> To offer a little more explanation, an Arkati who wanted to
>heroquest from multiple viewpoints would do so after joining several cults
>and performing several heroquests.
Surely he would have joined the Cult of Arkat? The various paths that Arkat had taken had been woven into a single cult. He would have learnt of the Arkati secret and striven to apply it in real life. Once he had mastered that, he could apply it to HeroQuesting.
>A God Learner would instead use methods
>such as contacting a few of the beings involved and using the God Learning
>ritual (and many other methods besides) before attempting the quest
>themselves, not to mention a lot of theoretical analysis.
I don't think the distinction between Good HeroQuesting as performed by everybody and Bad HeroQuesting as performed by the God Learners hsould be resolved in wehat sort of preparation they made before heroquesting. Ervrybody today prepares for it.
> Gregs RQ Con DU explanations of Illumination talked about it as
>'reconciling the impossible' or something like that. Having both very cruel
>and very merciful natures, for example. Which is not mercurial change from
>the illuminates viewpoint (it all makes sense to them) but certainly might
>appear like a changable nature to others.
The Illuminate is both at the same time. The God Learners weren't in that they changed themselves from one to the other which is what I said.
> Which was what I was talking about. While I always thought of the
>classic (un-illuminated) God Learner as approaching heroquesting in an
>intellectual manner, behaving as they felt to be appropriate for the
>situation.
Only that the Brithini and the First Age Malkioni were just as 'intellectual' as the God Learners and had the same ethos _yet_ they didn't screw up the Other Side and had a terrible time of it against the accomplished Dark Empire. So methinks that the answer lies elsewhere.
>I don't think we have any
>particular evidence for the God Learners reshaping their own psyches.
Statements by Sandy notwithstanding?
>On the other hand, I reacted according to
>a different emotion - religious faith - so you could say I was acting
>emotionally if you'd rather (illustrating my point to Peter that emotions
>can't be boiled down to simple dualisms in any useful way, or easily
>separated from the intellectual understanding of whats going on).
In any useful way? Easily separated? Quite a huge claim there. AFAIK I do not recall arguing that *all* emotions should be simulated by simple dualisms *especially* those involved in the element of making a choice and made it plain in the Androcles example. Methinks you're misreading again.
mr happy:
>Does anything know anything about Hachrat Blowhard
The cult of Hachrat Blowhard is probably an Orlanthi Cult that was introduced into the Yolp Mountains by Hachrat.
End of Glorantha Digest V4 #111
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail