>
> Glorantha is, first and foremost, a campaign setting. Its function is to
> provide an interesting and inspiring backdrop for roleplaying fun. Thus,
> the gloranthan sources are sources not of Truth, but of Inspiration. If
> something doesn't feel right to your campaign, ignore it. I won't let
> claims of "correctness" hamstring my imagination or shackle my campaign.
>
> If you feel overburdened by demands of GC, then i suggest a change in
> attitude. Nobody has a monopoly on Glorantha, not even Greg, who has said
> that "Glorantha is yours, not mine."
>
Perhaps part of our problem is that the current view of Glorantha seems to invalidate almost everything published up to RQ III; the Monomyth record is wrong, the gods have no objective reality, all the stuff of about the God's Age and Time is only the Orlanthi view, all that was written about Yelmalio was wrong, and the Dara Happen stuff (The Fortunate Succession and so on) are more valid anything that's been published before. Sometimes that's been expressed with a certain amount of arrogance.
And perhaps Glorantha has become so arcane that no beginner could possibly comprehend it. There's no real core of "truth" anymore; everything's subjective as a thousand different views of every little detail of Gloranthan life get put forth in the digest and the only published overview of the world has been declared invalid. While there's certainly something to everybody having their own way of looking at the world, it would be nice to have some common truth that we can depart from if we choose. I'd like an "Encyclopedia Glorantha" myself.
Just thoughts. While I find a good portion of the discussion is interesting, much is also irrelevant to gaming (yes, I know that for some it's a literary world) or overly authoritative when it's no more really than opinions. It isn't unreasonable to be annoyed at that.
V.S. Greene : klyfix_at_aol.com : Boston, near Arkham... "I want to spend my Christmas with a Dalak..."
Powered by hypermail