[Glorantha]Kids and Common Magic

From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_quicksilver.net.nz>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:55:08 +1200


> >What [kid-induced] weregild and sacrifice induced expenses would these be?

>Ever played King of Dragon Pass? That kid which tossed dung at the temple?
>Expensive in atonement... Humiliating the neighbors' Elmal Temple by the
>same method? Bad diplomacy.

Since kids don't require common magic to profane temples, this has nothing to do with the alleged bad-effects of

> >But common magic can't do that and the Feet dominates its trollkin
> >wielder through force of personality rather than any magical effect.

>This would be good on the rules digest then: when creating common magic
>animism charms, what are the chances of attracting something too big to be

None whatsoever.

>And how do I do this?

Making a common magic charm is like making a good luck charm. There's no major ju-ju involved.

> >>Common magic derived from e.g. the Stream is anything but a blunt weapon.
> >>Lesser embodied otherworld entities like Firshala and their magical gifts
> >>can be sharp weapons.

> >Firshala is not an embodied otherworld entity but a goddess entrapped in
> >the material world. Only when she is released will she provide magic and
> >as an otherworld being, she doesn't provide common magic.

>I don't quite see how Firshala differs from Imarja,

Imarga is the physical body of Esrolia.

>but what about the Stream?

The Stream provides no common magic but a bonus for sorcerors summoning undines.

> >So for practically all intents and purposes, kids do require adult
> >intervention to learn animist magic.

>If you call such spirits adults, yes.

Given that the number of spirits that are a) capable of teaching kids and b) willing to teach kids is close to zero, I fail to see how we should infer a general prohibition against common magic from this.

> >>Provided these entities are benevolent ones, or at least sufficiently
> >>propitiated ones. Herdboys and Oreads is an entirely different story.

> >An Oread isn't benevolent?

>In her role as seductress,

What role as seductress? You keep saying all this stuff but don't bother to explain any of it or how it relates to the original point.

>To use the common sense Peter claims as his own: The Orlanthi won't let
>their kids mess with entities outside of their control. Flesh Man charms
>probably can be given to kids "on a mission", and will be asked back.

Flesh Man doesn't teach charms, he provides talents. And since Talents are innate, they are beyond the ability of adults to regulate or even forbid. Hence Flesh Man is outside their control yet their kids are free to mess with him.

--Peter Metcalfe

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 6/7/04

Received on Tue 22 Jun 2004 - 06:57:04 EEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun 04 Feb 2007 - 19:57:52 EET