Chaos, Nature and Evil...

From: David Lucas <david.lucas_at_dial.pipex.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:03:26 +0100


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

The discussion of Chaos causes new writer to unlurk...letting in disorder from outside the Digest...that's what happens when you even just talk about Chaos.

[Lots of quotes removed...]

I will seek to clarify the issues that need resolving in the "Chaos" thread. And no doubt trigger accidental flame-war (96-00 on Placate/Clarify)

I would suggest that it does not progress debate to argue over the meaning of words. Words (a la Humpty Dumpty) need to be defined, even if multiple meanings are acknowledged. To seek a "true nature of Chaos" at a cosmological level is a God-learner project, and futile.

But the physics of chaos does need to be sorted out - since that will specify the *phenomena* that different people will then interpret differently. Along with magic and spirits, chaos seems to be a part of the physics of Glorantha and has therefore some definite phenomenology (whatever that might be).

The Gloranthan physics of Chaos

- -------------------------------

It is necessary to agree as Gloranthan lore what Chaos (or whatever names you call it) looks like. What triggers the Stormbull Sense Chaos and when? When does Bill grow a tentacle? We need this shared base of fact, which is what different cultures respond to in forming their attitudes. Of course some cultures may not have experienced some aspects of Chaos (and what fun when they meet it!).

Whether someone can "really" be cleansed of Chaos is a God-learner question of no import. Whether mainstream Orlanthi *believe* you can be is an important social question. Whether there are circumstance where trusted indicators (e.g. showing up on Sense Chaos) cease to detect you is a matter of physics. Obviously Gloranthans will not know the 'real' physics, but if written pedantically the physics need not violate any reasonable world view.

These questions of physics arise whatever your atttitude towards Chaos.

The single biggest issue is what Sense Chaos senses, since it seems to imply an objective definition. D&D Alignment by the back door. I tend to assume that (post-Compromise) there is a background level of chaos at a low level, with some random variation. And it is biased towards "Detecting things that Storm Bull does not like, or does not understand" and anyway gives quite a few false positives (that background chaos again). But I just wish it weren't there. If ever something needed Gregging.

Gloranthan social attitudes towards chaos

- -----------------------------------------

These can diverge (as per the "cleansing" debate). There is no need for peoples views to be consistent SO LONG AS THE ACTUAL PHENOMENA CORRESPOND SUFFICIENTLY. The trick will be to make the various social views both plausible and well integrated.

We can develop various culture's 'Chaosologies' in immense detail if so desired, But it is the everyman's thoughts, feelings, conversations and institutions that interest me, and which can be subtle without being sophisticated. IMO, the Orlanthi view should be closed to argument - questioning it is a sign of chaos-taint - so I like the direction the Arroy/Malia comments went.

The characters personal experience of Chaos

- -------------------------------------------

Just as a society can change, so can an individual. We may bring an Orlanthi to ambivalence about chaos, although I feel it unlikely. The player may not believe in objective cosmic evil, but the character does. He has met it. An Orlanthi sees not "ambiguity" but seduction and deceit. The human cost of fighting the good fight can be horrific. They must be resolute.

And what about Lunar culture. What is their view of "Chaotically Modified Organisms" (CGOs). How about running scenarios for Lunars there they start to wonder if in fact there is an objectively evil unity to Chaos.

And, what is the experience of chaos-taint like? There will be culturally relative reactions but also but is there more? Do you feel new unknown emotions that reshape a personality? Is the world somehow seen as if in a different light?

Nature, or whatever

- -------------------

Hibbs & Conrad said:

Ping

> because it wasn't part of Glorantha as originally created.
Pong

> they grew from, or were created from the stuff of Glorantha itself. Storm
was born

> from earth and sky and so is natural. ... you also have to accept Chaos
as natural.
Ping

> Chaos intrudes into the world from outside it and so is unnatural. It's a
very simple distinction.
etc.

There is no *natural* definition of 'natural'. There can be many different meanings of natural in many different Gloranthan languages (if they translate ;-) ). Set down a definition and then we can agree on the conclusion. But probably not on the definition.

What is the consequence (and therefore importance) of the debate? Is the motivating question whether Chaos is objectively evil, or objectively morally neutral. Plague on you God-learners. The Orlanthi know that chaos is objectively evil, the Lunars know otherwise. End of discussion. Start of fight.

BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Lucas;David
FN:David Lucas
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:david.lucas_at_dial.pipex.com REV:19990421T103557Z
END:VCARD

End of The Glorantha Digest V6 #542


Powered by hypermail