>I would say that this is an excllent synopsis of what I'd expect of a
>player character who has obtained Enlightenment.
But an NPC hero? Doesn't sound like Harrek to me. Or even Argrath.
I don't mean to be trite here. First up, thank you all for the quotes and comments, they've been most helpful. And once again, apologies for continuing the thread where it began rather than migrating to the Digest.
I'm struggling with this a bit, and on one level have been all my Gloranthan days. Let me share a few preliminaries. I'll be reporting in full in a short time (in an essay I might add, that for the most part will be much more concrete than my current musings, and inspired by recent conversations with Jeff Richard).
It began with a project on the great themes of Orlanthi myth, and in particular types of hero. It struck me that in many campaigns, the players were acting *against* herodom and heroes as much as *with* them, seeking to preserve humanity, clans and simple lives against the strictures of eternity and the world-destroying cosmic acts of godmen. 'The land is afflicted by a hero...'
Ok, I'm sure that GM input had some small part in this. :) I've always had a sore point about what ideology and power do to people.
A hero becomes one with an aspect of eternity: variously described as illuminated, enlightened, incarnating their god - I suspect ways and means might differ, but broadly a hero (in the technical, Gloranthan sense) leaves human values behind to incarnate an aspect of eternity, whether its Balance or Change or Storm or War.
Their values are not those of simple clansfolk, or even of kings and godar. Heroes are to be feared as well as admired. In fact, in some instances and from some perspectives, heroes are the *real* monsters of Glorantha, all the more frightening for their apparent humanity, utterly resolute in the pursuit of their ideals, destroying entire peoples in order to save them.
It seems that the values of heroes are such that they are not shared by the vast majority of their people, nor by the players who guide their lives in campaigns. In this sense, they become unplayable. They serve Eternity, that is Ideology and Meaning rather than people per se).
Now in Glorantha, we accept that Eternity is real, and potent, so comparisons with real world ideologies and heroes may miss the point.
So how do we deal with this dark heart of herodom?
We have descriptions such as the one posted by Jane that describes a numinous, beneficent aspect of heroes. We also have records of their deeds which describe a very different reality.
On one level of course, this is what campaigning is all about, testing values and actions and ideologies.
On another level, too we have different types of hero, and perhaps we need to focus a little more on different types. (This is what the project is all about). In Orlanthi myth, we can recognise different types of cosmic hero: the Argrathi/Liberator, the Larnsting, The Arkati, and others, and we can recognise the different incantatory aspects of cultic heroes: Chalanna, Humakt, Orventili, Finovan, Urox, Heler, etc.
What about the person who takes on the burden of herodom, but turns back from the brink to preserve human values and lives? (I suspect this is a much a description of Kallyr as an Argrath struck down by treachery before her time)* Are there other examples of such? What sort of term should we use to describe them? And is the fact that they are bound by humanity, the present and history rather than eternity a failure or a triumph?
Roll D20...
John
Powered by hypermail