Premise: What actually HAPPEND in the past (Objective History) is set, and can not change. That is the monomyth, and I wish I knew it better. But for major events in history, the players and their actions are pretty much set.
HOWEVER: The way cultures INTERPRET this history, how it was explained, how it was passed down from generation to generation as peoples spread out and cultures split off is often (very) different. For instance, one group may "remember" that Eurmal stole death from Humakt and gave it to Orlanth. Another group may see Eurmal as a metaphore for Orlanths greed and he did it himself. Which one is true? Why, it's up to the GM for YOUR Glorantha, and frankly, nobody will EVER know for sure. Now, the interpretation of how events happened is going to be fairly similar I believe, but the REASONS are ALLWAYS going to be argued. Given my example, some will say that Orlanth got greedy. Some will say he sought power. Others will say he wanted to impress women. Somebody else might say he was an instrument of change. Heck, I'm sure a small group thinks that Humakt was an arrogant SOB and deserved to have death ripped away from him.
Can you Quest to find the truth? That's a more difficult question. I am afraid that nomatter how open minded you think you are, there is a way that YOU will complete the path that is based on how you WANT it to be completed. For instance, if you want Eurmal to steal the sword, then you better have a Eurmal stand in, and he better go steal it. If he convinces YOU to do it yourself, then HE is influencing the myth, REALITY is not.
This is why I think people (should) hate the godlearners. They THOUGHT that they had an objective view on reality, but as people say, they were as biased and ethnocentric as everybody else. Of course all the myths "looked similar", they were looking for commonalities. And major myths are either based on the same situation, or interpretations of events. (I should mention, btw, that I'll bet that there are people who were not "in the know" of certain events, and just made stuff up that sounded good. For instance, if there was a group of people that had somehow never heard of the Celestial Court and Yelm, they might make up a completly different myth to explain the events. However, their myth would have to be built backwards from the results, and their supposed causes would most likely be all wrong.)
HUMAKTI Hm, the information somebody posted about Humakti in Esrolia was brilliant. I wish I had thought about that before I started my campaign. Perhaps the "We're not part of the matriarcal life death cycle, ha ha" feeling is one of their inner secrets. So they can ignore the women and do what they want, since they won't be punished by ernalda by being turned into a large, brown slug after they die.
Hero Cults:
How do people play hero cults? From what I've seen, they pretty much provide one divine spell, a spirt magic spell, or a skill. Do they require power to join? Is their a difference between a sub-cult and a hero cult? In my game, I have a hero cult for Humakt that got severed from the cult when temple it was run out of was overrun by Yanafal Tarnils. Then it became a spirt cult when the PC's found it, and they've managed to reestablish the temple and it is now a Hero cult of Humakt again.
Sever Spirt:
Speaking of severing, how do people play Sever Spirit with regards to ghosts and, well, spirits? In my thinking, Sever spirt CUTS the actual SPIRIT. None of this, "it removes the connection to the body" stuff for me. I see it as Humakts "Coup de grace" and it will send ANYTHING to Hell where they belong. (exception: if it doesn't have power, it doesn't have a spirit) You know, scissors in Glorantha will look like a truth rune...
Rich
Powered by hypermail