It's History repeating.

From: Simon Hibbs <simonh_at_msi-uk.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 17:12:47 +0100

Brian :

>Most of these threads follow this general pattern (note that this cycle
>has been co-authored by an anonymous source :)...):

I've noticed a trend too :

1. Brian posts an opinion, bewailing the revisionism of Glorantha in RQ3 and Hero Wars and complaining how much has changed since RQ2.
2. Several people post copious quotes from RQ2 era and earlier sources, demonstrating that actualy Glorantha has always been this way since the earlies publications.
3. Brian complains that that's got nothing to do with it, and anyway a mere couple of dozen references, essays in WF or even whole supplements don't count. In fact, only Brians own RQ2 campaigns are valid refferences for what Glorantha is realy like anyway, because that's the way people play it.
4. Numerous sycophantic pawns of the New Glorantha conspiracy point out that actualy, they've been playing Glorantha this way ever since the orriginal supplements came out and don't see what the problem is.

The Praxian thread is only the latest instance. Yes, if you didn't have, or didn't thorougly read all the RQ sources available in byegon days then your game will diverge from Gloranthan officialdom. It happened to all of us to some extent I'm sure, I know it did to me. That doesn't stop those games from having been lots of fun. It doesn't make their take on Glorantha at that time either naff or embarrasing. Nor does it stop me from playing equaly great Gloranthan games in the future, building on what I now know.

Complaining that Nick's revisionist opinions have become widely accepted has nothing to do with Praxian Clans. I don't remember seeing Nick's name in the credits for Nomad (Clan) Gods, or Clans (..er, Cults) of Prax.

Simon Hibbs

---

End of The Glorantha Digest V6 #521

---