Buddhist 'heroes' may well spend a lot of time in meditation, and that is indeed dull to play. But buddhist heroquests are another things entirely - Buddhist cultures have produced tales of heroes heading down to hell and similar heroquest type activities. And of course 'Monkey' (aka 'journey to the west') is a classic hero story, and that comes from a buddhist culture - and at least one of the main heroes is a good buddhist (the others being decidedly dodgy buddhists).
>I think any HeroQuesting rules are doomed to failure, and feel that a
>diceless structure will best handle the image-based quests, which depend on
>narrative structure and conflict.
What I actually want from 'HeroQuest' is not necessarily a set of rules for heroquesting, but a set of guidelines for constructing heroquests, and a set of rules for coping with Gloranthan style heroic powers back in the mundane world. I already find most of what I need in terms of rules for GMing the events of a heroquest in Pendragon, its what happens once they bring their nifty new powers back to the world that I want a handle on.
>Like illumination (which results from a HeroQuest IMHO)
Which just goes to show how different some peoples view of both Glorantha and what is a 'heroquest' differs. The common view of illumination seems to be that its a purely internal thing, an emotional experience of reexamining your own attitudes and limitations. While heroquests are about having yourself tested by others.
on to other subjects
Evil Stars - I have no disagreement with Peter M.'s opinions, but I am a little disappointed in them, I was hoping for something a little more exciting. Anyone else?
Of Beasts and Men
>>Oh, come on, Sandy. While I definitely agree that the winners were
>uplifted
>>by the process, I believe that the losers lost about the same amount.
> I do not.
I believe that the losers lost something purely because it is cool to have the hero plane animals be intelligent and worth talking to. I have no particular justification for this belief, so Sandy's opinion is far more authoritative, but it is a fun idea.
Perhaps originally some men were stupid and some smart, and some animals were stupid and some smart. During Wahas contest, for the successful tribes the stupid people became smart, and the smart animals became stupid. Some Praxian species that did not participate in the contest remain part stupid and part smart - an obvious example being the fish of the Zola Fel. Maybe baboons too - are there non-sentient baboons on the praxian plains? I thought that there were some very limited numbers.
Powered by hypermail