Re: Changed magic in 2nd and 3rd Age

From: L C <lightcastle_at_N9MCtwq9OAnrWAvcZX72qz_KetomVNg9JeiZuoAYIQNotA8a8hMoXH5j0RqXOShu>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:15:22 -0400


Catching up.
(Work has been unpleasant, but at least I have some for now.)

jorganos wrote:

>Not sure about that, really - IMO the God Learners managed to
manipulate the runes without attuning to them, achieving magical closeness to the deitites without becoming like them, and _that_ method
>failed.

Can you say more about this? Are you talking about a sorcererous way to do divine magic? I can see that.

>Without knowing the HQ2 rules, I still think that on a lower level
sorcery users still ought to be able to manipulate their runic knowledge, but when it comes into the region of divine power, their opposition >would be the appropriate divine power, and not at its weakest (as seems to have been the case in the God Learner magics where they did not send in huge waves of students on the basis that a few might >make it (through) the experiments.

Sorcerery would still work, but the whole "we can steal/mimic the powers of the gods" is a trick that doesn't work so well any more.  

>The Abiding Book has become a distant and unknown ideal source already
during the Imperial Age, allowing several different scriptures to coexist all claiming to be the closest to the original.

Hmm.. That doesn't seem to be the case from reading the 2nd Age stuff, although it seems possible. I guess when the Empire really starts to self destruct it goes missing, but the implication reading Jrustela and others is that there are a fair number of copies of the original. There is the hint of the whole "it might have been lost when they took it to the capitol" thing, of course.

>The original text had become the gnosis of a select group of monks
(who then apparently made a habit of "we have it, but none of us has to know it as long as we have the ultimate doctrinal control").

So your contention is the whole Imperial Malkionism wasn't using the book anyway?  

> Secondly didn't Malkionism (Hrestoli or Rokari) often became
> more monotheistic after the fall of the Godlearners?

>Not quite sure about that any more. The non-Tanisoran Genertelan
Malkionism apparently was formed single-handedly by Halwal, a dissident abbott from Seshnela who reformed the Fronelan church and >even managed to formulate a basic unified Arkati theology before abruptly leaving for Seshnela to violently end his personal dispute with the greatest local church authority there (a Pithdaran wizard).
>
>The Rokari church then bundled up the remains of the God Learner era
church (the mainstream Makanist, not the God Learner sect) and imposed an orthodoxy.

The last sounds about right.

>The God Learners were at best a Malkioni sect, never a mainstream
religion in the Malkioni lands. Things may have been different in their experimental colonies.

*nod* I do think they were always a very powerful minority.

LC            

Powered by hypermail