Greg Stafford wrote:
>Except in Loskalm, of course.
>But mostly true nonetheless.
And the Aeolians don't use the Abiding book either, if I recall correctly.
>Peter's approach using the Thesis is wonderful. I like the idea that it is
>likely from, ultimately, Sog City teachings.
>This is a great idea for a specific organization to utilize and
promote, to
>test and exploit.
Yeah. I think the "thesis" approach makes sense for the Sog City-derived
approach, I just don't think it applies to all Sorcery as the
underpinning metaphor.
Of course, that's because personally I am finding I like the idea of a
very basic framework (You have to learn sorcery, and then it becomes
something you know) and then lots of approaches getting to that.
>That is one presumption, but not everyone is a mini maxer, and I
always try
>to remember that most people are not, nor are they especially logical.
I can
>imagine grimoires dedicated to the growing of blue flowers, to internal
>decorating, hair styles, poison control, etc.
Absolutely. The old rules always bugged me in that the grimoires seemed
so narrow, when I think a school probably has a pretty broad approach,
rooted in a given philosophy.
(And then you get branching schools, etc.)
>Now, my reason for picking and picking here is that there is no one
way that
>sorceres do it, wizards, priests and so on; any more than there is one way
>for us on Earth.
Right. Exactly. This has become my view as well.
>If it was a thought process insgead, could we say, "Everyone who places
>logic before intuition (fill in the blank)" or even "Everyone who believes
>in the preeminence of Science (fill int he blank.)"
>
>However, we can easily say, precisely if we know the jargon, "Physicists
>agree on the speed of sound, and therefore (fill in the blank)" or "The
>Society of the Golden Dawn believed (fill in the blank) or "The
>Neoplatonists believes (fill etc)."
>
>I would really, really love to see some of this debate energy going to
>concrete Gloranthan constructs, whether they are philosophies, dogmas or
>speculative heroquesting cults.
Yeah, I'd like that too. And I suppose I should try and produce something like that. I think the problem, for me anyway, has been ever getting a handle on the West to begin with. From the time I encountered Glorantha, it has gone from Malkionism and the Abiding Book as the basis of everything to many more branches, from caste as immutable to caste as open to interpretation, etc. What the Abiding Book even says about things has never been clear to me, either. Maybe if I had bought Middle Sea Empire I'd have something to work with.
So working without some common basis of understanding has been difficult
for me.
Hell, I'm not even sure if it is Generally Agreed Glorantha that a
wizard/sorceror has to go to the otherside to get spells, or whether
they can be banned from using their grimoire.
Personally, I sort of feel that the fundamental difference between common magic and specialized magic is whether or not you need to make a link to the otherside to get it. (No for common, yes for specialized) As for banning the use of a grimoire/breaking the link people can make to the otherworld, I'm leaning now in the direction of that being a school by school thing. It depends on the relationship you have with the other side.
Thus a given Saintly order of Gerlant might have it that they can excommunicate you and then you can't get your spells anymore and another, which is more into a Hrestolian view of chivalry and individual achievement might not have that at all. Your link to the Saint is yours and the Priesthood can't block you out - only the Saint can.
But it always feels like groping in the dark since I don't have nearly enough Gloranthan esoterica knowledge to make something work.
>Then some of the debate and discussion could be around, "What would this
>mean in (my) Glorantha..." and we could see some of the philosophies and
>debates in the West emerge from this.
>I don't mean that the scripture need to be written, but it might be fun to
>start with what other Scriptures state (Dream of Snodal, etc.) and
work out
>its philosophical ramifications, which might have ramifications in the
>social world (what they wear or eat, where they say, customs and
>superstitions, who they like and dislike, etc.) Then the West will become
>fleshed out, and the intracies of some of their feuds and magical
strife be
>visible for play, for publication.
See, the impression one gets from the outside is that this already exists, but just hasn't been told to us yet.
Powered by hypermail