Gloranthan scripts; divine magic; temples; scenarios

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: David Dunham , via RadioMail (ddunham@radiomail.net)
Date: Tue 02 Nov 1993 - 09:55:47 EET


Loren, thanks for posting the conference.

>PRHarmaty: I don't feel Stormspeech should be written. The
> oral tradition thing.
>Ekron: Sartarite can be a script. I just don't know about
> Stormspeech. Sartarite is cool by me

But why couldn't you write Stormspeech in Sartarite letters? Mongolian was originally written in Uighur. Lots of languages use the Roman script.

I always figured Glorantha has a lot more languages than scripts (writing systems). Most were probably spread by world-wide empires such as the Jrusteli. Which raises the question: is there written Tradetalk? It would seem appropriate for contracts on the one hand, but if it's a pidgin-type language, I wouldn't expect a written form. (I think in my campaign I once described it as being very pictographic.)

>From: JARDINE@RMCS.CRANFIELD.AC.UK
> If you use the reusable divine magic for initiates (once per year)
> and reusable once per season for priests (they get the spells back
> on holy and high holy days). Then the great resurrection debate
> is fairly immaterial, a priest could cast resurrection 5 times a
> year and the odd initate with the spell is not going to greatly
> increase the total number available.

I'd have thought that even under a system which lets initiates regain divine magic, they aren't allowed to sacrifice for spells listed as one-use (whether or not priests can renew those).

Nick & Sandy:
I quite agree, temples should be treated more loosely than the RQ3 rules. It's too bad nothing in print suggests that temples aren't always fixed sites (yes, Orlanth worship may be outdoors, but that makes me think of Stonehenge, not just any old place where the Godi plants his staff).

>Me, I'm not too bothered by Rune Magic recovery: it takes place out of game
>time, and therefore isn't all that interesting.

Not in the sorts of RQ games I run...

Which leads me to a comment Nick made about Gaumata's Vision being one of the better scenarios. Sorry Mike, but I don't agree -- it seems to be an example of a somewhat disturbing trend in RQ Renaissance scenarios which probably stems from Ken Rolston's excellent abilities as a GM.

Recent scenarios are heavily geared towards a particular sort of character. GV is far better the way Nick ran it, for Sun County characters. Nick's also told me that _all_ his players run Sun County characters. What a luxury! In my Gloranthan campaign, we do have 3 Grazers, but also a Sartarite Uroxi, one or two Praxians, and possibly a Sartarite Humakti. (My Griffin Island campaign is worse, in that only two characters speaks the same native language...) The mixed party has always seemed the norm.

I ran Melisande's Hand, but only one character could participate (the Uroxi, tho someone rolled up a Magasta worshipper!).

The excellent Riskland campaign requires Orlanthi. Troubled Waters requires a Zola Fel initiate -- a cult explicitly stated (Gods of Glorantha) as not for PCs!

Some GMs (Ken is one) are masters of getting disparate characters motivated. I'm not. Some GMs can get their players to create new characters. My players really like playing continuing characters (how else can they ever gain their Rune?).

I'd like to see more stuff like the old Pavis/Big Rubble (anyone could venture in, and the Cradles scenario was for all non-Lunars). Or Griffin Mountain (suitable for natives or visitors).

A good scenario must be one I can not only admire, but use. That means I have to be able to use it in my campaign. I happen to run in 1611 -- don't tie your scenario to a particular year (a regrettable flaw in RQ Adventures fanzine). Ideally, a scenario wouldn't even be tied to a locale (e.g. feuding Orlanthi clans could be anywhere), though this is obviously excusable in a scenario that's part of a background book. Most importantly, keep the scenario open to the widest range of PCs. Writing a scenario for Orlanthi may seem like a safe bet, but it's not (I've never run an Orlanthi, and the only one in my campaign is a Windchild).

David Dunham * Software Designer * Pensee Corporation Voice/Fax: 206-783-7404 * AppleLink: DDUNHAM * Internet: ddunham@radiomail.net

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:32:04 EEST