(a statement from Erich)
>"In a fantasy game, the gods are real." =
>This is a somewhat limited view and one supplied copiously by
>TSR so why bother with Glorantha if you want things to be so cut
>and dry-
I gather you just don't get how arrogant that sounds?
one of the great things about Glorantha is its depth
>and such depth comes from a real attempt to make the world
>consistent and realistic within its own context. As human beings
>are involved this means much RW activity will be mirrored in
>Glorantha with some differences but largely the same.
So, the depth of Glorantha comes from how close it mirrors the real world?
>>I don't want to run a game in the real world with a little magic =
>>added either. =
>Thats the whole point, its not the real world, its Glorantha which
>has a wealth of myth, legend and magic but I like my worlds
>to function within their idiom with realism and consistency. The
>Gods are Real argument is unable to supply that consistency
>given what we know of historical patterns, myth and human =
>behaviour in the RW.
In the real world, it can be denied by most folk that spells and potions for Santeria and Voodoo don't work, or that Divine miracles and gifts of the Spirit in my Pentecostal heritage don't work. This _isn't_ the case for Glorantha; the magic "objectively" works no matter if the observer believes the magician's world veiw or not. I agree that there should be "realism and consistency" in the gaming/fictional universe, but to categorically state that an assumption that "The Gods are Real" makes this impossible is an absurdity. Should be obvious. This isn't to say that you must play/write in a Glorantha with real objective gods, but to suggest that it is a matter of taste as opposed to Objective Truths.
V.S. Greene : klyfix_at_aol.com : Boston, near Arkham....
Powered by hypermail