>> Most of the speculations concerning inteligent animals have been very
>>humanocentric. Why would an inteligent animal be even remotely
>>interested in human cults?
>Easy. Glorantha, for me anyway, is about pretending myths are true. Human
>beings have myths and legends with talking/intelligent animals in them.
What has that got to do with said animals joining human religions?
>A sociobiologically accurate analysis of how intelligent rabbit mythology
>might work is all well and good but not a lot of use if you are just
>using intelliigent animals in the game as colour or a mythic motif, which
>let's face it is what they're going to be in most games.
And so therefore trying to do the subject justice is a waste of time? If that was true, Greg would never have put pen to paper in the first place. So far as I'm concerned, putting in that extra bit of effort and doing the job right is what attracts me to Glorantha.
Also, how can you use them as a mythic motif if you don't explore their myths. What's sociobiology got to do with this? Myth is where it's at and how can you do their myths justice if you just lump them in to human cults?
I hope I'm not being unfair, but it just sounds like a cop out.
Simon
Powered by hypermail