From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 27 May 1994, part 5
Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
Content-Return: Prohibited
Precedence: junk
---------------------
From: DevinC@aol.com
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Thu, 26 May 1994, part 3
Message-ID: <9405261755.tn521388@aol.com>
Date: 26 May 94 21:55:07 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4198
Devin Cutler here:
Regarding the Uroxi Mad Dog Templars outside Hazard Fort in Risklands,
someone inquired as to what kind of initiation rites they might use, and
someone else suggested it be like a hazing.
I agree completely. In fact, when my players played in the Risklands, and two
Uroxi wanted to join the Templars, I had the Templars invite them to drink
and party with them and then bed down near their encampment for the night.
When the PCs were asleep, the Mad Dogs stole their weapons, covered their
(the Mad Dogs' that is) bodies in mud and furs, put goat heads and other
animal head masks over their faces, and ambushed the party....posing as
Broos.
This was, of course, a test. The Storm Bull worshipper that fled (after all,
unarmed and unarmoured against Broos twice your number would make many an
Uroxi flee!) was derided and cast away. The one that decided he would fight
to the death with his bare hands was immediately welcomed into the fold!
It was great to see the pained looks of "no way Devin, this is completely
unfair......6 Broos against two of us unarmed!" on the faces of the players,
and then the laugh as they found out the joke.
Alex writes:
"And most pre-Renaisance
cultures believed that their gods were indeed active, interventionist, and
absolutist, none of which stopped them being at each others' throats,
disagreeing on fundamental questions of belief, and all the other fun stuff
I think also happens in Glorantha."
Nevertheless, people react differently when presented with a belief as
compared to when presented with the physical presence or manifestation of
power of a deity.
Many modern day Christians and other modern day religious persons will
certainly say that without a doubt they believe in their God and hgis
omnipotence. Nevertheless, I can imagine that if God were to make blatant
weekly showings of His powers, then these persons would become much more
devout.
The pre-Renaissance persons may have believed their God was active, but they
never saw such activity. Physical proof is a wonderful motivater.
In addition, even in pre-Renaissance times their were many, especially
amongst the learned or the nobility or the well-to-do, who, while paying lip
service to belief in a God or gods, did not truly believe in such. Certainly,
the Romans were a good example of this.
"More like "faintly informative": the information turns out be be true, but
one could hardly deduce the exact facts on the ground from the granted
divination. This isn't the kind of "just the facts, ma'am" information
which would be likely to enforce fine details of religious practice on a
squabbling populace."
The divinatory information from Gaumata's Vision at the very least tells you
pretty much without uncertainty that a village somewhere in Sun County has
been corrupted with Chaos. When I ran the scenario, this was deduced by the
players instantly without any thought whatsoever.
In RQ2, many cults would use Divination to screen out initiates. Cults of
Terror mentions this many times, and such mentions suggest that this
information is reliable (i.e. at least Pow 18 Priest x5%=90% of the time).
Nick writes:
"Perhaps our Devin should reread the RQ:AiG and/or RQ Daily archives, if he
imagines I never write on rules mechanics. Or check with Oliver & Co about
the proofreading and mech-check I did for RQ:AiG's last draft. As Peter's
post, above, this red herring irritates me no end! A hate-figure is being
set up: the "Gloranthan Scholar Who Never Plays RuneQuest And Ruined My
Game". Whoever he is, he ain't me!"
I have found it very interesting that, during this Scholar/Gamer debate I
have never once named anyone specifically as one or the other, but many
people have put THEMSELVES into one camp or the other and then denied that
they were part of ANY camp.
I do not gainsay Nick's gaming contributions. I thought his scenario in TOTRM
11 (I hope I got the issue # right) was great!
I also never said Nick was or was not a "scholar". He has apparently assumed
that mantle for himself. For the record, I have never heard Nick being
hostile to gaming suggestions (hostile to high-powered gaming suggestions
maybe (g)).
Others have been, however. And I will try to reiterate one last time that
even if you deny that such hostility to gaming oriented issues exists on the
Daily, the fact remains that enough people perceive this hostility that we
should all try to be more accepting of other people's areas of RQ/Gloranthan
concerns.
Since I have never called for a halt to Scholarly discussions and have never
skewered anyone for engaging in such, I would simply ask that those with a
more Scholarly bent give the same courtesy to those of us with a more
gaming-oriented focus.
I think the above paragraph says it all.
"Write:
don't faff around complaining that other people are doing it instead. And,
if you don't have anything interesting to say, announcing that this is the
case is hardly worth your while or mine."
I did. In fact, I posted two long writeups of magic items and got no response
whatsoever. Did they suck? Where they usable? Feedback, along with courtesy,
(and constructive criticism when criticism is in order) encourages writing
and contributing.
I wrote:
"Some of the characters that Nick mentioned in the Daily intrigued me, and I
wouldn't mind hearing more about them.
I especially enjoyed the tale of Urrrgh the Ugly, and would like to see more
from other campaigns."
I did not mean to imply that Urrrgh the Ugly was a creation of Nick's
campaign, although it sounds like it from my syntax above. Urrrgh was in
either Sandy's or Ray's campaign (I forget which one).
An antecdote from my campaign:
The party was basically geased by Mostali from the Nidan Mountains (the geas
took the form of magically implanting iron time bombs inside the bodies of
the PC's and promising to remove them when the geas was completed) to slay a
certain number of trolls. This in compensation for the fact that they had
inadvertantly passed on some information that caused trolls to ambush and
slay some Mostali.
After wandering around the fringes of Guhan (or is it Halikiv, whichever is
in Northwestern Ralios), looking for Trolls, they came upon a group that was
a bit too large for their tastes (they had hoped to ambush a lone troll
hunter or two and do the job piecemeal). This group was led by a Priestess
and was stopping to parley/question the party.
While the party tried to hurriedly discuss amongst themselves what they
should say to these trolls, Thane Kiri Windstorm, a rather pompous and
arrogant arse*ole whom nobody likes but everybody respects, walked up to deal
with them. The party, thinking Kiri had come up with a brilliant alibi,
relaxed and waited to hear the great fast talk Kiri was about to perform.
Troll Priestess: "Why you do come to our places human peoples?"
Kiri: "We came to hunt trolls."
Needless to say, the PC's, the players of the PC's, the GM, and, most of all,
the trolls were completely taken aback. So taken aback that Kiri skewered the
Priestess with his sword before she could react!
Unfortunately, the rest of the fight proved tougher than the party would have
liked, once the Uz became organized, and although the Trolls were eventually
routed and prisoners were taken and delivered to the Mostali, the party
decided never again to allow Thane Kiri Windstorm to parley with anyone or
anything.
And now the tale is told in bars around Greydog of how Thane Kiri slew a
Troll Priestess with one blow through the power of brutal honesty (or brutal
stupidity depending upon one's viewpoint). Already an itinerant Humakt Priest
has used the incident in a sermon to show the power of Truth.
Regards,
Devin Cutler
devinc@aol.com
---------------------
From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly)
Subject: Re: Invisible God
Message-ID: <9405262159.AA16626@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu>
Date: 26 May 94 21:59:07 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4199
Paul Reilly here. Gary Newton writes:
>And what about the Invisible God being transcendent rather than immanent?
Hmm. Where is this from? I think that the IG was immanent in First Age
Malkionism, and is now considered immanent by some sects and transcendent
by others. People should let me know if they want a LONG discussion of
this; the reason are complex.
Short comment: I view the Malkioni religions as having more kinship with
the various Hellenistic philosphies than with any Earthly religions per se.
Of course this leads to some similarities as those philosophies fed
into the development of CHristianity, Islam, Mithraism, Isis worship, and
even Judaism.
I think the Camranians DEFINITELY consider the IG Immanent. However,
I don't know which of the Hrestoli and the Rokari espouse this view; whichever
one believes, the other must believe the opposite. Currently I lean toward
the Hrestoli believing in an Immanent God and the Rokari in a Transcendent
but I am open to your arguments.
Saints: I don't think "Saint" is a great word because it has connotations
of goodness, holiness, etc. which do not apply well to certain Saints such
as Arkat. I _think_ Saints are those who have broken down the barriers
and operate on 'both sides' of reality (in the West). They have great power
for good or ill. The Immanent IG sects would think that they have achieved
partial union with the GOdhead while still living.
Angels is appropriate if theyt are messengers of the IG, look up the etymology
of Angel.
Anyway, I have a LOT of stuff on this subject, and I don't think everyone
would be interested. Perhaps a Malkion mailing list would be appropriate for
the real fanatics? We don't want to annoy people with excessive 'scholarly'
discussions in a public forum, so perhaps we should retreat to the catacombs
of email.
- Paul
---------------------
From: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller)
Subject: Answering Devin's questions
Message-ID: <01HCSYW8XVEQ8WWV7N@wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: 26 May 94 13:25:26 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4200
Devin mentions:
> Well, remember this temple thing is only an example, although it is starting
> to resemble some aspects of the real sceanrio. But what if an inscription
> over an archway says "Blessed be Kolat, Father of the Spirits of the Winds"?
Well the easy answer is "Who wrote that inscription? Was it Arachne
Solara who knows all, or was it a priest and his hired mason?" There's
no reason why every mason's or priest's information has to be correct.
Divination won't even help much. The answers to divination are
notoriously fuzzy, and the only reason they seem less fuzzy in games
is that it is hard as a GM to make up a fuzzy answer on the spot. But
don't be fooled, the perceptions of gods are very different from those
of mortals, and an answer that a god might find useful would be very
confusing to a mortal. Imagine if you were to try to give directions
to the best food "nearby" to an ant. I might tell her to hop on the
trolley and go to Le Bec Fin, but is that useful to her?
> Would the Daily be an appropriate place for people to tell us about there
> campaigns? By this I mean a short narrative of the current situation or of an
> interesting antecdote.
Of course it's appropriate! Players must volunteer to do this,
however. GMs are usually too busy writing other stuff, and don't want
to reveal campaign secrets in a public area either. Do I hear you
volunteering, Devin?
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
"Enough sound bites. Let's get to work." -- Ross Perot sound bite
---------------------
From: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller)
Subject: Benefits of being worshipped
Message-ID: <01HCSZGJLKAG8WWV7N@wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: 26 May 94 13:40:52 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4201
Greg Fried asks:
> Now, my question is this: if the local people actually worship at this
> shrine, what benefit might the PCs derive? I don't want them to get
> swelled heads, but if I could give them some modest but interesting
> benefit, in exchange for something on their part, I would entertain
> the notion. Thoughts?
Remember the story that Greg related at the RQ-Con HQ Session about
what happened when Orlanth had been beaten on the LBQ (Light Bringer's
Quest)? He was out of strength and was going to lose to some horrible
foe.
A feather fell from the air onto him, and he was strengthened by it.
Greg said that the feather was the support of his family, the people
who were praying for him (worshipping for his benefit), transformed
into a physical shape on the Heroplane.
So worship bought Orlanth his second wind when he was in a tough spot
on the Heroplane. Sorry for the pun. And that's what worship buys
anyone. Worship will give those characters the edge on their opponents
whenever they are in a heroquest, and IMHO if they accept the aid they
have available from worship then the benefits of the HQ are shared
with their worshippers.
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
"Enough sound bites. Let's get to work." -- Ross Perot sound bite
---------------------
From: 100102.3001@CompuServe.COM (Peter J. Whitelaw)
Subject: Three deep breaths...
Message-ID: <940527001218_100102.3001_BHJ37-2@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 27 May 94 00:12:19 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4202
Hi all,
Nick in response to myself...(Devin asks the same but _so_ much more sweetly)
>What a load of crap! I recall at least three helpful posters giving Chris
>Someone chapter and verse on Gagarth, before Sandy posted the entire text
>of the official Chaosium cult write-up. Were you asleep at the time?
It would appear so, Nick.
Either that or I mistook the postings for debate on something or other of little
or no interest to me and therefore scrolled through them as fast as I could.
My loss I guess. I don't suppose anyone knows the relevant X-RQ-ID numbers do
they?
>I thought I was doing you a kindness by not rejecting your offer of "some
>non-Gloranthan campaign notes from a friend's campaign" sight unseen.
Well, thanks for the thought but, no, you weren't.
I asked a question, I was hoping for an answer. I didn't want to clog up the
daily with a load of stuff that would be of no interest to the majority. Since
you would appear to be in a minority of one (unless I have missed some votes,
which is very possible) I shall be posting the notes.
If you do happen to take a look at the notes and do, indeed, dislike them the
author would welcome some feedback.
>That's two replies, now. Happy?
Yes thanks. Gleefully so.
>But I get irritated when the good things about this Daily are ignored, and I
thought >the speed of our Gagarth (and other) turnarounds was a fine and noble
>achievement.
I unreservedly apologise if my comments irritated you. It was merely an
observation based on my own experience with the Daily thus far. Perhaps I have
been 'spoiled' by having only previously participated in CIS forums where there
are Sysop's who will generally fall over themselves to help people out.
I have apparently 'crashed and burned' over the Gagarthi and am not ashamed to
say so.
And as I have posted before, I usually find something worth printing off each
day. Hardly an unappreciative comment.
>Obviously some folk missed it. Maybe they were off grinding axes at the time...
If you were implying myself there then sorry, but no. Not me. I endeavour to
keep my tongue firmly planted in my cheek when I post here.
My hardy endeavour starts to fail with this though:
>As Peter's post, above, this red herring irritates me no end! A hate-figure is
being
>set up: the "Gloranthan Scholar Who Never Plays RuneQuest And Ruined My
>Game". Whoever he is, he ain't me!
Nick, If you think that I am in support of this notion then you are woefully
mistaken.
Even if some postings may not be to my taste at least those that post have made
the effort. Different people have different ways of exploring/playing
Glorantha.
Live and let live.
WRT my 'red herring'. It is not so, I believe (with the exception of my
unmitigated cock-up over the Gagarthi). But to discuss the matter here would be
of little relevance to the purpose of the Daily. If you wish to do so by
private e-mail you are welcome.
*****
I will be away this weekend spending quality time with my (far) better half so
the next batch of Jon Drake's campaign notes will be posted some time next week.
*****
All the best,
Peter :-%
---------------------
From: mcarthur@fit.qut.edu.au (Robert McArthur)
Subject: a plurailty of heroes
Message-ID: <199405270144.LAA23658@ocean.fit.qut.edu.au>
Date: 27 May 94 21:44:22 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4203
Well, not quite a plurality...
Having played dragon pass extensively I keep being reminded, in runequest,
of the comment in DP that none of the peices on the board represent single
entites - "not even Cragspider". I'll assume this dosen't apply to dragons:-)
In the roleplaying world of runequest, our characters found that as they
progressed to rune level (they never got further :-( ) they were more and more
worried about going around in as a group of rune levels of dispirate religions.
Now, this didn't mean a Cacodaemon priest and Storm Bull lord, but we had
Stormbull, Orlanth, Daka Fal, someone a bit like Urg! (sp?) and some others.
Not too bad really. We often played that the higher 'level' a person got
moving towards herodom the harder they were to be with and the fewer people
they had around them. Thinking over the DP writing, it seems that all powerful
individuals have a group of close 'colleagues' to assist them. For
lightbringers it's the ring; darkness cults would have something as would sun
cults, elves, dwarves and even chaos cults. Some cults may invest their
worshippers with extraordinary power to make up much of the balance as they
often are expected to be 'alone'. Again, the melding of the cults together
such as in the lightbringers ring would provide much more strength through
different gods coming together and the use of different powers.
All this indicates, to players of Runequest, that they can continue to be
together as they advance in their relgions. It is not uncommon to have a
group of high-level characters.
Comments?
Robert McArthur
---------------------
From: Argrath@aol.com
Subject: Wakboth made me do it
Message-ID: <9405262325.tn533651@aol.com>
Date: 27 May 94 03:25:01 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4204
Alex says: "Wakboth is making me post [this long message on
initiation]."
Well, THAT explains it.
Does anybody else on the list want to read anything more
about this initiation argument (or, for that matter, the related
threads)? I'd like to see the Aeolian church write-up, but
debating it before seeing it seems a tad ... something. Anyway,
subtle hints from several quarters having failed, I join in the
plea for a cease-fire.
Gary Newton: That doesn't sound like Confucius.
Dogs Playing Poker:
DevinC:
OK, your adventurers have boned up on Ancient Syanoran
(how?) and read something referring to Kolat on an archway. That
does narrow down the options a bit, but why can't Kolat be a
minor figure whom the GLs built up? This is all contrafactual,
anyway, given Sandy's post. But it illustrates how, with a
little imagination, you can solve these problems. I don't
propose to wave my wand over every difficulty your campaign
development might face. What I am proposing is the use of some
initiative and imagination to deal with those difficulties.
"why does everything have to be inconsistent?"
Ever see "The Player"? "Because THAT's reality."
Serious answer: if everything were inconsistent, wouldn't
that be a form of consistency?
Really serious answer: Because many find it to be more fun
and more realistic that way.
Re: "dates written on sarcophaggi [sic]"
"Hmm, says here this pharaoh was buried in 3340 B.C. ..."
No, I know what you mean. But the reason you can tell a 4th
century ruin from a 16th century one is that you are the happy
recipient of centuries of scholarship in archeology. Your
adventurers don't have this advantage, and neither does anyone
else in their society, if it is at all comparable to premodern
societies on earth. Remember Shakespeare and his clocks striking
in ancient Rome.
Yeah, there's a perceived problem. But you haven't
articulated a convincing argument in favor of it. And if you
don't want to talk about it anymore, don't expect to have the
last word on the Daily. :-P
Re: campaign stories
By all means. Please.
LBQ: Light Bringers' Quest.
Greg Fried:
I had a player in my first D&D campaign whose character was
a cleric of himself...
I think you have to pass certain thresholds to receive
worship. Being dead is not absolutely necessary, but it helps.
As Greg Stafford explained in the Heroquest Seminar, if you do
something for your group, they keep calling on you long after
you're dead, and they get the benefit of whatever it was you did
for them when alive. What the hero gets out of it is continued
existence, in some form.
Hmm--tangent: becoming a vampire is a form of heroquest,
with continued existence as the goal... eternal life: Ugh.
--Martin