No, we're talking about differences in level of available proof between the RW and Glorantha. Vague, subjective, "internal only" stuff, that can't prove anything to an outsider, is in common, so not worth discussing.
> >The difference is that the RW priest would have no
> >defence. The Gloranthan priest could say "yeah?
> >Disbelieve *this*, then!" And shoot the guy, there
> and
> >then, with a lightning bolt from his hand (no, not
> >from some possibly random thundercloud), killing
> him.
> >
> >I'm not aware of this level of unarguable objective
> >evidence being common practise anywhere or anywhen
> in the RW. Could somebody please prove me wrong?
>
> Quite right. It's quite obvious that in the real
> world none of the evidence or 'proof' of real world
> religions are sufficient to convince you.
Exactly. In Glorantha, this kind of objective evidence is available, in abundance. In the RW, it is not. So, there will be differences in how people approach their "faith" in deities. Those satisfied with the vague stuff will exist in both, so forget them. How will the existence of hard, provable, all-too-obvious evidence affect everyone else, that's the question.
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail