> As do many of the so-called "western" peoples, we acknowledge the
> existence of the Creator. Yet for my people the Creator is little more
> than an acknowledgment of a natural process, albeit the prime process.
I'd have expected something more assertive: "We, unlike those others, are fully aware that this so-called 'Creator' is nothing more than ..." Unless, in later life, Arros comes to disagree with his people's perception of the Creator, it seems odd to me that he should almost *disparage* their (his) belief: "Creator <who we all know is more important than this> is to my <backward> people little more than ..."
Other than that, no problems!
(Do you suppose the inhabitants of the City of Ten Thousand Magicians, that EWF relict, would be known to outsiders as "Dracomancers"? Just a thought...)
I'm quite flattered to realise that part of reason for the worry expressed by Doyle re: whether Freeforms are getting too much attention vs. traditional role-playing games is that he'd rather have us Gloranthan authors producing RPG scenarios than freeform games. Unfortunately, I'm not really faced with that dichotomy: I don't write scenarios often, or well, or that are good enough for publication. I'm not a "stats man", and get bored working out the Butt Attack of the third broo on the left.
But I'm happy to explore Glorantha through freeforms, working out the reasons and motives that move the world: policy and history and rivalry and personality. Answering questions like: What kind of man is King Congern of Jonatela, and why would he be interested in Malkioni theology? How can I briefly explain the Waertagi mindset to someone who may have no previous Gloranthan knowledge? What plans does the Lunar Empire have for Arrolia? In what ways do Rokari look and act different to Hrestoli? How do these people see themselves?
Thinking about these issues produces lots more colour and flavour for fleshing out the world than lists of Rune spells or population stats do (for me).
Part of the fun of freeform-writing is describing the world-view of each faction, culture, or player individually: these "bluesheets" (in HtWwO, these were Sect Writeups) which contain background common to several players, but not issued to everyone in the game, are very enjoyable to write. I'd hope they are also useful outside the freeform: as they're mechanics-independent and written as a very high level overview of Glorantha, they should be useful player handouts in a traditional RPG setting.
Glorantha wasn't written to be a setting for skirmish wargames!
IMHO, one of the things the KoW represents is the "Death of Chivalry" -- all the advances and innovations and technologies attitudes which explain why chivalrous combat between knights in shining armour *isn't* the way wars are fought today. So every time an army that is "Right but Repulsive" hammers opposition that's "Wrong but Wromantic", we see the Kingdom of War at work. I'd like to make them feel like:
English longbows vs. French chivalry at Agincourt; Crossbows (a Satanic weapon!) and Gunpowder (ditto); Roundheads vs. Cavaliers; Wellington vs. Napoleon (plodding English vs. inspired French); Machine-guns vs. French "Elan" in the trench war; Panzer blitzkrieg vs. Polish cavalry charges;
I'm not saying they "have" all these things, obviously (though they might just have gunpowder IMHO), but rather that the impact of fighting the Kingdom of War should be similar to any or all of these situations: the chivalrous Loskalmi way of war is "outdated" against this opposition, and although honourable knights in shining armour are all very well, they aren't exactly practical at the moment...
Food for thought, anyway.
End of Glorantha Digest V2 #562
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail