>>Amusingly, I have laid down this gauntlet to the "luminaries" (you know who
>>you are) on the subject of herodom and if anyone is well equipped* to write
>>a Gloranthan hero it is they, with access to Greg and his works that most of
>>us haven't got.
MOB sez
>>I've already obliged: the Lunar Coders. They're as good as you're
>>gonna get from me. Y'know, I doubt very much if Hero types are
>>much more powerful, stat-wise. Their growth and power comes in
>>ways that can probably only be adequately described by storytelling
>>rather than bald stats (which is probably why HeroQuest hasn't
>>appeared yet, and ain't likely ever to).
There are two points here that I would like to address in this exchange.
First, the idea that there are luminaries on the list. In MOB's defense, I don't remember anyone since I have been listening in tooting their own horn. Nonetheless it is true that there are several members on the list whose words *do* carry more weight than others. Specifically MOB, Nick Brooke, David Hall, Martin Crim, etc. I certainly do accord the words of these individuals more respect and weight, do to the fact that they have published more material on Glorantha then most. I see this as perfectly natural. Martin L. seems to believe that when one of these individuals visits scorn upon his thoughts that they are invoking the weight of their reputation as well as their actual words. Well, sure, that is true, but everyone else in the world does it, why shouldn't they? There is heirarchy(sic?) on the list. If you get more published then they do you won't have to worry about it as much.
The second point I want to address is the idea that Heroquest will never be published because roleplaying (as opposed to storytelling) is inadequate to the needs of simulating Heroquests. This is an attitude that I find worthy of derision and scorn and deserving of attack. The presence of such individual as Martin Laurie is often presented as evidence that any "roolz" for Heroquests would inevitably be misused. This is Nick Brooke's position, I believe (correct me if I am wrong, Nick). This is added to the difficulty that Greg, Sandy and others have had in simulating the effects that a) Heroes have on the larger community and b) the effect that larger communities have on the Hero. There may be other difficulties. (Oh, by the way, is anybody working on a set of Heroquest rules right now?) I also percieve a shift to the idea that LARP is the way to go, the wave of the future when it comes to roleplaying Glorantha. I find such a view pernicious, to say the least. Table top role playing requires much more discipline than LARP, which has made LARP's goals seem loftier, if for no other reason then that they are easier to acheive and so seem acheivable, as opposed to tabletop role playing goals. This debate is perhaps not completely appropriate to the list. Nonetheless it does seem to me that individuals on the "A" list mentioned above seem to share this view, and I do worry about the weight of their combined reputation endorsing the view that tabletop role playing in Glorantha is a thing of the past. Is this consensus view of those individuals on the list? Have I maligned anyone's views and or reputation? How do I get out of this chicken-shit operation, anyway? (sorry, couldn't resist that last bit)
thanks
Doyle Wayne Ramos-Tavener
Orthodox Gregite *and* God-Learner (I think)
End of Glorantha Digest V2 #530
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail