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, 16 Nov 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.
X-RQ-ID: index
6900: pheasant = (Nick Eden)
- incest and other taboos
6901: PMichaels = PMichaels@aol.com
- a request for feedback
6902: ddunham = (David Dunham)
- Etymology; Bloodlines
6903: ppofandt = (PAUL POFANDT)
- Anyone looked at ARIA?
6904: ppofandt = (PAUL POFANDT)
- Size of Genertela
6905: alex = (Alex Ferguson)
- Re: Spirit taxonomy
6906: alex = (Alex Ferguson)
- settlers
6907: M.Hitchens = (Michael Hitchens)
- Re: Population of Sartar
6908: M.Hitchens = (Michael Hitchens)
- Re: gods, myths & heroquests
6909: joe = (Joerg Baumgartner)
- Nick's problem with me, RQA in Europe
6910: jonas.schiott = (Jonas Schiott)
- Words and Blood.
6911: akuma = (Steven E Barnes)
- More on spirits
6912: k151665 = (Kiukas Petteri)
- HELP
6913: sandyp = (Sandy Petersen)
- Re: STUFF
6914: Henk.Langeveld = Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
- More missing Dailies... + Announcement
6915: davidc = (David Cake)
- Pamalt shamans
6916: FKiesche3 = FKiesche3@aol.com
- Going Back to Sartar
---------------------
From: pheasant@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nick Eden)
Subject: incest and other taboos
Message-ID:
Date: 12 Nov 94 10:50:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6900
In-Reply-To: <9411110815.AA22181@glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM>
Alex wrote
> Nick Eden:
> > I'm not very convinced by clans that are 1500 people big either.
> Surely > with 1500 people about you don't need to worry too much about
> inbreeding?
>
> Probably not much, no. (Depending on _who_ they marry, obviously.) But
> clans are social constructs, not minimaxed breeding programmes, so
> customswill persist even as clans get larger. (Note that Volsaxi clans
> seem to be even larger, and perhaps Hendriki, too, though for them clans
> are less important, I think.)
But where do social constructs come from? I've always thought that the
reason that we have toboos about sleeping with our sisters is that over
the years this has been shown to be a bad thing, leading to stupid and
deformed children.
Now Sartarites have a similar taboo, but not within the immediate family,
but within a VERY extended family. So extended that there might not be
any common blood in the two people. Doesn't make sense to me.
Does the same thing happen in Scotland? As a member of the MacGregor clan
(honest I am, even if it is tenuous) should only consider marrying people
from other clans?
---------------------
From: PMichaels@aol.com
Subject: a request for feedback
Message-ID: <941112231047_6424464@aol.com>
Date: 12 Nov 94 18:10:49 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6901
Hi all!
A while back (Oct 31) I posted a story about the Aldryami Trickster and some
thoughts about pixies & sprites. I'd like to ask for some feedback from
those of you who read it. Did my thoughts find fertile soil in your
Glorantha, and grow in its richness? Or, did you find only some of the
thoughts good, while others were sterile? Or was it all only fit for the
compost, to be broken down to feed what is already living? I'd like to know
what you thought.
Peace,
Peter
---------------------
From: ddunham@radiomail.net (David Dunham)
Subject: Etymology; Bloodlines
Message-ID: <199411130445.UAA04536@radiomail.net>
Date: 13 Nov 94 04:45:09 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6902
Nick Brooke conjectures
>Urox = Aurochs, surely. Not Norse.
I read it as Germanic: ur-ox, as in original ox. Or as in the term you use
in another reply, "ur-Orlanthi."
I promised more info on East Ralios bloodlines. Ingkel Hundred-Fighter (who
was the Thane of the Belovaking clan in Delela) has 15 great-grandsons (and
15 great-granddaughters, who will marry into another bloodline), as
determined by whatever random process I was using. Of course, most of these
men will get married, so their wives will join Ingkel's bloodline. If all
the parents of the 15 are still alive, there are another 12 people. This
gives a bloodline of 42 people. A clan would have dozens of them. (I don't
pretend these numbers are authoritative, but the bloodline of Kolla
Head-taker is of similar size, FWIW.)
---------------------
From: ppofandt@ozemail.com.au (PAUL POFANDT)
Subject: Anyone looked at ARIA?
Message-ID: <1994NOV13.6490@ozemail.com.au>
Date: 14 Nov 94 05:45:15 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6903
G'day
Has anyone yet had a look at the product:
'ARIA, Cantical of the monomyth (TM)'
If so, I'd wouldn't mind a brief note as to what it is and what it's like.
Paul.
---------------------
From: ppofandt@ozemail.com.au (PAUL POFANDT)
Subject: Size of Genertela
Message-ID: <1994NOV13.6489@ozemail.com.au>
Date: 14 Nov 94 05:45:13 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6904
G'day
Can anyone tell me what the correct scales to use are, when measuring distances
on the map of the continent of Genertela included with the Glorantha Boxed set?
Going by the included scale (1:11,000,000) the ruler '400/800/1200' should be
1485km, not 1200. Also, by the same scale, the distance from Nine Good Giants
mts. is approx. 660km. By the River of Cradles map, the same distance is approx
350 km. In the same ROC map (lower left Prax map) the distance is approx 200 km.
Any suggestions as to the correct scales to be used are.
Paul.
---------------------
From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (Alex Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Spirit taxonomy
Message-ID: <9411132020.AA09356@hawaii.dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Date: 13 Nov 94 20:20:22 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6905
Colin W. laughs lightly at my Doomsday Scenario:
> > [...] you could bind
> > a suitably meaty spirit as a _combined_ Intellect/Power/Magic spirit,
> > which would be somewhat gross.
> Personally I wouldn't have a problem with this. It's no worse than having 3
> different spirits bound into the same object,
It would be, since you only need to track down one spirit, instead of
three, and the result would be more powerful, in that you'd now have
what was effectively a spell-casting extension of your own INT and mps,
rather than three separate entities, each with only one of the three
capabilities, and no access to that of the other two. This is in fact
somewhat more powerful than having an ally, assuming similar INT and POW
and simultaneous access to all three capabilities.
One could always insist that the abilities are "compartmentalised", so
that, say, if you store one of your own spells in it as an INT spirit,
it doesn't itself have access to it with its Magic Spirit hat on, but
that seems a tad unrationalised.
> and I imagine the cost (in terms of POW) would (/should) be much the same.
Hopefully rather more.
> #1/ What it takes to bind a spirit (in terms of simply holding it captive).
> #2/ What you can do with the spirit when it's in a binding enchantment.
> I reckon #1 is dependent upon what the spirit *is* (its "species" or whatever;
> this might correspond to the entries in the Monster book, or it might use
> broader categories such as Man-spirit, Beast-spirit, Spirit-spirit etc).
But the existing taxonomy is essentially by what the "functionality" of
the spirit is, not its origin. (Unless the two are indentical, for some
unknown reason.) If an Intellect Spirit is just an undistinguished
bag of INT and POW, then the name is a misleading, and the description
in error, so I don't see much merit in the classification _unless_ it
has this special "feature". Which is equally an argument for new
nomenclature and descriptions on the one hand, or keeping the existing
Binding Enchantment rules, according to personal taste.
> I reckon #2 is dependent on the added functionality of the enchantment.
> The current rules imply that the use of MP/INT/spells is a peculiar quirk of
> the spirit itself which only manifests when the spirit is bound. That's what I
> don't like. It's too contrived.
If the use of a spirit's INT isn't a "feature" of the spirit itself,
though, why is it easier to use Intellect Spirits in this way? Perhaps
the short answer is "because they have a low INT", but unless the cost
progression is pretty steep, that wouldn't necessarily be much of a
deterrent.
> Now, I don't think this necessarily calls for a rules re-write;
It would, in that you wish to allow things such as Binding Ghost as
Intellect Enchantment (or Ghost Binding Enchantment, plus Enchant
Intellect, say), even if it were contrived to be backwards compatible
with the existing rules. I think I can see broadly how to tweak the
rules to get roughly the effect Colin wants, but I'm not convinced it's
a great idea.
Alex.
---------------------
From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (Alex Ferguson)
Subject: settlers
Message-ID: <9411132242.AA10693@hawaii.dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Date: 13 Nov 94 22:42:05 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6906
Nick Brooke attempts to hoist Joerg with his own Holy Country petard, which
I fear to be something of a damp squib:
> > Those of the settlers who came for religious or political reasons came
> > because they wanted to change their life from that accepted at home.
> Cart before horse. They came because the way of life previously accepted at home
> (their accustomed way of life) was now being changed.
This would appear to suggest that 300 years ago, Esrolia was a Thoroughly
Modern Model Patriarchy. Which I doubt. The Pharaoh may have made any
number of changes in Esrolia, but why would he have made it matriarchal?
Alex.
---------------------
From: joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner)
Subject: Nick's problem with me, RQA in Europe
Message-ID:
Date: 14 Nov 94 16:40:33 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6909
RQ-Adventures in Europe:
I've just been informed that Ingo Tschinke has received a master of RQ-A.
He will give it to the printers as soon as possible, but we don't expect
it printed before Wed, 23.11.94. As soon as we have it, Ingo will send
out the copies to people who have subscriptions, and the following week
you can expect RQ-A 4 to hit the British game stores, latest iin early
December.
Direct subscriptions are available from
Ingo Tschinke
Schevemoorer Landstr. 33
28325 Bremen
Germany
and cost 40 DM for a 5 issue subscription (either cash or eurocheques
payable to RuneQuest-Gesellschaft e.V.). We have some back issues of
RQ-A 1 through 3 left, so it is still possible to get the full series.
No, Ingo has no e-mail address/access, apart from mine.
____________________________
Nick Brooke in X-RQ-ID: 6895
> Joerg:
> Let's not start a quibbling match. We both agree there are social changes afoot
> in Kethaela, and that some reactionaries pushed off to Dragon Pass.
Ok. Which changes exactly? Pro-Pharaoh vs. pro-Only Old One factions was
the war the Dragon Pass immigrants fled from, most likely.
> Beyond that, make up our own stories.
I repeat impressions I got from people arguing against my Aeolian
proposals.
> You suggest that the migrants have regressed to a
> pristine ur-Orlanthi state which was not previously to be found in Heortland,
I have been suggested that the settlers of Dragon Pass did emigrate to
worship Orlanth the old way. I don't claim (any more) that the new way
is the Aeolian Church, but I'm a bit at a loss what the new way is, then.
I tried to make proposals.
> but you'd surely admit the only reason to do this is that it allows your Aeolian
> Malkionised Heortland to have existed earlier and longer than conventional
> chronology could countenance.
I don't admit this. I admit that I'd like to reconcile the known history
of Orlanthi Heortland and the Aeolians, but fact is that the Heortland
Orlanthi (and I don't mean the Hendreiki or the Aeolians) of the 16th
century are presented somewhat different from those of Sartar.
They worship mostly Barntar, according to the Holy Country description in
RQ Companion, which appears to be somewhat different from the Sartarite
direct worship of Orlanth. They are as urbanised as modern Sartar, which
makes them radically different from the collection of Quivini tribes before
Sartar Peacemaker unified them. They are organized in only four tribes,
which makes for an average tribal population of 125,000 people, an order
of magnitude more than the Sartarite tribes.
> I prefer to make "radical Aeolianisation" more recent, because I can
> better see where Sartarites came from under those circumstances.
What time do you propose for a wider spread of the Aeolian creed
in Heortland, then? And to what extent? What is your impression,
David (Hall)?
> And because the
> "Mediaeval" West may not have looked that way in the past, IMHO, any more than
> the real middle ages existed unchanged and unchanging for thousands of years.
Proposals for this? I have some ideas...
--
-- Joerg Baumgartner joe@sartar.toppoint.de
---------------------
From: jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se (Jonas Schiott)
Subject: Words and Blood.
Message-ID: <9411141903.AA12636@vinga.hum.gu.se>
Date: 14 Nov 94 20:04:21 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6910
Disclaimer: all these comments refer to Saturday's Daily, since that's the
latest one I've received.
Nick:
>but at least the world-wide Cult of Orlanth (tm) is exactly
>the same!" (NOT!)
Aw, shucks, that's the one I was trying to sneak past you.... ;-)
>Urox = Aurochs, surely. Not Norse.
Huh? OK, so "Uroxe" is a modern Swedish word, not old Norse, but since a
garbled transcription of it has been adopted as the English name for the
animal in question, I assume it has respectable roots.
______________
David (the rune owner):
>In East Ralios, I'm using the 4-generation definition of a bloodline
>(people who have the same great-grandfather up the male line)
Hmm, interesting. When we wrote up the Otter clan (for Growing Pains) we
took the definition literally: the male line is traced to the founding of
the clan, thus there are only three bloodlines. Of course, this is probably
more of a social construct than genetic truth - the story about the three
founding brothers has a touch of myth about it (there must have been more
men around to father children).
( Jonas Schiott )
( Institutionen for Ide- och lardomshistoria )
( Goteborgs Universitet )
---------------------
From: akuma@netcom.com (Steven E Barnes)
Subject: More on spirits
Message-ID: <199411150739.XAA08223@netcom20.netcom.com>
Date: 14 Nov 94 15:39:57 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6911
At long last, I am back, having cleared a backlog of 80 digest messages...
Sandy Petersen writes:
>>The current rules imply that the use of MP/INT/spells is a peculiar
>>quirk of the spirit itself which only manifests when the spirit is
>>bound. That's what I don't like. It's too contrived.
> In the first place, I see no reason why the use of Power and
>Intellect spirits "only manifests when they're bound". My shamans use
>them all the time, including them in their fetch. Since when you use
>a Power or Intellect (or Magic spirit for that matter), you don't
>have to unleash it from your fetch in some sort of attack, I play
>that shamans can quite contentedly hold them till the cows come home.
OK... Suppose a shaman grabs the spirit of a newly-slain human, and
binds it into his fetch. What kind of spirit is it? What abilities
can it use?
-steve
---------------------
From: k151665@proffa.cc.tut.fi (Kiukas Petteri)
Subject: HELP
Message-ID: <199411151500.RAA16872@proffa.cc.tut.fi>
Date: 15 Nov 94 19:00:03 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6912
HELP
---------------------
From: sandyp@idcube.idsoftware.com (Sandy Petersen)
Subject: Re: STUFF
Message-ID: <9411151647.AA04438@idcube.idsoftware.com>
Date: 15 Nov 94 05:42:05 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6913
Colin: I agree with your theory that Power and Intellect spirits are
not just tools of abusive players, but have some sort of natural
function and/or reason for existence.
I'm currently sticking by my theory that Intellect spirits
are the great Spell Recyclers of Glorantha, an essential part of
moving knowledge around.
Power spirits aren't quite so obvious. Perhaps they are just
primitive INT-less entities, who lack a sense of self, and hence are
subject to having their MPs used by others. A more highly evolved
spirit, such as a ghost, cannot donate its MPs to another, because it
_has_ self-awareness. Perhaps the special cult spirits that we know
are able to donate their MPs have some kind of spiritual organ that
permits this unusual activity?
Nick Brooke:
>The God Learners' "RuneQuest Sight" was just a particularly
>virulent, but still subjective, way of viewing the world. (OK, it's
>IMO, but can anyone prove me wrong inside Glorantha?).
I can't prove you wrong (seeing as I think you're right), but
there is more to the RuneQuest Sight than just another world-view --
the distinguishing feature of the RuneQuest Sight is that it KNEW
that it was subjective, and strove to hold multiple subjective
viewpoints simultaneously in a (only partially successful) effort to
be objective. Modern Orlanthi/Dara Happans/Doraddi etc. are clueless
that there is another way of looking at the world than their own,
manifestly correct, viewpoint.
In essence, I believe that the God Learners were like those
irritating modern-day scholars who proclaim that all cultures have a
subjective world-view, including our own (a manifest truth), but then
go on to proclaim that therefore all cultures are equally viable and
worthy of respect, and make their people equally happy (a manifest
untruth).
>Some people want the diversity to be reflected in more
>tangible/mundane ways, distinguishing between Troll spirits and Wolf
>spirits and Flower spirits rather than between game constructs with
>different stats.
Unless there's something different about a troll spirit as
opposed to a flower spirit besides its name and appearance, then the
result will be that we will have game constructs with identical
stats, surely not preferable to the current situation?
Agreed: we need a more interesting and varied spirit fauna.
Agreed: RQ III did not go far enough in that direction
(though you have to admit it was lightyears beyond RQ I's vanilla
all-identical spooks).
Just because RQ III needs even more spirits, and details on
what it DOES have (didn't you like my suggestion that Intellect
spirits are spell-recyclers?), doesn't mean that we need to dump what
has been accomplished at such great loss of life.
I second Harald Smith's vote for Peter M's being appointed Flesh Man
of the daily.
---------------------
From: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
Subject: More missing Dailies... + Announcement
Message-ID: <9411151948.AA12590@yelm.Holland.Sun.COM>
Date: 15 Nov 94 19:48:48 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6914
Again did I have problems with "glorantha" at work,
causing another set of dailies to be skipped entirely.
The messages have been queued, and should be sent out
tomorrow...
ANNOUNCEMENT
I took over the RuneQuest Digest from Andrew Bell over two years
ago. In january 1993 I created the RQ Daily, with the objective
of furthering free discussion, with little overhead.
I think I can say that it worked.
But now, the last couple of months, I find that I do no more
have the time and resources to continue runequest@glorantha.
I have found a volunteer who is willing to take over the Daily
as a forum for discussion about Glorantha.
Now that Loren Miller has moved on with the rq-playtest list,
and started the rq-rules discussion, combined with the growing
accent of the Daily on Glorantha, we've decided to create
a separate Gloranthan mailing list, not particularly linked
to any game system...
We will transfer any existing subscriptions as smoothly as
possible.
I wish Loren the best of success...
Henk Langeveld
Former maintainer of the RQ Daily+Digest
---------------------
From: davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake)
Subject: Pamalt shamans
Message-ID: <199411160223.KAA22172@cs.uwa.oz.au>
Date: 16 Nov 94 18:35:59 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6915
Just a small editing slip I picked up, that maybe the list can
resolve. (I hate to point too much at Sandy, but he probably wrote it).
Pamalt cult write up, from Tales #11
Under Shamanhood
"Shamans of Pamalt may not become chieftains, though they may
become acolytes."
Under Acolytes, only half a dozen lines below.
"Shamans are normally barred from becoming acolytes of Pamalt, but
all a tribe's shamans are usually initiates."
As they seem to disagree, which is correct?
I assume the first because
1) that is what it says in GoG.
2) I prefer it, because I generally like my shamans to have access
to some rune magic (though as the acolytes get 'all common', that might be
a bit generous).
Cheers
Dave
---------------------
From: FKiesche3@aol.com
Subject: Going Back to Sartar
Message-ID: <941115221201_283265@aol.com>
Date: 15 Nov 94 21:10:45 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6916
Greetings All:
Well, in response to a recent bit of mail from Janet & Paul Anderson, I sent
mail expressing interest in a local (! Howdy virtual neighbors!) RQ game
getting started...
Paul (and Janet) called this evening to give me some details. The campaign
takes place in Sartar after the Starbow Rebellion.
I have no real restrictions on cults, etc., other than being a Sartarite (to
give the group a feeling of cohesiveness). Does anybody have suggestions for
sources, what I should look at, etc.?
The game is (almost) afoot!
Fred Kiesche
(FKiesche3@aol.com)
(Neuromancer@eWorld.com)