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, Wed, 06 Jul 1994, part 1 Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM Content-Return: Prohibited Precedence: junk X-RQ-ID: Intro This is the RuneQuest Daily Bulletin, a mailing list on the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha. It is sent out once per day in digest format. More details on the RuneQuest Daily and Digest can be found after the last message in this digest. --------------------- From: bchugg@leland.stanford.edu (Barron Chugg) Subject: Fear of a Western Planet... Message-ID: <199407051956.MAA04146@popserver.Stanford.EDU> Date: 5 Jul 94 04:58:54 GMT X-RQ-ID: 5040 Hello All. Cullen: > How about >instead of classic Taoism, Neo-Taoism with all the weirdness and magic >that entails (plus a triple dose of draconic references), with a bit of >pseudo-Buddhism thrown in? Oh venerable sage, could you give this ignorant peasent a useful reference for "Neo-Taoism"? Sounds like fun! >I would tend to say that the paths are a metaphor, which is only true up >to a point. The god is one with the path, but the paths are also one >with the god, and are therefore in some sense conscious. This is the way I llok at it too. I use them as a shorthand for, "doing the things your goddess did to become more like her". This is the "underlying reality", the mechanism I proposed was the micro-heroquest of following the runepath. This gives the GM a simple format that they can then complexify to their heart's content. As for the "consciousness" of the god, this is another area where the GM can make their own call. If you want un-conscious gods, then they are their paths, laid down before Time. If you want conscious gods than the belief and ritual of thousands of worshippers forges a presense within the paths that has some free will (or at least, enough possible choices as to give to illusion of free will (imagine one choice per worshipper and go from their)). But, again, one need not "know" what is the truth to run a great campaign. >C> My theory is that anyone who does anything New leaves a small etching >C> on the godplane. If you do something so great that other people want > >Does this include actions taken off the godplane? Well, as someone terribly biased in this area, I'd say yes. Glorantha is too mystical a place to fully seperate the myth from the reality. Thus, as stated before, everyday tasks, as mundane as plowing a field, are akin to mystical events. Further, my limited reading into ancient life makes me believe that people living in the past viewed their tasks as rituals. If you didn't say the right poem over the grain it _would_not_ grow. If you did not butcher the animal properly, its spirit would not return to be caught again next year. With that basis, it is easy for me to mix myth and reality. Only a die hard sorcerer would view them as totally seperate (like the GLs). (Aside: that may have been one of the great errors of the GLs, to believe that the Hero Plane and the Mundane plane (that name must be of Western origin) are seperable.) > >C> For a hero to ascend to Godhood he must perform actions so immense >C> that others will want to follow in his footsteps. By following in his > >I would say it is a little more complex than that, and involves the hero >actively trying to create a set of paths on the Rune/Hero/God-plane. I don't know. I think that the hero may create the path (followable or not) without knowing what he is doing. There may be an unconscious choice, but consciously the hero just does his heroic deeds. Note, as I have said before, I believe that heroes can be pretty "passive" at the higher levels. More power, less choice. Gods: All power, no choice? (Quoting Henk) >H>The question whether the god or the initiate is acting here is >H>moot as for that instant they're one... > >I wonder if a successful DI affects the Rune/HeroPaths of that god? >Reinforces them like an act of worship maybe? Yes, but not in a global way. A follower who calls on their god directly, in a time of great need, and gets a response is very likely to be more devout in the future, more in tune with the god. This will allow that person to better walk the god's paths. Whether "new" runemagic can be created by DI is an interesting one. Maybe the worshipper would view the DI as a "clue" to some new magic and scout out the path for himself (his cult) later. (Quoting Elias) >>Colin Watson, commenting on Barron Chugg's Runepaths: >>C> God, Cult and Path are somewhat unified. >E> >E> I agree with this, but I would place considerably more emphasis >E> on the "God" portion than you seem to. > >Why? I'm sure a worshiper of Orlanth would tend to do this, but as a >GM I would tend to try to see it from different points of view depending >on the situation. If a NPC is recounting a myth then the god is the >focus, but if a person is Rune or Hero Questing then the paths format >seems to me the easiest aid to understanding (in my own mind) what is >happening (so I can explain it to my players in the God metaphor). This is a classic difference between GM and player. The GM knows what is "really going on", but doesn't want the players to have that knowlege. So the GM renders the "real" truth into a format that fits the world he has created. As a GM whenever I describe interactions with the divine I use very personal terms, trying to make the PCs feel that they are involved with a great, personal entity. Is this true? No, but, locally, for the PC in question, it is. After all, I am describing their perceptions, not some dry, third person view (yes, I always use the second person when I GM). Anyway, I'd say that if the GM did not emphasis the god when describing things to the PCs, he would be making it more difficult for them to play in character. The GM's "truth" should be much less important than the PCs perceptions anyway! (Re: Cullen's comments on regaining magic.) This brings up a great question. If the ritual is just the framework the priestess uses to regain her magic, there have got to be other ways. I could imagine a priestess of some experience being able to regain her minor spells away from a temple (HERESY ALERT!!! HERESY ALERT!!!). Why not, she has enough experience with the paths she can walk them under less than ideal circomstances. Sure, the temple setting makes it MUCH easier (what with the statues of the goddess, the chanting acolytes and the mythological tapestries), but, if runemagic is personal, it should be possible in another way. Besides, the priestess's life is, no doubt, defined by a great many rituals already. Why can't these aid her in regaining her magic? Sure, it flies against all established doctrine, but what the heck! (Quoting me) >B> I feel that rituals that expect results require some level of >B> devotion, doing the dance a saying the words is not sufficient. > >This could be represented by having rituals wherein the candidate is >expected to 'do the Orlanth-like thing' without being told what that is, >and without being warned. He would then be judged by his actions, and >might get promoted, not kicked out or killed depending on his response. Yes, just so. I'd guess the simplest punishment would be social stigma, followed by our pals the Impests. Of course, the Orlanthi that fails would be expected to overcome his failure through hard work (that's a principle of Orlanth too). >Well, anything to shake up the PCs is good in my book. Unshaken PCs can get awefully boring...and smug! > >Well, if the initiate (or whatever) reflexively does what the god would >do (or what he thinks the god would do) then he's being devout. The >frame of mind will come about as the initiate progresses. Do the >actions long enough, and the proper mindset will follow. This is a >common form of indoctrination. This is a very Japanese theory as well. I remember reading about a man learning flower arranging. He was tought by having to copy the masters designs exactly and never being allowed to work on his own. The theory being that after sufficient practice he would reach some enlightenment and be able to create on his own. Funny, my Karate teacher thinks the same way... Anyway, you are right, if you do the dance often enough and with sufficient diligence you will gain some enlightenment. I prefer to look from the opposite perspectve, however. If you have the right mind set, the proper actions will follow. Chicken, Egg...God, Path...Floor wax, Dessert topping...all in the eye of the beholder. >One heroquest ought to be: going into a gods myths >and using that 3 point non-reusable spell enough times in the role of >your god to make it a 3 point re-usable. Or, finding the "owner" of the rune in question and stealing it. I can imagine hoards of devout Yanafal Tarnils HQers going over and over to Humakt's slaying of Grandfather Mortal and trying time and again bend Death into a curve. Same would go for Deezola and the rest. If a cult offers spells one-use to rune lords, there might be a path they can follow to allow them reusibility (same goes for priests). ___________________________ Alex: (Quoting Jonas, quoting me) >> >Can belief create reality in Glorantha? > >> Yes: Illusion. > >Leading to thorny questions such as: Is Illusion Reality?; and Is Illusion >Caused By Belief? Depends on who you ask: Westerner: "Only things we can see and feel are real." Praxian: "If it can hurt me, it's real." Pamaltelan: "There is no real, only the dream." Illuminate: "That is a good question, my son. You should think about it a while." Shaman: "Real, schmeal, you think too much." Trickster: "Well, it was real gold when I gave it to you." Kralorelan: "It is a part of the Void and thus nothing." Lunar: "Depends on what I need it to do..." etc. I'm more in the Praxian camp, that is to say, the pragmatic one. Real is as real does. If it interacts with the world in a "real" way (where real is defined locally) then it is real enough for me. ____________________________ Nils: >Devin on gods and worshippers: >>I see Devoted worshippers who are willing to live, fight, and die for their >>gods, who provide the essence of their existence in a magically rich >>environment. I see Gods who are conscious entities, rather than the figments >>of their worshippers' imaginations, and who take an active role in those who >>serve them and in the world and universe in which they exist. > >Amen! I can't believe I missed this quote the first time around! This is a great statement of belief. The passion of the followers should _absolutely_ be reflected in the deity and I agree that to cheapen that belief is a bad thing. When we try to over disect the gods we are like last century's anthropologists commenting on "quaint, native customs" (with the subtext of "look how backwards the stupid primitives are"). This is something I have tried to avoid. I am certainly defining the gods in a more scientific way (Dammit Jim, I'm a physicist, not a philosopher!), but I want to make the individual crucial to the process. So the devout worshipper will experince an active god. In a world of individuals too much looking for a global _truth_ is pointless. As I have said, what I am offering is at best a framework. (I know this wasn't directed at me, Devin, but my original purpose in these postings was to mediate between your views and (I think) Alex's.) _______________ Nick: >____________ >Barron Chugg: > >> Let's face it, the Monomyth breaks Arkat's rule BIG TIME. Going into >> every myth with the plan of beating into your preconcieved ideas is >> neither humble or respectful. > >On the other hand, it accords well with a Western/Humanist extreme view of >Man as the Master Race, Measure of All Things, able to succeed against the >odds (etc.). Compare John Campbell's beliefs from the Golden Age of Crap >Science Fiction. Well put, and see my comments above. My biased view has always been that the Westerners were missing a big point in Glorantha. But then, maybe in the West (that great Undeveloped Country) things _are_ more rational. Maybe the mythical connections are less, or nonexistance. Maybe it is harder to worship the gods there. All that rationality in one place must have some effect on the mythical landscape. Perhaps the repeated use of sorcery causes the area to slowly build up more rationality. This would be a great reason why thiests hate sorcerers (they make it harder to worship, just as modern science makes some religious beliefs harder to hold (e.g creationism)). Hmmm... ______________ Well, enough RQ for today... TTFN Barron --------------------- From: watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson) Subject: pesky impests Message-ID: <9407051445.AA12432@pelican.csd.abdn.ac.uk> Date: 5 Jul 94 15:45:36 GMT X-RQ-ID: 5028 ____ Alex: >>(my [Dave's?] conception of the Orlanthi is that the impests spend their days >>spying on everybody, tallying up wrong doing). > >This is a worryingly totalitarian-sounding picture. I agree that Orlanth >seems unusual in having SoR for very minor things, but it would be very >odd if they're the conspicuous exception in having an effective Thought >Police of them. Well, I kinda liked the idea of impests spying on folk, but I think it credits them with too much intelligence. There are a couple of other ways I can see them working: A/ They're let out by the Priests on holy days with orders to strike down anyone who isn't on Holy ground. B/ They simply attack at random (exploiting the premise that Everyone Is Guilty Of *Something*). What the Illuminate Says: "Nonsense. Of course I'm immune to Spirits of Reprisal.However I am allergic to sack-cloth and cheese and..." :-) ___ CW. --------------------- From: Bhupindar@aol.com Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Mon, 04 Jul 1994, part 2 Message-ID: <9407051112.tn04055@aol.com> Date: 5 Jul 94 15:12:41 GMT X-RQ-ID: 5029 unsubscribe, please --------------------- From: niwe@ppvku.ericsson.se (Nils Weinander) Subject: Oriental oddities Message-ID: <9407051516.AA09501@ppvku.ericsson.se> Date: 5 Jul 94 19:16:54 GMT X-RQ-ID: 5030 Nils Weinander writing Me on eastern sorcery: N> calligraphy or dance. Imagine the surprise of characters from central N> or western Genertela when they see a yellow-skinned man dancing up a N> fire, or healing a wound by reading a poem. Cullen in reply: >An amusing image... The image of dancing up a fire would surely come as >no surprise to anyone acquainted with shamanism though No? I didn't think Gloranthan spirit magic involved that kind of ritual for 'normal' spell effects. >In China there were classic books of >poetry, and knowing an appropriate verse from one of the classics (or >being able to create one) was regarded as the mark of learning (I seem >to recall). This could be easily made into magical poems that draw on >the power of the universe (with a skill roll for discernment?), and it >could be impolite to use a poem twice in the same day/week/year. The impolite bit is very nice, just the right way for a polite, cicilized mystic. In my 'mystic sorcery' variant I didn't intend for the poetry or other focus skill to carry any actual magical power. It is meant just to focus the mystic's mental energy. In the 'low magic' the practitioner just enhances a skill with a kind of magic, but when it comes to the 'mystic sorcery' there is not a single skill which is to be enhanced, but a magic effect to be brought to existence. The focus skill is just a substitute to get the mind of the mystic in the right kind of trance. Cullen on eastern afterlife: >With the vast majority hoping to get enough good >karman to get into the pure land, where they will pass from the cycle >when the emperor comes. A few monks and crazy holy (wo?)men will see >the doctrines of the dragons more truly and realize that all of >existence is unified, and that there are no enduring essences anywhere Right on! Me: N> I.e. the paradox of the Void: everything