RE: Almost the last word on Thunderous Ladies?

From: Steven Barnes <SBarnes_at_brio.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 15:30:00 -0700


"Jane Williams" <jane_at_williams.nildram.co.uk> writes:
>Steve Barnes: sorry, this isn't a "I agree". Well,
>not completely. Mainly because he's talking about
>"complaints about retconning Vinga", and as far as
>I'm aware there haven't been any.

Well, what's-his-name, the guy who stormed off the list last week, made the remark about ret-conning.

>Complaints about retconning Orlanth so that he no
>longer gives Storm powers to females, either of his
>own or of associated cults, yes, but that's very different.

Fair enough. Jeff Richards and Pam Carlson have addressed the issue far more eleoquently than I could have.

Everytime the mind of Stafford moves to flesh out another part of Glorantha, someones sacred cows get run over. The details I am reading second-hand about this alleged ret-con are rather minor compared to, say, the infamous "Why I Hate Mostali" Different Worlds article.

>I don't know what your specific interests are, but suppose
>Officialdom came out with something that made Indrodar Greydog
>Impossible - he's only in a fanzine, so obviously that wouldn't
>matter, would it? Would it?

As it happens, I've never heard of Indrodar Greydog. I am the most fanatic Gloranthaphile in my gaming group, However, I lack the patience (or the motivation) to track down every fan publication out there. Stafford "blessing" material in a fan publication does not mean that Chaosium/Issaries has any obligation to maintain continuity with it.

>Anything that contradicts something as basic as this, or, far
>worse, contradicts the main Orlanth write-up available to us
>(River of Cradles), had better have a very good reason for it.

It is pretty sad IMO, if Praxian suppliments contain the definitive write-up on Orlanth.

Powered by hypermail