From: Graeme A Lindsell (graeme.lindsell@anu.edu.au)
Date: Wed 02 Feb 1994 - 22:53:47 EET
Replying to David Cake replying to Oliver Jovanovic
> [RQ:AiG is driven by the need for a ]
> > viable alternative system of Gloranthan magic that can compete with,
> > but is different from divine and spirit magic. The characteristics
> > of Gloranthan sorcery are that it is skill based, and potentially
> > soul destroying.
> I agree with the skill based bit, but where does the soul-destroying
> bit come from? I think that you hve been listening to priestly propaganda.
One question for those who have the draft: exactly how skill based is it?
I've heard about the Maintain skill, so there is at least one more
manipulation, but is it still one spell = one skill?
The reason I ask is that in RQ3 it was significantly harder to become
a sorcerer than the other magicians. You basically had to design a sorcerer
from day one, whilst you could become a priest or runelord (or to a
lesser extent a shaman) during play. The basic problem was the need to learn
a _lot_ of skills: if you wanted to be able to cast them without 20
minutes of Cereony then it was even harder, as you have to learn a lot of
skills and then train them to a high level. The advantage to trying to do
this was that a powerful sorcerer was the most effective magician, at least
on the mundane plane.
Now most of the advantages of being a sorcerer (very long duration and
range spells) have gone, but it has been made more difficult to become
at all effective, since manipulation is based on skill (a change I applaud
BTW). If the number of skills that need to be learned hasn't been reduced,
or the sorcery spells made more effective than those in the RQ draft 1.0,
then I can see no reason for players to want to become sorcerers, and I
doubt sorcery would last as a technique against Divine and Spirit magic.
> Sorcery is potentially soul-destroying - but so are divine and spirit magic,
> they just won't admit it. Just ask the Malkioni -'No, sorcery is the only
Especially DI's: they can destroy souls faster than any Tap spell or
> Sorcery in Glorantha does not consist of sorcerers,
Well if they aren't made significantly more effective, either by having
vampire.
> > even master sorcerers, that can maintain dozens of small spells, or
> > easily cast spells at great ranges, and the mechanics intentionally
> > reflect this.
better spells or less skills (say the skill Tap to tap any stat, or Enhance
to replace the various Enhance (Characteristic) spells), then I doubt that
there would be any Sorcery in Glorantha.
> Sorry, but this is one thing about RQ4/AIG that I just hate - the
> desire to completely remove the extended range/duration as a viable option.
> (and I am sorry, but permanent POW for very dull and difficult 1-use effects
> is not a viable option)
Total agreement here!
Graeme Lindsell a.k.a graeme.lindsell@anu.edu.au
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:33:40 EEST