> Also, is there a web site where I could find the Duck Mini-Pack
> or is there a project for one ? All this work on duck is just
> fabulous. I can't wait to use this stuff in my next games. I'm even
> thinking about an entire duck party...
I've just collected all messages on ducks posted in GD this summer. =
Based on it (both my messages and other people contributions) I started =
a document of what will become my final version of the Duck Mini-Pack (I =
suspect that it will not be all that mini...). I am revriting the whole =
thing in order to acomodate an conciliate the issues raised on tens of =
messages.
I'll send this document to anybody that e-mails me to =
sermasalmeida_at_mail.telepac.pt
Sandy Petersen:
> >Why is the adaptability of ducks such a mistery?
> Their adaptability isn't a mystery - their PAST is a mystery.
> (...) it's hard to say what they were a hundred or a thousand years =
ago.=20
It's hard to whom? If you mean that it's hard to ducks to tell their =
history, I agree with you. The way I understand ducks, the notion of =
'history' is alien to them. They don't have a rational study of their =
past or an established set of past records. They have lores and stories =
but these reflect heavily the influence of the peoples with whom they =
share ther living. In that sense, their view of the past is a reflection =
of other peoples history.
But what about humans? IMO both the god-learners and Lankhor Mhy sages = should have studied the durulz and recorded information about them. In = that sense, duck's past is not a mistery and can be described. My duck =mini-pack is an atempt to do just that.
> The whole point of being a weird little cranky guy is to _be_
> him, not to have some kind of epic history backing you up.=20
Here you have three, not one, points: should they have an history? I =
just stated my opinion which is yes.
Should it be epic? No (here I strongly agree with you). Being epic, =
dramatic or comedy is mainly the result of the way things are described =
and presented. It's less related to fact then to form. The consequence =
is that any durulz's history should be writen in the right tone. (Do I =
have the literary skills to do it? I suspect not.)
Should it 'back ducks up' (in other words, are they aware of it)? I just =
agreed with you that no.
> I hold to the opinion that traditionally in Glorantha ducks have been =
good
> Sartarites, not just skin-deep.
Ok the expression 'skin-deep' is not quite appropriate. Anyway, we are =
speaking about different things. One thing is to decide if ducks have =
their how culture that is different from the human culture. A different =
thing is to know if they share a common political system. Let me give =
you an example: in RW native americans do have a distinctive culture but =
they also received and incorporated the european culture and are good =
United Sates of America citizens. And they live in reserves... That's =
how I think ducks were incorporated in Sartar.
Two points: ducks are unaware of their distinctive mores (they don't =
describe them, reflect on them or rationalize them). Ducks participation =
in orlanthi culture is limited since humans don't accept them as equals =
(you don't find ducks leading humans; in cults ducks are accepted as =
initiates or acolytes but it's exceptional for a duck to achieve priest =
or rune lord status - with the exception of religious activties =
participated only by ducks: like RW slaves last century that had slave =
priests leading slave religious ceremonies).
> I also believe that there's no point in having ducks unless their=20
> personality and nature is just as shallow as it seems.
First, we have them. It's to late to go back. Second, I mostly agree =
with you but I think that this means that ducks' personality deserves to =
be studied. I'll post my musings on this issue in the near future.
S=E9rgio Mascarenhas
Powered by hypermail