OOP Stuff

From: Guy Hoyle <ghoyle1_at_mail.airmail.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:29:24 +0000


>>Please, do me a favor. If you have a detail of Gloranthan minutae
>>that hasn't seen daylight since Avalon Hill got its grubby hands on
>>RQ, then don't expect anybody to take it as gospel. You have to
>>re-establish it as likely all over again. You have to take a tripto
>>the well of knowledge, and MAKE A REASON UP why it should be true
>>in our Gloranthas.

>This is of course heartily seconded. If stuff isn't in-print, it's
>ipso facto *not* official material *now*, and can thus not be used
>to establish 'facts' about the Glorantha of today.

This is a rather short-sighted view, IMNSHO. Sorry you can't find the older stuff, but it's still a part of Glorantha! Yes, we should be better at explaining the old stuff, but this "I don't have it so it doesn't exist" attitude is carrying things way too far. There's way too much precious Glorantha lore that's OOP to simply dismiss out of hand.

When referring to an OOP work, we should also present a summary of the relevant material instead of saying "It's in the Big Rubble set", or "See Griffin Mountain"; no doubt it's this bad habit which has fired the wrath of so many "newcomers".

Guy

Powered by hypermail