>That's a good way to do it. Although, in AD&D terms, I'd classify the
>Lunar vs Sartarite conflict as one of Lawful Neutral (Lunar Empire) vs
Chaotic
>Good (Sartarite) cultures. Generally, the Sartarite protections of
>individual rights and the moral injunction that the rulers must serve
>the governed, as well as the general compassion and regard for
>non-combatants, the poor, etc, I've seen in examples of Orlanthi culture
>qualifies them as 'good' in AD&D terms.
What? First off, Orlanthi society has "the moral injunction that the rulers must serve the governed" because the rulers (tribal kings, clan chiefs, etc.) rarely have the power to force unpopular positions on their community. Play Fall of the House of Malan at Glorantha Con V to get an idea just how compassionate and morally virtuous ambitious chiefs, kings and carls are. As for their protection of individual rights - most recr eations of Orlanthi moots tend to focus on outcomes that the community can enforce rather than some Bill of Rights. It just ain't there.
Now I'm not Nick Brooke (a relentless propagandist for the Lunar Empire) and don't believe that the Orlanthi are the Bad Guys, but I also don't believe the Lunar Empire are the Bad Guys. They are both human societies doing what they think is right or that they think they are entitled to do. I do think the Lunars have bitten off more than they can chew and their power is considerably more tenuous than they think in 1621, but that is hardly an indictment of the Lunar Way. The Orlanthi bit off more than they could chew in the Second and Third Councils and boy did they get walloped for it!
Jeff
Powered by hypermail