Re: Glorantha Digest V2 #104

From: Erik Sieurin <BV9521_at_utb.hb.se>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 21:00:52 +0100

Carl Fink and Eric Rowe continues to argue:
> >Interesting. Now what would you think if you were told that the past IS
> >immutable, but that our knowledge and perception of what really occurred
> >is all that is changing through Myth progression? In the 'real world',
> >history does not change, but still all the myths of all cultures changed
> >their beliefs as to what that history really was. Having 'real' gods
> >does not affect this in Glorantha, especially if the mythological
> >progression has true power. (unlike the real world, according to most)
>
> You aren't getting me, are you? THIS IS NOT EARTH! Why are you
> assuming that mythological progression in Glorantha is anything like
> what happens here? I mean, this place is a lozenge enclosed by a
> solid heavenly dome, Eric! It isn't like here.
Uhm (to both of you) do you believe that Myth (that thing on the Godplane, whatever that is) is changable/unchangable, or that myth (the description of how the world works and why, that my parents and the religous authorities has given me)?
>
>
> From: yfcw29_at_castle.ed.ac.uk
> >Answer me this. If you reject euhemerism completely, how do you explain
> >the power of heroquesting to change myth?
>
> Clearly I'm not getting through: In my Glorantha, heroquesting CANNOT
> CHANGE myth in the sense of changing Godtime events. It can change
> the nature of reality, as for instance the wounding of Korasting, but
> it can't go back into the past and change what already happened.
Same to Simon Hibbs(?) and Carl Fink (again) here: do you talk about Myth or myth? Is Myth the same as the past (at least if that past is the godtime)?

and Simon again
> But then, if the secret was useless, why did the Gift Carriers wipe out
> everyone who knew it?

Because those who had known it had used it, and that was a Major Felony for whoever sent the Gift Carriers?

  David Boatright:
Agree with you about the heavyness of the list; it IS tough when 50% consists of basically arguing about semantics concerning esoteric topics like "what is life?". But do you not find discussion about how trolls, dwarves, elves etc are interesting to the game? Many of us do not play in Sartar/Prax official campaign time, and like to have an idea of how Glorantha is in other times and places; many of us dislike the idea it is always the same. It is from that the idea of changing roles of gods etc comes. I mean, 3 of the players in my oldest campaign play Humakti. Neither they nor I care a fig about what Humakt was in the eyes of people long ago. But if they flip off to Ralios, it is fun if Humakti is different there and I can see what they say about it.
And I do not think useful posts are "shot to pieces" by them creative guys, but of course I would like more useful posts. I personally have trouble with some of John Hughes' philosophizing about levels of the game and myth and catharsis etcetera, but he may write stuff like that in every digest (well, that is perhaps as far as I am concerned as long as he continues to type things as his Far Point campaign notes, which I loved. The same thing goes for many of them creative guys; I find that you can actually use a lot of their stuff, even if I tend to swish past much of it.

---