There's ample evidence that they _can_, so the mere matter of the frequency that they _do_ seems at best a secondary matter, at least to this perhaps credulous poster.
In any case, I'd question whether this revel of revisionism was a profitable way to set about an initial understanding of any Gloranthan civilisation. When there's as much Kralori info kicking around as there is Lunar or Orlanthi, perhaps _that_ would be the best time to begin counter-currents of the "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they" sort.
> Well, as some of the Five Dragon Warriors are alleged to be able to
> turn into draconic form, that would make the whole debate rather moot
> wouldn't it? One wonders why no one said at the start 'Darudan draconism,
> yeah, those guys over there turn into dragon form every now and then and
> they are Darudists'.
I've been casting around for the answer you were looking for several posting iterations now: I had no idea _this_ was it, though I'm sure I alluded at least to similar themes. As I've also said, this is not the _deepest_ sense in which their religion is draconic, and is not the one I'd choose to stress in determining its Draconicness, but I suppose, whatever works...
> I'm still no closer to understanding what Darudism actually
> consists of, though. Its sort of draconic mysticism - except not mystic
> like the other mystics, and not draconic in a particularly obvious way
> (except the 5 Dragon Warriors), so what are we left with?
As a recently self-confessed Reductionist, I have to admit you're certainly managing to out-Reduce me on this one. I feel we've over-analysed the word 'draconic' long past any utility, and evidently we're still talking past each other on it; I'm increasingly inclined just to give up on that score. 'Mysticism' I can see going much the same way. I'll grant you that 'draconic mystics' doesn't tell us _much_, but if you're going to reject even that much, it'll leave us with significantly less.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail