<html><body><div><EM>Tom said</EM> "I have always thought that this (sacrifice of valued beast/object) happened PLUS the POW!"<BR></div>
<div>Exactly correct.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Getting Divine Magic is a big deal. The gods want their pound of flesh, and for them Flesh = POW. Of course the applicant is sacrificing cattle (or flowers or heads of ones enemies or sea bass - whatever) and going through a major ceremony. That's all assumed (and probably should have been emphasized in one of the various god books or other) in the sacrifice of POW. You don't just march into a temple, write a check for 2 pts of POW, and walk out with Shield 2.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Sure, you can have a system where you trade oxen for Divine Magic, but that isn't RuneQuest. You can change the POW costs, make spells more or less frequently re-usable, make them more or less available to different grades of worshippers, more or less powerful, but the exchange of POW for divine intervention in the form of spells, as well as regular DI, is central to the dynamic of the game. If this seems to make Spirit Magic and Sorcery more attractive than Divine Magic, then there is probably something wrong with Spirit Magic and Sorcery in your game.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Just the viewpoint of one of the creators. :)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Steve Perrin<BR><BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid" webmail="1">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] House Rule Query<BR>From: Thomas Zunder <tom@zunder.org.uk><BR>Date: Sun, February 10, 2008 5:38 am<BR>To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." <rq-rules@crashbox.com><BR><BR>I have always thought that this happened PLUS the POW!<BR>Players would probably exploit this.. the actual sacrifice of POW makes the <I>player</I> feel it is a sacrifice, as well as the <I>character.</I><BR><BR><a class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:royce@efn.org" target=_blank _onClick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=royce%40efn.org');; return false;">royce@efn.org</A> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:49699.71.210.24.147.1202605910.squirrel@webmail.efn.org type="cite"><PRE wrap="">Hi, All,
I wonder if the following idea for a house rule would be a mistake.
Instead of sacrificing POW, a character may sacrifice an animal at the
temple. (Said animal must be bought from the temple priests at some
inflated price, of course.) Better spells would require a larger, more
expensive animal -- goat for weaker spells, bull for stronger spells,
and human sacrifice a possibility for bad guys worshipping disreputable
gods. (Ba'al, anyone?)
So, would this make divine magic _too_ accessible, _too_ cheap?
I am not wedded to the substitution notion, having merely stolen it
from Classical mythology, so please feel free to shoot it down.
Thanks ahead of time for any feedback.
Asher
_______________________________________________
RQ-Rules mailing list
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:RQ-Rules@crashbox.com" target=_blank _onClick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=RQ-Rules%40crashbox.com');; return false;">RQ-Rules@crashbox.com</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules" target=_blank>http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules</a>
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>RQ-Rules mailing list<BR><a onclick="Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=RQ-Rules%40crashbox.com'); return false;" href="http://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php?aEmlPart=0&type=reply&folder=INBOX&uid=1593#Compose">RQ-Rules<B></B>@crashbox.com</A><BR><A href="http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules" target=_blank>http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules</a><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>