Re: sandy's maunderings

From: Sandy Petersen <sandyp_at_idpentium.idsoftware.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 95 12:03:34 -0600


Alex:
>I feel that the existence of Humakti military units, and come to
>that the Humakti code of honour itself, which can put the cultist's
>life a distant second to other considerations, represent something
>of a move away from this sort of ethic [i.e., don't order your
>friends into combat]

        The code of honor is taken by the cultist voluntarily (no one _has_ to join Humakt).

Loren Miller (apparently sitting up too late at night and brooding)
>So does everybody agree that all the important people in Gloranthan
>history have haitches (that's the letter "h" for the slow among the
>readership) in their names to make it obvious to even the most
>ignorant simpleton that they are Heroes?

        No doubt about it.

Alex
> >For what it's worth, [Sedalpist] root catechism differs from other
>>Malkioni.

>Do elucidate, please...

        The very start of their catechism (which is all I can go into here) is different from any others.

        "There is no god but the Invisible God and there is no prophet but Malkion."

        The first half of the catechism is, of course, the standard God Learner cant, found amongst those sects originating during the second age. But all the other GL-derived saints recognize Hrestol (at a minimum) as a prophet. Most recognize other guys, too -- such as Rokar, or Valkaro, or someone. The Sedalpists adopted part of the GL code, and believe in their own version of the Invisible God, who (by their lights) has gone far off and left them behind, but they only accept Malkion. They do know about saints, and accept some. They regard saints as the only folks who for sure entered into Malkion's Solace of the Body.

Alex opines on God Forgot
>I think they're actually either atheists, or "think gods exist, but
>are in a huff with them all" types. But are they of actual Malkioni
>origin? Or are they some unrelated group, or even devolved
>Brithini?

        Since some Brithini still exist here, it's possible they devolved from them I suppose, but I prefer the theory that at the Dawn there were some Old Malkioni present, plus a small core of hold-out Brithini. The Old Malkioni, lacking Hrestol's revelation, finally decided their god was no good.

Loren roasts the Crimson Greg.
Then Alex (of all folks) defends Mr. Stafford, sir.

Why does Greg do these terrible things? Here is my psychoanalysis of my friend.and colleague.

  1. He is pathologically creative and enjoys making up stuff.
  2. He is constitutionally lazy (I don't mean this pejoratively).
  3. His memory is not eidetic.
  4. He believes it is more important for things to be "cool" than for them to be "consistent". Especially if he can easily make up some pseudo-reason explaining how they're consistent anyway.

        Hence, when the time comes for him to mention something about an obscure group like the Third Eye Blue cult, he won't go look up every possible source for TEB material (see note 2 above), nor will he necessarily even know he wrote something earlier (note 3). And the combination of notes 1 & 4 means he'll tend to just manufacture things out of whole cloth.

        Even now, years after I've left Chaosium, Greg occasionally calls me to ask me some question about Glorantha that he knows he figured out once, but can't remember the answer to.

Ian
>One other key factor missing from SCA combat is the morale problem.
>When your SCA unit has its formation shattered, people don't panic
>and run the way ancient and medieval units would. Why? Because there
>is no real penalty for dying.

        Nor will they break and run even before entering combat. But still I'm glad to hear that the SCA is doing some mass combats. You can figure stuff out from such that no amount of one-on-one fighting will do. Mike, how well do shield walls work?

        I've re-enacted in Civil War battles, and there's no doubt about the fact that you learn all kinds of amazing facts. Such as why those guys stood shoulder-to-shoulder in line when they advanced, instead of breaking up into smaller groups presumably harder to hit. You also learn that you don't charge at a run. At least, you're not supposed to (but the last few yards everyone breaks into a run anyway, orders or no orders). One cool thing about civil war re-enacting is that there are so many guys at the big re-enactments (at Pea Ridge this year we expect 5000 guys) you really do see units maneuvering and fighting and even breaking under fire and running away. I imagine the combination of smoke, people dropping "dead" around you, excitement, and the loud crash of musketry makes you more nervous than in a somewhat less-noisy SCA recreation. (Unless the SCA'ers run off, too -- but I suspect they're not trying so much to recreate a "real" medieval battle, as to enjoy the fight.)

        At least, I've not only seen units panic and rout on the field, I've done it myself. You just get caught up in the action. Once I ran away (with the other guys in my group) and didn't even see a rebel. Pretty embarrassing. I guess we were raw recruit-equivalents. We were advancing through a forest, and so couldn't maintain our line properly (the trees kept breaking us up). We'd stop every once in a while and shoot into the foliage to keep our morale up, but we couldn't see anything up ahead. We kept hearing shouts and musket fire, but couldn't tell where it was coming from. We kept advancing, but started marching slower, and slower .... Then someone yelled, "they're a-comin'!" and our whole group broke and ran. I ran about thirty yards, then stopped and wondered, "What the hell am I running for?" and turned around, my musket raised. About fifteen feet away was a solid wall of screaming Rebs, rifles glittering. That was the end of me. One volley and I fell straight down dead while they charged over me. Next time I'll keep running.

Dronar punishment of Hrestol:

        I propose that Nils' suggestion that Hrestol is forced to pull a plow (or a cart) like a draft beast is the First Punishment he suffered. It rings true as nothing else yet proffered.

Takehiro
>may I ask you how to deal with the difference between your answer
>(use 'the point of the spell') and what I could find in the
>rulebook, "The magical strength of an area-effect attack is equal to
>the total number of POW points used to enchant the area." Of cource
>this rule is applied originally only to "Area-Effect Conditions,"
>but is there any reason to treat it and "Attack Conditions"
>differently? Or the word "The magical strength" stands for anything
>but the chance of the spell overcoming defensive magic?

        The words "magical strength" are imprecise, and should have been corrected in editing. By "defensive magic" do you mean the spell's chances to blast through Countermagic and the like, or to overcome the target's MPs? If the former, the spell itself is the amount of power it has to blast through the defender's spells. If the latter, I use the MPs in the enchantment to back it up.


Powered by hypermail