>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:36:17 GMT
>From: owner-glorantha-digest_at_chaosium.com (The Glorantha Digest)
>To: glorantha-digest_at_chaosium.com
>Subject: The Glorantha Digest V5 #656
>Reply-To: glorantha_at_chaosium.com
>
>
>The Glorantha Digest Thursday, June 11 1998 Volume 05 :
Number 656
>
>
>
>TABLE OF CONTENTS
>
> Ian Thomson the Life Rune
> Michael Schwartz Re: Red Hair
> Ian Thomson final word on Deezola
> David Dunham Re: paradigms, Wind Children
> Bill Thompson Wind children
> Simon Hibbs Re: HW & paradigm shift
> Peter Metcalfe Gregging and HoG
> Peter Metcalfe HoG and Antirius
> Simon Bray Red Hair and Wind Children.
> Paul Wegner Re: Orlanthi Coming Of Age
> TTrotsky_at_aol.com Re: newbie Gloranthans
>
>RULES OF THE ROAD
>
>1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially
> not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated.
> If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show"
> please do. But don't include the whole message you praise.
>2. Use an appropriate Subject line.
>3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a
> point-by-point basis.
>4. No anonymous posting, please. Don't say something unless you're
ready
> to stand by it.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 09:48:35 +0000
>From: "Ian Thomson" <ithomson_at_swin.edu.au>
>Subject: the Life Rune
>
>Hello
>
>Anyone know where I can get a gif or jpg of the Life Rune
>
>or even where I can find a hard copy in some publication
>
>thanks
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 19:05:04 -0500
>From: Michael Schwartz <mschwartz_at_mindspring.com>
>Subject: Re: Red Hair
>
>In my own words:
>
>>To anyone who has met Suzanne Courteau, Greg's wife, this should be
>>significantly less puzzling than it is to Jane.
>
>Oh and, before I receive endless rebukes from persons protesting what
>they feel is a sexist remark on my part, I'll mention that Suzanne is
>intelligent, articulate, charming and quite witty... Greg was obviously
>smitten enough by her to marry a second time. More than reason enough
for
>him to take a bit of license, by way of homage, concerning cultural
views
>toward red hair, don't you think?
>
>Or perhaps the myths colored (pun intended) his real-world
perspective...
>:)
>
>
>
>
>Michael Schwartz mschwartz_at_mindspring.com Ann Arbor, MI USA
>====================================================================
>"I've always said you can get more with a kind word and a two-by-four
>than with a kind word alone." -- Marcus Cole, Babylon 5
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:04:35 +0000
>From: "Ian Thomson" <ithomson_at_swin.edu.au>
>Subject: final word on Deezola
>
>thanks very much again to everyone
>
>especially in this final assessment
>
>to Nick Effingham and Simon Hibbs
>
>thanks especially to Simon for presenting a critical analysis in a
>very unantagonistic way
>
>whilst I doubt I have made the cult write-up anything approaching
>official standard
>
>its gone thru another re-write
>
>As promised I won't post it again for a while in case there are more
>changes
>
>but its here at
>
>http:\\www.geocities.com\Area51\Dimension\5507\deezola.html
>
>and once again
>
>who knows how to Zip documents up to put them on a site for easy
>downloading?
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:10:25 -0800
>From: David Dunham <dunham_at_pensee.com>
>Subject: Re: paradigms, Wind Children
>
>I won't argue terminology (though I'm aware of the overuse of
"paradigm").
>
>Hero Wars takes a different approach to combat than games like
RuneQuest,
>Pendragon, or Star Wars. In these three, each dice roll maps more or
less
>to some real world event. I make a dice roll which represents shooting
my
>blaster, and depending on the results, the enemy is vaporized. (Whether
>this is a automatic weapons roll or a series of thrusts and feints
doesn't
>really matter, that's an abstraction of detail.) Hero Wars combat
doesn't
>do this. You cannot point to a particular die roll and say that it
>represents your sword swing, and that because you rolled well the enemy
>took a wound. It doesn't attempt to simulate, however abstractly, the
>processes of the modelled world. You are encouraged to map the game's
>internal states back to the simulated world, but this isn't necessary
(or
>always easy). In traditional games, the game's state does map pretty
well
>to the simulated world (you're down 3 HP in your left arm -> you have
been
>wounded in your left arm). In the current Hero Wars draft, knowing that
I
>have 40 AP and you have 30 does suggest that I have an advantage, but
>that's all it says. (And we both have an advantage over where we
started!)
>
>Every game attempts to simulate a world and a flavor, and are
considered
>more accurate depending on the results. (When they fail to have
reasonable
>outcomes, they end up in Murphy's Rules.) Most games do this by
abstracting
>the processes by which the world works. Hero Wars does not. This takes
some
>getting used to, but I believe it does work.
>
>> I just don't see the value or purpose of characterising its
differences
>> from RQ, Pendragon (etc) in such jargonified, and apparently
considerably
>> overstated, terms.
>
>I won't argue terminology, but in the hands of a GM it's a rather
different
>tool than previous games. The distinction is sometimes important -- and
>most noticable when it comes to combat.
>
>I think this discussion shows the lack of merit of talking about the
game
>system before it's widely available, and will cease with this attempt
at a
>clarification.
>
>
>Nils Weinander wondered
>
>> Has anyone does any work fleshing out the Wind Children?
>
>I assume you have RQ Vikings (an odd source, I admit!) and that issue
of
>Different Worlds?
>
>David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_pensee.com>
>Glorantha/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html>
>Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 21:43:15 +0100
>From: Bill Thompson <interlit_at_pacificcoast.net>
>Subject: Wind children
>
>>> Nils Weinander
>
>>>Has anyone does any work fleshing out the Wind Children?
>>>They are among the most fascinating inhabitants of
>>>Glorantha IMO, but I find very little information
>>>about them.
>
>I think that nobody has fleshed out a wind child better than David
Cheng
>and I have the photo's to prove it.....
>
>"Ask me a riddle and I reply:
>"Cottleston, Cottleston, Cottleston Pie.""
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:50:09 +0100
>From: Simon Hibbs <simonh_at_msi-uk.com>
>Subject: Re: HW & paradigm shift
>
>Richard Develyn :
>
>>If you take it a stage further, one approach is to almost remove the
>>distinction between players and GM, emphasising instead collective
>>story-telling.
>
>Surely the collective input is what distinguishes roleplaying from
>acting?
>
>>This, to my mind, is not role playing. You're not _having_ adventures,
>>you're _writing_ them.
>
>You are still playign a role, and you are still playing a game, so I
>can't see how you can claim it's nolonger roleplaying. The collective
>storytelling approach is an extreme case. Games such as Amber can tend
>towards that extreme sometimes. Personaly I think the ideal is to find
a
>ballance between the two.
>
>To take an example from fiction, some episodes of Babylon 5 involve
>interactions between the command crew (the players) and external
>threats. These are comparable to strongly refereed game sessions. Other
>episodes involve personal interactions and conflicts between the main
>characters. These episodes are comparable to lightly refereed games
>where most of the running is made by the players. I could imagine
>runnign a B5 game in which Jakaar and Londo were both players for
>example. In game sessions where Jakaar and Londo are plotting against
>each other and trying to win over other players to their cause, the
>referee takes a back seat.
>
>In what sense is this nolonger roleplaying?
>
>
>Simon Hibbs
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:36:44 +1200 (NZST)
>From: metcalph_at_voyager.co.nz (Peter Metcalfe)
>Subject: Gregging and HoG
>
>Alex Ferguson:
>
>>Well, apart from the inherent painfulness of said agreement, in
>>this case the other answers were argued from in-print sources, and
>>my initial reaction was that Peter's answer was correct. I feel like
>>an Accessory to Gregging...
>
>Why would you feel bad about gregging me or being an accessory to
>a gregging on me? Surely the bigger they are, the more satisfying
>the 'thump' when they fall?
>
>David Cake:
>
>>>The raison d'etre of the quest in Dara Happan eyes was to get the
>>>Orb. They never made the conceptual leap that Harmast did to get
>>>use the quest for something else.
>
>> At this point, the next step is something like 'Sez who?' to which
>>Peter can reply 'Sez me', at which point everyone knows where they
stand.
>>Or Peter can quite some obscure source to prove his point, probably
>>ultimately without success as using sources to prove that something
doesn't
>>happen is very difficult unless at some point it is unambiguously
stated.
>
>Instead of describing what a big sadistic bully I am, you could have
>cottoned onto the words 'Harmast' and 'conceptual leap' and realized
>that I was talking about experimental heroquesting. It is stated in
>any number of sources that the Dara Happans did not experimentally
>heroquest after the first age.
>
>This does leave the issue of the quest in the years between Khordavu's
>Enthronement and Nysalor's Death. But in the absence of questing
>after Nysalor's death and the return of the Goddess, and the general
>downsizing of the Antirian cult after Nysalor's death, the issue is
>largely academic IMO. Should new evidence or brilliant theories come
>to light, I will quite happily revise this opinion.
>
>> Personally, I think that over the centuries Dara Happan thought has
>>taken enough strange turns that its very likely that at some point the
Dara
>>Happans did make that conceptual leap, though it possibly didn't make
it
>>into the mainstream. Talking about 'the Dara Happans' as we are here,
when
>>they have 1600 years of religious revisionism, is a dangerous
>>generalisation.
>
>FWIW we know the strange turns made by the Dara Happans. The closest
>to experimental heroquesting that the Dara Happans got is Karvanyar's
>'Every Man a Sun' which appears to be mystical and quite difficult.
>
>- --Peter Metcalfe
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:36:47 +1200 (NZST)
>From: metcalph_at_voyager.co.nz (Peter Metcalfe)
>Subject: HoG and Antirius
>
>David Cake:
>
>> I do, however, heartily applaud the idea of creating a quite
>>separate forum to the digest, so that newbies are not traumatised when
>>their interesting myth idea is brutally cut down by Peter on the
grounds
>>that it is contradicted by Glorious Reascent, and in any case totally
>>inconsistent with real Roman agricultural techniques.
>
>And perhaps also for people who get tired of David 'Revisionist' Cake
>sprouting cheap shots from the blue...
>
>>>> I think the Dara Happans may have recreated parts of the quest (ie
>>>>the part where 'Antirius the Undeceivable is not fooled by his
invisible
>>>>Other'), but not known the whole story of the version where Antirius
wins.
>
>>>How can they know the story where Antirius wins when they know that
>>>such a thing has never happened?
>
>> First, did they know the story of how Antirius is the Undeceivable
>>(which occurs at the Hill of Gold) before the successful quest for the
Orb?
>>I think they did, but I see no firm evidence either way.
>
>Well considering that Antirius has returned from the Hill of Gold
>during the Great Darkness at least once, my opinion is yes. But
>'not being deceived by his Other' is a completely different thing
>to 'winning the orb of the eye'.
>
>> Secondly - The Orb is the source of Justice, and Antirius is the
>>source of Justice.
>
>The Orb is not the source of Justice, but Authority. It is part of
>the Imperial Regalia. It is demonstrably not intrinsic to Antirius
>because myth records it originally was held by Yelm and then
Murharzarm.
>It passed unrecorded in myth to Antirius (aklthough Plentonius records
>him receiving the Cloak). Antirius then lost the Orb when the Roof
>was built and never held it again. It is demonstrably not necessary to
>his wellbeing because he came back to life (at the Dawn or at 111 ST -
>depending on whom you believe) without the Hill of Gold quest being
>successfully completed. Ergo on an examination of Dara Happan lore,
the
>Orb and Antirius are distinct entities.
>
>>OF Course Antirius must eventually win, even if they do not know how
>
>Why must Antirius win at the Hill of Gold? The Prince who succeeded
>in the quest does not invoke him.
>
>>Antirius never fails, but when we attempt the quest in
>>his place, sometimes we imperfectly understand his suggestions, and by
>>failing wound him.
>
>I note the Fifth Wounding Error occured when Antirius displayed
>Justice and found it to be less than it had been. Thus to say
>'Antirius never fails' is at odds with what the Dara Happans know
>about their religion.
>
>>>Going up the Footstool is part of the Ten Tests. The HoG quest
>>>is not part of the Ten Tests and is far more recent than the
>>>Ten Tests.
>
>>The Orb should be at the top of the Footstool, and if it isn't you
have to
>>resort to the Hill of Gold, a debased version for when the Orb is not
where
>>it should be. But the two quests are related.
>
>Given that all the other regalia are also supposed to be found at
>the top of the Footstool in the Ten Tests makes this reasoning faulty
>considering the HoG quest was not used to retrieve any of the other
>missing regalia (some of which had been lost when the Ice came
>according to the myth).
>
>>> What does a myth of Antirius have to do with becoming Emperor of
>>> Dara Happa?
>
>> Now, ask yourself which is the first mention of gaining the Orb? Is
>>it the Hill of Gold? No. Its Yelm receiving the Orb. Then Murharzarm
>>receives the Orb. The original quest for gaining the Orb of Authority
is
>>about ascending the Footstool, and is part of a series of quests where
you
>>are tested by spirits.
>
>So why do people have to repeat the Hill of Gold quest and not the
>Ten Tests? And how do you reconcile this with the omission of the
>Orb of Authority from the modern Lunar Regalia?
>
>> Now, suddenly the Orb is stolen by evil beings. Do you invent a
>>totally new quest, unrelated to the first one? No, you try and use the
one
>>you have, except you know the regalia isn't at the top of the
Footstool
>>anymore, and you know the bad guys have it. So you adapt the quest a
>>little, so that you are ascending a hill, and you face the bad guys
along
>>the way.
>
>To postulate that Antirius was experimentally heroquesting in a
>response to the loss of the Orb is quite frankly awful. He quested
>for the Orb because the enemies had it on top of the Hill of Gold.
>Likewise I do not believe that questing at the Hill of Gold now is
>going to find the Orb as it is no longer there.
>
>>The Hill of Gold quest for the Dara Happans is about trying to see the
true
>>path (the path Antirius would take, because Antirius is undeceivable),
>
>But Antirius himself _tried_ that path and was unsuccessful _despite_
>being undeceivable!
>
>>The Hill of Gold proper (the one in Vanch) was never ascended by
Antirius
>>in a purely mythic sense
>
>And you are wrong as a cursory examination of the GRAY shows. Antirius
>tried it twice and failed to attain the Orb. And in order to forestall
>cries of irresponsible nitpicking, I should point out the GRAY
describes
>the worldview in which the Ten Princes would have understood the HoG
>quest. So rather than propose Antirius=Authority and speculate on the
>meaing of the HoG from there, you would be on far firmer ground if you
>tried to understand it the way the Ten Princes did.
>
>>>Not all quests are meaningful on a smaller scale. Otherwise Frodo
would
>>>have simply melted down a gold ring in a fire whenever he was in
trouble.
>
>>Would this example be somewhat overgeneralised to make a rhetorical
>>point perhaps?
>
>No.
>
>>Similarly, the Antirius Hill of Gold quest probably works pretty
>>well if what you want to do is recover an Orb of Authority.
>
>*An* Orb?!?
>
>- --Peter Metcalfe
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:05:40 -0400
>From: Simon Bray <101635.32_at_compuserve.com>
>Subject: Red Hair and Wind Children.
>
>Hi All,
>
> RE: Red Headed women in Glorantha.
>
> I definately believe that Suzanne Corteau may be one of the sources
for
>red hairs Gloranthan imortance.
>On the same wave length those that know Greg's friend Kerry Campbell
will
>see similar reasoning. I once came face to face with Kerry during 'Home
of
>the Bold' she is a true valkyrie and scared the hell outta me.
>
> Their are historical references to red hair. Boudicca was supposed to
have
>had red hair, as did her daughters. The population of the U.K was once
made
>up of 33% red heads before the Roman invasion. Red hair was deemed
unlucky
>by the Romans, probably due to Boudicca. (IMO) If I remember correctly
the
>medieval warrioress Agnes the Black had red hair. I think that it also
has
>a lot to do with cliche eg red heads being fiery tempered (which during
>several relationships with red headed women has not been disproved).
>
> I think Griselda from Oliver Dickinsons stories also influenced Gregs
>attitude to red headed women. The description of Pikat Yaraboom in
Troll
>Pak and the story 'A Tasty Morsel' will elaborate on this. I am not
sure if
>the 'Collected Griselda' is still in print from the Megacorp but it is
a
>worthy purchase.
>
> RE: Wind Children.
>
> The best resource that has been published about wind children must be
the
>scenario book from the Vikings box set. This reads so much like a
>Gloranthan article that it is no problem to convert. I have heard that
the
>background was originally Gloranthan any way. I think that all as needs
>doing is an expansion of their mythology. This article covers Habitat,
the
>Aery, Behavior, Food and Drink, Method of Living, Family and Life
History,
>Trade and Technology, Warfare, Natural Enemies, Preferred Magic,
Language
>and RQ3 Character Creation. The article doesn't feel Viking, talking
about
>'Elf Woods' and 'Storm Gods'.
>
> What I wanted to know about are the Storm Walkers. Has anybody tried
to
>write them up?
>
>Cheers Simon.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 09:17:47 -0400
>From: Paul Wegner <wegner_at_mail.fpg.unc.edu>
>Subject: Re: Orlanthi Coming Of Age
>
>Bruce,
>
>Go to Loren Miller's webpage
>
>http://rider.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/Fabulous/glib.html.
>
> Under scenario materials you will find the "Orlanthi Quest for
>Adulthood" by Brian Curley. This HeroQuest for adulthood tests the six
>orlanthi virtues. It seems like a nice way to get the characters
>adventuring right away and teach them about what is important to
>Orlanthi.
>
>Hope this helps.
>
>Paul
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:01:52 EDT
>From: <TTrotsky_at_aol.com>
>Subject: Re: newbie Gloranthans
>
>One of the Davids:
>
><< I do, however, heartily applaud the idea of creating a quite
separate
>forum to the digest, so that newbies are not traumatised when their
>interesting myth idea is brutally cut down by Peter on the grounds that
it is
>contradicted by Glorious Reascent, and in any case totally inconsistent
with
>real Roman agricultural techniques. >>
>
> While I agree that creating a separate forum is a good idea, my
>understanding is that it is intended for Hero Wars gaming/rules issues,
rather
>than Gloranthan background. So it wouldn't be the ideal place to post
new myth
>ideas, and even if it were, what are you going to do... ban Peter (or
anyone
>else you don't like) from joining the list? Ban mention of Glorious
ReAscent
>or other specific documents? Forbid people from criticising new myth
ideas (or
>whatever)? None of these options seem practicable, nor even desirable,
to me.
>
>Forward the glorious Red Army!
> Trotsky
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #656
>***********************************
>
Get Your Private, Free Email at
http://www.hotmail.com
End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #657