I think it makes quite a lot of sense in Glorantha. Goldentongues and scheming boldhome politicos are thoroughly Worldly, Mad Shamans in Caves, and Dayzatar priests extremely Ascetic. This is still valid even if they're equally "pious", according to their own religious lights. How useful a distinction it is, and how significant it would be for the virtues of many religions is perhaps questionable...
David Dunham says, presumably a la Claude Raines:
> I'm shocked at the number of personal attacks on the Digest lately.
Seems pretty much within the usual Cyclic variation to me (sadly). Perhaps a ritual beating of the Usual Suspects at G-con V? ;-) (I feel pretty safe, as various idiotic developments in Real Life means that it doesn't look like I'm going to be faced with the prospect of having to talk myself into spending the $800+ it'd cost to get there...)
> I've seen an attempt made to graft traits on to RuneQuest, and I didn't
> think it worked very well. [...] If you're going to use personality traits,
> you really ought to integrate them into the game system (as does Pendragon).
The extent of this "integration" is that it uses the same die-rolling mechanism as other tests. While consistent mechanics are quite nice, there's nothing particularly trait-specific about the Pendragon mechanism, and indeed, I think it has some distinct weaknesses. Having either percentile traits, or D20 rolls for both traits and skills, but with more RQ-like criticals would be equally consistent, and probably more appropriate if you're running a campaign with a timescale (and experience rules) more like RQ than Pendragon.
> if Issaries really
> does have Worldly as a virtue (which I'm not sure about), it would be
> explained as not meaning that the merchant sneers at deities [...]
But rather as...? I think we can all agree on what it doesn't mean, it's what it does that's a bit more slippery.
> Alex Ferguson suggests
>
> > Worldly/Ascetic
>
> Which seems to preclude the "superstitious" interpretation of the Pendragon
> Pious trait.
I think the Pendragon trait is better described as "spiritual", rather than "superstitious", to split further hairs. I don't think I'm exactly precluding it, rather I'm attempting to "tighten up" the definition so that it's meaningful in Glorantha. I find it hard to imagine many Gloranthans who have a strong "disregard or disbelief in the spiritual side of life", so I think ridding the trait of such connotations makes sense, and leaves the trait-pair looking more relevant.
People's _specific_ religious beliefs, quirks, and prejudices are better handled as Passions, I think, as several others have chimed in.
> BTW, neither English Muffins nor Australian Toaster Biscuits are sweet by
> nature (though sometimes they're baked with additives like honey).
So if they're not Actual Muffins (TM), and not pancakes, what exactly are they? (At least no-one has mentioned "scones" yet, which are always guaranteed to add to the confusion.)
> Bringing this back to Glorantha, it seems that any food item known by a
> place name is unknown (at least by that name) in said place.
I suspect this mania for misattributed foodstuffs is something of a modern phenomenon (perhaps a more complete attribue list would be Modern, Corporate, American), but I'll grant you it does have some comic possibilities.
> As I recall, croissants were invented to celebrate a Muslim
> (crescent-symbol) victory. Presumably the Lunars have them.
Or by the above logic, perhaps everyone else just _thinks_ they have them. Which Orlanthi militants proceed to ritually stomp on, to the bemusement of Lunar Chinless Wonders (TM MOB), who wonder why someone is going berserk at an innocent crumpet.
Slainte,
Alex.
End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #32
Powered by hypermail