Bending Humakt out of shape

From: Jon S Green <jonsg_at_harlequin.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 11:32:56 GMT


On Thu, 5 Mar 1998 23:25:22 GMT, various members of The Glorantha Digest wrote:

> From: Simon Hibbs <simonh_at_msi-uk.com>

> I don't think theres anythign cock-eyed about that. However, the lead
> cross quest is an established Humakti heroquest. According to what you
> say abouve, the existence of that quest and the following of it
> establishes the history and nature of the god. How can a god have an
> independent opinion of it's own history and nature, especialy bearing in
> mind the god's lack of Free Will?

The key thing is how the God's perceived _within_Time_. Changes made within Time affect how the God's seen henceforth (and is remembered as having been seen). Outside Time, but bound by Time, the Gods may have firm opinions on how they're worshipped, perceived and served within Time.

> > .....from within Time, the nature of the
> >God in Time has altered and, from that time henceforth, the new Path is
> >the true Path, and all on the Mundane plane perceive it as such. ...
>
> But the lead cross quest is an established heroquest, yet are you
> claiming it tells us nothing about humakt?

Um, I don't understand this comment. If the Lead Cross HQ is an established HQ, then it's part of the God and His Paths. It may be deprecated on the Mundane Plane. It may even be enacted against Humakt's wishes, as expressed to His representatives. But, however much people may wish otherwise, it's part of Him and will be so as long as the Path is walked.

There are parts of a God's nature that most of the God's followers -- and maybe even the God -- may wish to disavow. If that Path is not walked for centuries, millennia even, the Path becomes weak and loses significance in Time, maybe even is forgotten and ceases to be part of the God within Time. That's why it's important to walk the Paths in ritual, and to get it right, and to do it as often as possible. A neglected God becomes little more than an impoverished Spirit (e.g. Firshalla, IIRC); a God whose Paths are walked only selectively changes in Time.

Outside of Time, on the Gods' Plane, the God simply _is_. Within time, how the God's perceived and worshipped; to which aspects of the God their worhippers sacrifice POW and MPs; which Paths of the God are walked often and well: all these things define the presence of the God within Time.

If I've misunderstood what you're saying, could you please clarify for me?  

> >I would imagine that a God which didn't wish its Path changed would
> >disapprove mightily of those attempting the change and set every
> >possible obstacle in their way.
>
> Gods have no Free Will.

They cannot enact their will directly, no: that would violate the constraints of Time. ("Whoopee!" says Wakboth....) But, through their worshippers, they can and would cause their will be be enacted, and there are many ways a God can express a wish to a Holy person.

(Example: a Priest has misgivings about a certain HQ, or the way it's apparently being perverted, and performs Divination to ask the God if it's in the God's will that the HQ be altered in that way. If the God says, "No!", it becomes the Priest's Holy mission, his Jihad, to prevent that HQ and any other attempts at it from taking place, by any means possible.)  

> Following the heroquests of an enemy cult has a number of dangerous
> pitfalls. For a start, how do you find out how to follow the quest?
> These are closely guarded cult secrets. Even getting a few details wrong
> could be incredibly dangerous.

MGF point one: observe the Enemy. Interrogate any converts to your own cult. Infiltrate other cults. Spy on their ceremonies by means mundane and magickal. You'll be lucky to get the inner secrets, but you'll soon have pretty good access to their more minor HQs, Paths and legends.

(In my current campaign, an IO Initiate on the Priestess path is being protected, for reasons too lengthy to explain, by a YO Intiiate and sometime Sun Dome Templar. As a result, they end up attending (but not participant in) each others' ceremonies quite a lot, although not the fully secret ones. It's an educational experience, literally so, and you'd better believe the IOite is documenting everything. Eventually, it'll get put to good use. Of course, neither of them knows about _that_ yet...)

> Secondly, to succeed at the quest and
> often even to survive it you must fulfill the ideals of behaviour and
> responsibilities of the enemy, putting your own soul on the line.

MGF point two! Of course, it'll help if your respective cults are pretty close in outlook but competitive (YT / Humakt for example). A Humakti force enacting a CA HQ, or vice-versa, would be unworkable.

I can imagine the YT or Humakti leader of such a hostile HQ being given Death as an honour for having completed their mission, and to purge them of any taint. Other cults would have other ritual purgings.

> Thirdly, following an enemy cult's heroquest successfuly, even if
> changed, strengthens the enemy cult. If their heroquest involved
> fighting your own cult, then it will also weaken your own side.

Agreed. You'd pick a HQ which didn't put the two cults head-to-head. Yes, it would strengthen the opposing cult to a very minor degree, certainly no more so than if their own followers did the same -- which they do all the time -- but the damage you'd inflict by your "hostile takeover" would hopefully outbalance the very minor benefit to them. It's a very high-risk strategy.

> All it would take is for the enemy heroquesters to undo the changes you have
> done - a relatively easy feat for them, compared to the effort you had
> to go to - and all you'll have achieved is to make them stronger and
> you weaker.

You wouldn't be significantly weaker, except minutely and by comparison. By choosing the right HQ, there's no direct consequences to your own cult.

> I can see what you're getting at, but I'm afraid I think you're being a
> bit naive.

I'm not going to get drawn into name-calling.

> >Silly example: ......
>
> All this would do is strengthen the Humakt cult. I'd like to see a real
> example of what you mean though.

That's going to take a lot more time to put together than a throwaway remark, but I am working on something at the moment. I'll post it to the Digest when finished if people are interested. Don't expect to see it for a few months yet, though, it's a long-term campaign scenario.

But I _do_ love the idea of the haughty Humakti going to their HQs wearing tutus and trying to ignore the titters of the commoners they pass...

> From: scp4 <scp4_at_ukc.ac.uk>

> Minor changes to the true path may be possible it is true and I like
> that idea but IMHO any major change would lead to the creation of a
> minor "mirror image" of the god in his altered form in the person of the
> Superhero himself (let's not kid ourselves someonoe who pulls this off
> has to be a Super rather than normal(?) Hero).

Depends on the nature of the change. Something really minor could be pulled off by a Hero or a fair bunch of Priests all walking the same Path. Something the scale of the Lunar magicks would need a SuperHero (who would personalize the change and become a Godling), or a fair few Heroes, with (High) Priests weighing in too (in which case the change would be geographical to the area in which the new ritual was enacted).

> From David Dunham:

> > IMG the God Learners changed
> > some Gods' natures by perverting their Paths
>
> While you're the authority on your game, I suspect that the God Learners
> didn't in fact change the nature of the gods (otherwise there wouldn't have
> been the "False Gods Revolt"). Instead, they changed the nature of the
> cults.

No difference, within Time (which is what I've been saying).

I have it in mind that they may, as part of their experimentation, have attempted to modify ritual as a diagnostic tool in order to understand Gods. They would have understood that ritual is a Mundane representation of a Divine Truth, and therefore faulty. The objective was to see how much resistance they met to their change. If unresisted, they've discovered new aspects of the God; if heavily resisted, they know that what they've tried is inimical to the God's nature. God Learning using the Scientific Method. In doing so, they may have changed Gods' natures inadvertently, not realising that it's possible to do so.  

> I doubt Abraham changed the biblical god to one who no longer required
> human sacrifice. Or that Jesus or Mohammed changed him once again. Surely
> they were revealing new ways to worship the same divinity. Not that
> followers of these different ways might not consider each other to worship
> different or changed gods -- the effect is much the same.

That's too Earthly an analogy for me. I don't believe Gloranthan rules apply here!

Nonetheless, bear in mind that I'm not talking about changing the God's nature on the Gods' Plane, I'm talking about changing the Mundane Plane's perception, within Time, of the nature of the God. In that context, perhaps Abraham _did_ change YHVH's nature ... as far as YHVH's followers perceived it.

Jon
- --
Work: jonsg_at_harlequin.co.uk | ICQ: 4500882 | http://www.harlequin.co.uk/ Private: jonsg_at_pobox.com | PGP key avail. | http://www.pobox.com/~jonsg/ Opinions expressed may not be Harlequin's! <*> Junk email utterly reviled "Nonthreatening and comfortable, this green does not pounce on you." (JB)


End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #468


Powered by hypermail