> My basic notion was for the heroes to get involved when a cottar of their clan, nobody important, was apparently seized from his stead by a few weaponthanes during a raid. I imagined that he might be guilty of the crime of, say, speaking to a child from the feuding clan whilst out tending his sheep, something inconceivable to our modern sensibilities. How far do the Orlanthi views on children preclude this from being a possibility? Is it absurd that a feuding neighbor would take it that far?
I'm not sure who is who in this example.
In New Guinea, feuding groups will further their side of the conflict by killing children from the rival group. I've always figured the Orlanthi were more like the Icelanders, who apparently waited until the children grew up to kill them. (I think the Albanians also had rules on who could be killed.)
Basically, once two clans are feuding, blood is the only coin. It takes a conscious effort to try to end the feud, perhaps with wergild paid to make sure both sides consider things even.
David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
Powered by hypermail