> [French] pro-lunar groups were in the infantile powergamer stage.
> In the groups I've seen playing Lunars, the main aim was to get
> illuminated as quickly as possible to be able to use chaos and
> to do evil freely with a little background justification. All
> they wanted was power...
As you say, this is terribly sad. We've always enjoyed the Lunars more because they are a civilised (and civilising) imperial power: this is perhaps due to the bias of the English educational system, which is broadly in favour of bringing the benefits of (British/Roman) civilisation to the natives and barbarians.
Playing a Lunar allows you to look down your nose at the peculiar local customs of Sartarites and Praxians, treating them with lofty, imperial disdain. It's also easier to play scenarios where you justifiably become involved in exciting adventures while "just doing my job" or "only obeying orders" (i.e. doing something the GM is keen on) -- "The Tarsh War" and "Rune Metal Jacket" are examples of this.
I'm a bit surprised to hear that this tendency isn't more manifest in France, which is, after all, internationally famous for its pose of cultural snobbery and superiority. As well for as inflicting Chaotic Atrocities on innocent South Pacific islands...
> Moiraides did not marry the Feathered Horse Queen. He did marry the
> Feathered Queen of the Kerofini Temple in an effort to become King
> of Dragon Pass. These are two seperate Queens.
Despite the alleged chronological hash in the sources that making this identification would cause, I still think it's preferable to have just ONE sovereignty-conferring, sought-after-by-kings, feathery queen in/of Dragon Pass, rather than cast aside old William of Occam's cut-throat and duplicate this position unnecessarily. Without far more justification, I don't believe there need be any difference between the "Feathered Horse Queen" and this proposed "Feathered Queen".
Powered by hypermail