David Ford commented:
>I can not understand why so many gamers, want their worlds to have magic
>but none of the side-effects that having magic in a world creates.
>Also it seems that magic that kills/injures people is allowable but anything
>that upsets the ancients/medieval technological level is a no-no. Why is
this?
>In Glorantha especially, there does seem a tendency by modern gamers to
reduce
>the effectiveness of resurrection and healing magic. I don't say this is a
bad
>thing as each campaign should suit its gamers, but it would be nice if
players
>and designers of Fantasy Role-Playing Games/Worlds had the guts for their
worlds
>to be fantastic.
This of course presumes that the objective of all Glorantha campaigns is to be fantastic. Personally, and I speak only for myself, my objective is a mythic/realistic Glorantha. My notorious farmer campaigns involve communities of bronze age folk struggling in a world where there beliefs and myths are demonstrably "true". The main fighting magic is "Thews of Orlanth" (aka Strength spells) and "Turn Spear" (aka Protection). Priests and holy men (like Boranthos Gulikson) can call down Orlanth's Thunderbolt, but that is a big deal. As for resurrection through a three-point spell - I hate it and suppress the Chalana Arroy cult whenever I can as a GM.
Lots of different people play role-playing games for lots of different reasons. I acknowledge that there are folk who like to have players that kill Argrath, banish Harrek, seduce and discard Jar-Eel and tame the Crimson Bat for their personal stead. That just ain't my Glorantha. To be honest, a lot of the differences between the so-called "objectivists" and "subjectivists" really boils down to differences in why they play around with Greg Stafford's literary creation.
I should reveal my bias. To be perfectly honest, I don't even like fantasy literature that much. Give me a good Norse saga, Homeric epic, or Greco-Roman "travel-log" any day.
On a different subject, Remster responded to fellow SFC initiate Pam
Carlson:
>If this indeed the case, then how do they interpret their own variant
>of Lighbringer worhsip?
Which Lightbringer worship? IMO the southern Heortling (Sartar, Heortland) Orlanth cults in the Third Age has some significant differences from the northern Heortling Orlanth cults (Tarsh, Aggar, and Holay), to say nothing of the non-Heortling Orlanth cults (Talastar [a special case IMO], Ralios, Syllila, Vanch, Brolia, Wenelia, etc.). Furthermore, I have a sneaking suspicion that even things like the Lightbringers' Quest that we all know and love have changed rather significantly in meaning and association since the Dawn.
>Regardless of cultural differences, Orlanth is hostile to the Red Goddess.
Whose Orlanth? Sure, the Orlanth worshipped by the Sartarites and the Heortlendings is implacably hostile to the Red Goddess. Probably the Orlanth of Talastar is as well. I think the Orlanatus [or whatever] of Syllila is not hostile to the Red Goddess.
>If these Orlanthi in Tarsh do not actively oppose the Red Goddess or are
religiously >friendly to her, then they maybe culturally Orlanthi, but
not religiously. Please
>explain...:)
Sure - if Harangvot the Barber from Syllila (a 14th century Syllilan player-character of mine) showed up in Sartar he'd be able to show up to the local tribal Orlanth ceremonies and participate in the rites, although he'd perform certain parts of the rituals "wrongly" and in the "wrong" sequence. Still the local Culbrea priests would accept him as Orlanthi. When they performed the "Shepelkirt Bad Bad Bad" ritual and Harangvot looked at them dumb-founded without a clue what these upland barbarians were talking about, the local priests would presume that Harangvot was not religiously Orlanthi and probably perform the Summon Spirits of Reprisal ritual against poor Harangvot. As far as Harangvot is concerned, he walks in the path of Orlanatus and Walind the Ram like a good thane.
Does that help at all?
Jeff Richard
End of Glorantha Digest V4 #476
Powered by hypermail