However, Onslaught does lead me to wonder:
According to today's definition, Onslaught is indubitably an assassin. He kills individuals for money. "Assassinate implies specifically the sudden killing of a politically imortant person by someone hired or delegated to do this." But is he an assassin in Glorantha? He doesn't seem to commit the Orlanthi crime of secret murder because he doesn't mind witnesses. But he doesn't have the legal excuse of a feud (which in fact isn't really a legal excuse, since there's no protection against a counterfeud). I think we could pose the question, would one of the thane's Humakti housecarls be able to use Sense Assassin? This is a rules question, but I think the answer is yes*. If Onslaught were ever brought to trial, a Lawspeaker would refer to precedent and custom, as well as to Heort's Law.
In Prax, I'm not sure there is a distinction between types of killings. Perhaps dishonorable killings would deserve more painful deaths. The determination would probably be made by a khan, based on his own opinion.
In the Lunar Empire, I suspect there are codified laws, covering different degrees of murder or manslaughter. A judge would find the most appropriate statue and mete out the appropriate punishment. (I suspect this is all based on Dara Happan law, but the Lunar judge would have more leeway in making a determination.)
Mark Groff wrote
> In Dragon Pass, Argrath, all by his
> Lonesome was the combat equivalent of a decent Regiment
We don't know that -- the counter doesn't represent Argrath all by his lonesome, but with his Companions.
> What
> exotics does Ralzakark command?
I hate to think of what Dorastan nasties he could summon.
Powered by hypermail