From: David Dunham (ddunham@radiomail.net)
Date: Mon 31 Oct 1994 - 01:03:18 EET
Simon Hibbs said
>As a shaman, I would keep a copy of the 'visibility' spell handy
>at all times. Very usefull to cast either on yourself while
>discorporate, or on your fetch.
>
>>* What exactly a fetch is I'll leave for another message:
>
>I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this. I would say it is an
>awakened part of the shaman. Although I believe there is a case
>for saying that about allied spirits and familiars too.
Actually, I'd say you think it's just another spirit, one you can cast Visibility on.
Nick Brooke said
>If I were using an annual Economics table (like the Pendragon and PDP ones),
>the
>amount of Priests' RunePower spent for the benefit of the community would be a
>modifier to annual prosperity. Certainly for the Orlanth and Ernalda types. In
>fact, I'd set it up so having *no* Rune magic cast to benefit the people in
>normal ways (Cloud Calling, Earth Singing, etc.) was perceived as a *penalty*,
>not a "normal" position.
And you said you didn't want bookkeeping? The Ernalda acolyte in our Riskland game casts dozens of points of rune magic each year in support of the community, and probably an equal amount in support of our stead. I know the player keeps careful track on a Gloranthan calendar; perhaps our GM can provide more info.
Henk Langeveld
>>Nobody in my campaign can become a Priest or Acolyte without at least
>>having Worship, Sanctify, and probably Spellteaching. (Which, BTW, I
>>consider an argument against RunePower...)
>
>What about restricted RunePower, which splits the sacrifice
>for Divine Magic in POW sacrifice for RunePower and spell-learning
>as a separate procedure/ritual? It still requires people
>to acquire knowledge of a spell before they can spend their
>RunePower on it...
OK, I shouldn't have taken a potshot at RunePower. The Spirit Magic-like approach you describe is an improvement. I think I still favor the tradeoffs inherent in the current system. As it is now, our Ernalda acolyte has to decide whether she wants to help the community more, or maximize her adventuring power. (I think she's about 50/50, BTW.)
Mike Dickison suggests
>I think "hairy" is a term of abuse in Esrolia. It implies a boisterous,
>loud, crude, undisciplined, unwashed and so on person.
I like this; same term used by the Romans to apply to "uncivilized" Gaul.
>Incidentally, nobody seems to agree on whether it's Esrolian, Esrolite, or
>Esrolit.
When I saw "Esrolit," I thought it was a typo for Esrolite. Since English is so inconsistent with naming peoples, I'm inclined to go with Nick Brooke's little joke and call them Esrolites. After all, their neighbors are Sartarites (and Tarshites).
Scott Haney asks
>To hold a spirit, does a RQIII fetch need to
>maintain a sufficient number of MAGIC POINTS
>or PERMANENT POW to hold all of the spirits?
ALthough the section is confusingly written, I think it's clear that a fetch needs magic points, not POW, to hold spirits. See Magic Book, p.15 col. 1.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:37:28 EEST