>> Does anybody know what Mr Arsehole was going on about?
>
>I don't but I do take exception to calling Dave "Mr Arsehole". I know
>that his tone was bellicose, that his post was incoherent and that he can
>speak for himself but...
>
OK, fair cop, this was a little harsh, although I'll add that I wasn't the
one who originally coined the phrase. It becomes clear from this sort of
thing, though, that one incident of nastiness leads to another; as far as I
could make out, David was taking the piss very unjustly out of Peter
Metcalfe, whose writings and opinions I have a great respect for - why did
he do this? FWIW, I'm sorry, OK? Shall we play nicely now? :-)
Whoever said that comments like "Aren't you paying attention?" are offensive and inflammatory was also right (I think it was Alex). If we all calmed down a bit it might be a good thing - of course we shouldn't _not disagree_ with passion, because there wouldn't be much of a digest then, would there?
Runes and Traits in HQing:
Me:
>> Each _rune_ would have trait affiliations too, and when a HQ tied
>> him/herself to a rune, the relevant traits would become set at extreme
>> levels
Alex replies:
>I dunno 'bout dis. That seems to be a hark-back to the old RQ idea of
>"mastering" a Rune, which I'm dubious about. For cult-oriented
>Questers, I think such notions are made largely redundant by the traits
>associated with each religion/diety (strike according to taste/dogmatic
>opinion). It may be true to some extent that all Storm gods, say, tend
>towards similar characteristic traits, but I don't see any real benefit
>for making the traits depend _directly_ on runic associations, rather
>than on the nature of the particular god (or Facet, all you Mask-fans).
I _do_ like mastering runes, but I'm remembering that a rune is just that: a sigil that represents an object or (in this case) concept. In saying that somebody had 'mastered' the movement rune, IMO one is saying that they have mastered that aspect of their _own_ being, and thus tapped into the universal power of that aspect... in this way I say that each rune has one or more traits associated with it, as do combinations of runes, since belief has real power in Glorantha.
If everybody agrees that, say, the beast rune is connected with bestial anger, then someone who 'masters' their anger and can tap into the universal power of anger through myth (HeroQuesting) becomes associated with that anger and the power of that anger, which is in part represented by the rune. So, they have 'mastered' the rune, and gain it's power and a permanent mythical association with it.
<sigh>
That wasn't explained very well. Did anybody understand that? I can try again if not, but I'm pretty keen on the idea.
Trotsky robs Paul to pay Peter:
>Peter:
><<Each _rune_ would have trait affiliations too, and when a HQ tied
>him/herself to a rune, the relevant traits would become set at extreme
>levels (this ties in with loss of Free Will as discussed at length). Of
>course, extreme scores in the right sort of traits would be necessary to
>tie to the rune initially.>>
>
> Hmm... interesting... but what traits are we talking about? This is easy
>to see for runes such as Truth, Illusion, Harmony or Life, but I'm not sure
>about many others. Death, for instance. I initially thought 'Courage', and
>then something related to readiness to fight. Which may be fine for Humakt,
>Zorak Zoran and so on, but it doesn't really apply to Ty Kora Tek. And what
>about the element runes? One tends to think, 'Air = Orlanthi virtues' , but I
>assume Molanni and Entekos both have the air rune (though I could be wrong,
>never having seen a cult write-up of either) and yet put a different meaning
>on it.
> What I'm saying is, I don't think every cult, let alone every culture,
>puts the same meaning on a given rune. This may well be what Peter meant, but
>he doesn't specifically say so.
Actually I said that and yes, I certainly agree with you there. I'm not suggesting that the runic connections with each trait are fixed between all cultures, but that each culture has traits that it in it's mythology associates with each 'rune'. Of course, many of these _will_ be the same, but as Trotsky quite rightly says, not universally. But a Sartarite Humakti _would_ have (one of, maybe) his Death trait(s) as Courage, because that's how they see Humakt. A Ty Kora Tek cultist may well have a different associated trait.
So what's the point of this whole rune/trait idea if it _is_ culturally influenced, you may ask? Well, I like runes, for one, but more importantly there is great value in describing the HeroQuest paths via runes (which is how the God Learners did it, so it must be good for rules!). In the above example, the Humakti can attune to the Death rune via Courage and Honour, and probably would do, but he _could_ use the HeroQuest paths of Ty Kora Tek to attune to Death instead, which use a different trait, EVEN THOUGH they are not his correct cultural traits, because the Hero Paths ARE THERE!
So, in conclusion, the meanings (traits) associated with the runes (power sources) are to some degree culturally subjective (a dangerous word to use...), but the paths created to the runes are burned permanently into that rune/powerful concept and thus those trait-rune linkages are universally valid.
That wasn't too well explained either. I'll give up now and wait for response. :-(
Oh, BTW, whoever said that successful HQing didn't seem to reduce the HQer's abiltiy to HQ and thus the "Free Will expenditure for HeroPlane change" mechanic was flawed was right IMHO. Any ideas for a fix that feels right? Michael? Alex? Beuller? Anyone? ;-)
Rules Systems: (somewhat off-topic, sorry)
Nikk Effingham, who is very cultured for a Broo (probably one of
Ralzakark's lot) ;-)
>Anyhow, I find tinkering with the rules
>and solving RQ's inherent flaws, a pleasant passtime....
Oh, me too, definitely. A quick pre-plug... my website will soon (in a few weeks) be full of RQ rules tinkering for those rules-lovers out there - modifications to the combat system for extra atmosphere and less randomness, and magic/worship system mods to make it more Gloranthan. Watch this space...
>> Nikk, I think Storyteller sucks, and Mark Rein-Haagen Dazs is a
>>pretentious wanker. There are far too many rules holes in the Storyteller
>>system.
>
> I found that when I regulary ran Storyteller the holes rarely
>appeared, and in the heat of gaming such minor points as the
>multi-functional fighters who can pick up one weapon they've seen it before
>and use it just as well as their favourite sword didn't really occur to us.
There are much bigger holes in storyteller than this. Two quickies:-
There are loads more (although that's all the GD space I'm gonna waste on this), but those are two heavies that tend to trash the game. Fair enough? :-)
Ciao,
Paul.
Powered by hypermail