RE: [HeroQuest-rules] One System to Rule Them All (Was: Re: [WorldofGlorantha] Re: How Much Rule fiddling Is Tolerable?)

From: Sam Elliot <samclau_at_o38DI7v2L6NIQcPDK0Jpwb9eRaBzDcg8BksNbQWJQa4vssSxKvHtLYCuPoMSa4A_CFjVDnW>
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:06:18 -0300

Rory goes off on one, mostly making sense:
> Common magic - make it all augment-only, and forget about "where" it comes
> from (ie, remove the "Feat/Spell/Charm/Talent" categorizations).

Whether or not that is a good idea, improvement costs the same as other abilities - is that not going to be a problem? If so, how to solve it?

> Concentration - Rather than concentrate on a particular system of magic,
> concentrate on a particular being. So you want to Be a Devotee of Humakt?

Or...concentration as an ability which can augment your main magic use and un-augment (?) other magic uses. I think that's Mike Holme's houserule? Could even be merged with Devotee or whatever.

> Great, you can't have any other kind of magic (even Common magic). I'd
> abolish the "Concentrated Initiate/Practitioner/Lay person" categories
> altogether. If you want to concentrate, you need a strong focus to
> concentrate on. if you want to change your concentration (Now you want to
> a Devotee of Chalana Arroy?), then you'll lose some abilities because you
> were so focused on another being. Shamans would (I think) concentrate on
> their Fetch. Magi, possibly on their Familiar (since I haven't seen the
> rules, I can't really comment - maybe instead of their familiar, on a
> particular School or Founder node. I haven't bothered to think much on
> them).

Okay, but there'd be less special cases in the rules if this were done through abilities, as the Concentrated ability above.

> The question then becomes: "How much *you* want added?" In an ideal world
> (or, as we say around here: "If I ran the zoo"), the basic presentation
> would present the three-world mopdel in the "Where we get our magic from"
> text, and be pretty vanilla in the "How do we use it" part. But the
> magic levels *should* have more particular-to-their-system rules.

Yes. That's what I said before. You're just using more words ;-)

> Go ahead and present counter-arguments if you want, I don't really care.

This man has been in the web-world too long :)

Sam.             Received on Sat 21 Jul 2007 - 15:06:18 EEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 04 Jan 2008 - 23:00:21 EET