand their ground, are in for a world of unbalanced, totally unfair, rule-mechanickal hurt. As far as I understand it.

Me:
> > What kinds of effects are reasonable when you go beyond straight
  >> augmenting?
Rod:
> Ideally, magic should be using the same rules as other abilities
(except the
  "Resistance 14"). If you want magic to do more, then we really can't tell you
  where to stop, because you've already past that point. Add what feels right to *
  you*, but you're beyond the edges of the map, in "Here there be Dragons"
  Territory.

It's funny about assumptions...
I kinda assumed that "Here be Dragons" would be where anybody would go, or at least might end up willy-nilly, and hoped for a discussion about where to stop. And maybe some pointers about how to find ones way, out there.

Anyway. Greg recently told us that many of the old 3p. divine magic got turned into secrets for a while, but should rightfully be feats that requires a bigger-than-usual hero quest to obtain. So, those are examples of "Really Big Magic". Now me and my narrator are going to use them as scalers. We will assume that passive augmenting is "Small Magic" and active feating is "Big Magic", and that will at least give us a starting point.

Cheers,
Dan Guillou            

Powered by hypermail