> The idea that Western heroquesters try not to name their opponents
> originates with Nick Brooke...
Thanks for ably summarising my position.
[In deference to Stephen P. Martin, I should mention that it's possible that an exhaustive reading of the published and unpublished Staffordian corpus might, at some point, turn up the word "Nameless" in a context which could, with the benefit of hindsight, appear to lead one willynilly down the path my homepage article has taken. Nevertheless, I feel that nobody other than the remarkable Mr. Martin cares a jot or tittle about this. But I would surely hate to harm his vision of Glorantha's untrammelled purity by pretending to have any ideas of my own...]
On a more general ground, I think the idea of previous posters was that Quests might exist in which (nameless) guardians are defeated, rather than their being Nameless Guardians. Thus the Quest itself would take much the same form, regardless of whether you're trying to get past dragonewts, or barbarians, or Imperial Soldiers, in your attempt to win the (nameless) treasures. The trouble with anything this "generic" is that the *specifics* of the situation you are venturing into are naturally more apposite than anything in your preparations: your enemy can win just by "being themselves", as this is something you can't be ready for -- your Quest works against nondescript guardians, but these ain't they.
::::
Nick
::::
Powered by hypermail