>>If i answer your question and say "yes [no], Orlanth really did [not] kill
>>the Sun God and did [not] bring on the darkness," the answer will be True
>>As Long As You Believe It Is.
>And I think there's an "external" reality, and the question is either
>true or false, no matter what you personally or collectively believe,
>in the same way that fossils didn't disappear during the millenia of
>belief in Divine Creation.
The external reality will be there regardless whether it was Humakt, Humath, Rebellus Terminus, Worlath, Zorak Zoran or even Elmal who killed Yelm - the Sun Emperor (god) got killed (by force), and a period of Darkness ensued. Just like the fossils tell us little to nothing about dinosaur skin coloration or mating habits, the external facts tell us nothing whether it was Orlanth who killed and whether it was Yelm who was killed.
>>The production of meaning demands an interpretating subject. You have to
>>specify *for whom* the question and the answer is to be meaningful.
>>Otherwise it is void of meaning.
>Nope, not the case, not in matters of fact. Plain wrong.
Carl, take a closer look at what is fossilized fact, and what is legendary knowledge. It is still possible to blame a deity originally innocent of the murder, and make it a mythical truth within a certain area. I won't say that Ragnaglar was a benign fertility god, but are you absolutely sure that his was the main fault in bringing Chaos into the world? The Dara Happans say that it was Rebellus Terminus, elsewhere identified with Orlanth...
>People have asked why I feel so strongly about this. Well, look at it
>as a gaming issue for a second: say that my gang of PCs manages,
>through mind-ripping terror and incredible dedication and (to be
>honest) insanity and betrayal, to prevent the destruction of the city
>of Bikhy by Chaos. (Go ahead and say that, we did it.)
>Now, in the "whatever is believed is true" universe, some future
>heroquester can retroactively rearrange history so that he and his
>sister saved the city, or the city was never in danger, or we failed
>and the city *was* eaten by chaos. Anything we did is ultimately
>meaningless and futile, because it may never actually have happened.
Now, Carl, you don't even have to change history retroactively - just have another chaos invasion threaten to destroy Bikhy the minute your player characters are out of sight, and let that other character step in or let it be eaten. Nobody will ever know they saved the city... You can never be sure that what you achieve is not turned into futility. If your players say manage to install a new Oasis in the Long Dry, and someone else reassembles Genert and makes all of Prax verdant again, who will remember and acknowledge the achievements of your players?
BTW, I don't think that you can change _history_ retroactively; you can only change _myth_. However, in a future Age of the world, history may turn into myth or legend, and can be changed.
Joerg (who is planning to stay at Convulsion Fri-Sunday nights, in case my latest e-mail didn't make it, David)
Powered by hypermail