Last of the 'only published overviews'

From: peter metcalfe <>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 17:06:11 +1300 (NZDT)


I'll keep this short.

> Well, after digging through some of the Digests (far from all) I've saved
>I didn't find some of the remembered stuff about Monomyth invalidity.

That's because we were never arguing about the validity of the Monomyth but rather when the 'only published overview' of glorantha (which is NOT the Monomyth) had been declared invalid. For an example, let's take a portion of the lengthy quote that you dug up without reading it in detail.

Me>> In Glorantha, magic can perform observable effects in the eyes
>> of an objective observer. But four different philosophies can
>> be identified in casting effective magic in glorantha: the
>> Humanists, the Theistics, the Mystics and the Naturalists? Which
>> one of these is truth?

Do you recognize the source of this arguement? It's straight from the published overview in ye Olde 'Cults of Terror'. Look at the glorantha pages at chaosium's website if you don't believe me. So how can you claim that I have declared the 'only published overview' of glorantha invalid when in fact I am quoting from it to show that the Monomyth is not universally true?

Powered by hypermail