From: Graeme A Lindsell (graeme.lindsell@anu.edu.au)
Date: Mon 01 Nov 1993 - 18:15:17 EET
Joerg comments on my comparison of Saints and Rune Magic:
>Nope: All POW is burnt off one-use. But that's what the theists tend to
>attack the Malkioni for: They burn off their souls!
People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones: one-use rune magic and divine intervention can burn off souls as fast or faster than any saint.
Sandy writes:
>Why can't Gloranthan polytheists pray to the various gods in THEIR
>pantheon expecting real supernatural help to the same degree as
>Earthly ones got any? Just cause initiates get Bless Crops doesn't
The current rules make it fairly clear they would get none. As Loren said, this is a motive to only respect those gods you are an initiate of.
Chris Cooke writes:
>I was just given some disturbing news last night...
>RQ3 is no longer in print!
>IS THIS TRUE?
I can't say but didn't someone post here a few months ago that
Avalon Hill's rights to RQ lapse if they let it go out of print?
Makes it seem unlikely. On the other hand, we can hope!
Paul Reilly writes:
>RQ3 material (and King of Sartar) seems to be taking a step backward
>toward D&D by casting the Lunars as evil villains for the sake of it.
Most RQ3 products seem fairly balanced IMO, esp the Glorantha pack. I can't recall any instance of the Lunars being portrayed as reflex villians in a published scenario. KoS is hardly an unbiased source: I'll be interested in what the Lunar book says about Argrath...
>> is it possible to remove the taint of Chaos from a creature?
> Of course it is. Lunar philosophers have long known a technique to do so.
>It involves teaching the being afflicted by Chaos to live in harmony with
>itself and the Universe. This technique has been known since the First Age.
>Storm Khans will verify that the taint is gone from one who has accepted
>our teachings...
Yes, but what about that SIZ 16 indestructible wooden toy duck with the spleen made of diamond that used to be our comrade: I admit he's become very eloquent after your treatment, but he hasn't turned back into Quacklin...
Graeme Willoughby writes about extension: Yes, I agree about its risks. One way of weakening it is to include the points of Extension with the spell itself as being unrecoverable until the spell ends. This at least stops them casting extended spells every 2 weeks.
Colin Watson
>So what do you all think: should the "standard" DIs be available
>to all or not?
I like the idea of limiting DI's to the powers of the God in question, but my GM thinks otherwise, for game reasons: the expense of a successful DI is so great that the supplicant should get what he asks for. He has a legitimate question: what useful DI could Thed, Goddess of Rape, give a broo worshipper in extremis?
Aside on DI's: I'm becoming increasingly disturbed at the way gods devour their worshippers souls for divine intervention. Perhaps DI should take sacrificed rune magic instead: that is what the god has real control over IMO.
Opinions?
Nick Brooke writes:
>I think it would be wholly perverse if the world worked that way -- though
>given that, it's probably a valid Lunar philosophy ("Love your Enemy", and
Not quite what I meant. There are gods that seem to exist only as enemies of others, and some gods (ie Storm Bull) that are defined by fighting a certain enemy. If no-one worships these gods, then perhaps they are sustained by the worship of those who see them as an enemy. Of course, they will never be as powerful as the actual god worshipped: they exist only to be defeated.
When a Storm Bull temple has a high holy day, they pray to "Storm Bull, Destroyer of Wakboth"; they are praying to two gods, protagonist and villian. Wakboth is trapped by the Block now, but if/when he is released, I think most of his strength will come from the fear that everyone has of him.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:32:03 EEST