> You're thinking too damn hard and not playing enough.
Just take a break, think back a little and remember the old days of the RQ Digest by Andrew Bell (I wasn't around the RQ scene back then, but the invention of archives has made it possible...) This is what I'd like to see more of on the Daily, a few cults, how to fix niggling rules problems (with the death of the Rules Digest I don't know where this is s'posed to go), descriptions of campaign material (there was an excellent piece by John Castellucci on the Block, filled with adventure ideas) and other *usable* material. I'm sure that a lot more people would like to see this as well. The debates that rage across the digest, the composition of volcanoes etc... are also needed, as this gives Glorantha it's depth -- but I think there is a limit. Knowing the mineral in's and out's of a Volcano is going to be useful in an appropiate campaign, but I could not possibly see the point of wondering about the subjectivity of gods. If it was only a short debate, taken off-digest at a later point, I wouldn't give a damn, but my "page down" button is starting to wear thin. Plus, I'm sure that in "Everything that you ever wanted to know about the Glorantha Digest but were afraid to ask", the document detailing what does, and doesn't belong here, (which I'm *sure* you've all read) it says that the nature of gods is not only a topic that no-one can agree upon, but it is a "tiresome topic", and I couldn't agree more. Surely the place for auch a debate is off-digest???????? Surely you realize you're never going to come to a conclusion????? If someone wants to unearth an old topic, such as Elmal, Free Will etc... they should only do so if they have something new to bring to the topic. I have to hail Mike Cule for taking the leap and trying to attatch numbers to Free Will, rather than just sitting around talking about it. Maybe this is why HeroQuest has never been produced, too much talking, not enough doing.
What I'm trying to get at is that certain conversations aren't fit for the mere mortal readers of the Digest like myself who find such paradoxical debates about the subjectivity/objectivity of gods tedious. Not that they shouldn't be on the digest, if you want to discuss the military tactics of Mostali, the in's and out's of magical elven weaponary etc.. that's fine -- I won't participate, but in the end if someone posted a conclusion, or put it up on the Web (has anyone got a succint collection of the elven weaponary discussion, homing arrows etc...) then Glorantha will be a lot better for it. But in the case of gods, Elmal and other such cra... stuff, I think it would be best to remain off-digest.
Remember, there are about 550 members of the digest, most of us just remain quiet and pick out the best bits for the games we play. Little else.
Paul Chapman:
>Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! And I'm even Younger (1975: I wouldn't know if
>it was a good year because I was only a baby) ;-)
Hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahha [followed by an evil cackle] -- I'm even younger. I find the suggestion that there's no new young blood in the RQ game quite odd, our gaming group ranges from between 14 and 31. Just goes to show what a role-playing club does for the gaming community,
All In My Most Humblest Opinion,
Nikk E.
Nikk the Broo Shaman of Thed
http://www.personal.u-net.com/~eff
"If absolute power corrupts absolutely,
where does that leave God?"
-- George Daacon
------------------------------
Powered by hypermail