(Humakt cult (C) 425, Arkat.)

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_interzone.ucc.ie>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 08:35:10 GMT


Amid 10K of cheerily blazing straw men, unreconstructed quotes (mail headers no object), unfortunate formatting, and no real attempt at a subject line -- had he forgotten to state his name, could have a Rule Grand Slam! -- Chris Bell states that Orlanth (Adventurous) isn't an male cult:

> unlike Jane Williams, gods bless her heart

You seem to have almost completely misspelt "Greg Stafford", whilst still retaining the correct number of letters. The pronoun usage would also once again have to be called into question.

> What works for me is having
> Humakt having an essentially unchanged nature since the Dawn.

Smashin', super, fantastic. And let's see what you could have won, had you only presented an argument that might have worked for anyone else who wasn't of the same initial opinion anyway.

No one questions anyones right to run their game however the arseways heck they like, and to post whatever material based on same (or otherwise) they like. But really, what _is_ the point of merely stating, and restating (and restating) a position without offering _any_ supporting argument for it beyond personal taste, or developing it in a way that might actually lead to some further understanding of the history or nature of the Humakt cult, a smidgeon of gameable material, or... well, anything, really.

If the Humath-haters out there produced an account of the Arkat, Ralios, Slontos, Death God etc., shebang that was even halfway as _interesting_ as their particular bete noir, then it might start to seem like a contest, to we bemused onlookers watching the current rout. Neither "Not in my campaign!" nor "Greg might not like it!" are particularly edifying vote-winners.

Nevertheless --

Slainte,
Alex.


Powered by hypermail