and count me with Nick
Peter
>No worse than "Lunars are Right, Orlanthi are Wrong" profounded by
>some...
Lunars and Orlanthi are of course, both right by their own cultural values and both wrong by the others. Nick and others (certainly including me) have, on occasion, been known to promote the worthiness of Lunar cultural values - which does no mean we are unaware of the virtues of Orlanthi culture from their perspective.
However, there is a very real danger IMO of the "Malkioni are Right, Stygians are Wrong" being taken as not just culturally true, but objectively metaphysically and spiritually true - ie Stygians (and Aeolians, etc) should be worse magically, because they are wrong. And I think that just sucks.
Not to mention it doesn't make a whole lot of sense - Arkat, one of the greatest heroquesters and most widely knowledgeable magicians ever, would teach his loyal followers a particularly sucky form of magic when he had several other options? Hmmm....
David D
>It was my interpretation that henotheism does indeed have weaker
>magic than a more pure approach. This is one reason the Abiding Book
>spread so fast.
Their magic might be less effective on a culture wide basis, and there will always be factors that make particular cultures more or less effective. But not intrinsically less effective. Are Rathori less effective magically as a culture than the Orlanthi? Sure, the Orlanthi have a huge variety of magical effects, eventually organised magic in the SMU using stolen LCM techniques, great competence at heroquesting, and so on. But are they intrinsically less effective? Well, the Rathori produced Harrek, and he still gains much of his magical might from basically Rathori magic (the bear god), so potentially, the Rathori are mighty tough. I have interpreted some things said lately that the Stygians are intrinsically less competent magically than the Malkioni, not just in the sense that an individual practitioner might have a higher score, but in the sense that the Malkioni are in touch with levels of power that the Stygians are not. And I don't like that idea one bit. That said, Peter seems to have a much more complex and interesting view of the Stygians than some - not sure if I buy the tantra idea, but its certainly interesting.
I would also note in passing that there seems to be a bit of favouritism - the Orlanthi and the Lunars get to mix magic systems with impunity, and get no major problems from it. But the poor old Stygians get smacked hard for the same offence.
Cheers David PS unable to resist, sorry, but>New Decade, Century, and Millenium will not in fact start until 2001, since
> Thank you for the sentiment, but at the risk of being pedantic, the
Anyone that that thinks its important to tell people that 19080 was part of the 70s, just for example, not only is at risk of being pedantic, but has probably already had a formal diagnosis of an advanced case of the condition, and should consider joining some sort of support group for sufferers. The most important thing about the whole argument is not who is right or wrong, but that if you really thinks it important, you're in the pedants club.
'...never support evil as a preferred lifestyle'
-TSR Inc corporate standards OldThinkers UnBellyFeel MoonWise! - Nick Brooke ------------------------------
Powered by hypermail