If others like me are working from rules and books, then I will continue to use free interpretation of most of that material. Almost all of the descriptions of gods and races (apart from the actual rules) are written from the viewpoint of a contemporary of a RQ character. A Sartarite human would certainly believe that trolls ate rocks, and this is reflected in the "writings of the time" which we are using as a basis of our fantasy world, and were in reality composed by Mr. Stafford. That same Sartaite would believe that Humakt is the god of death and war, and would not be able to conceive that there are other death gods in other lands with overlapping responsibilities, etc. People on the southern continent would have a different set of gods, a different story about the origins of the sun, moon, and universe. Put those two theologies together and they cannot mesh. Everything that I have read (Cults of Prax, C of Terror, King of Sartar, a couple of Avalon Hill things) was written to make the PC's believe in their own gods and other beliefs, not to make us believe them.
I am saying that I cannot take this all as dogma, like others seem to do. I still feel that a campaign background must sit well not only with PC's but with the players themselves.
If Mr. Stafford stands up and tells me I'm off my nut, then I'll just continue to play RQ - the Science Fiction version. Maybe I am in violation of some licensing right by having my own version of Glorantha!
Powered by hypermail