Untrue, Peloria was occupied by Orlanthi on a couple of occasions. During the first age and by the EWF.
> * Pelorian involvement in DP has always led to maximum harm to Peloria
> (e.g., Dragonkill war, fall of the Bright empire)
> * Peloria has repeatedly been invaded from out near Pent (first age
> rule, Sheng Selaris)
> From my perspective, based on history, DP (and the Orlanthi in
> general) offer very little active threat when avoided, and a great
> deal of risk if disturbed. Pent, on the other hand, represents a
> continuous, active threat.
> Am I missing something? In general, what is the motivation of the
> leaders (Emperor, Bellex Maximus, whomever) for invading DP?
Consider the invasion of DP to be a meeting encounter. Or consider the way the British Empire expanded in many cases. Firslty you spread out, then your people are killed by hostile natives, the govt steps in to help and before long has to dispatch an army. Plus there are powers in the Empire that want wars, want to fight and want booty. The Orlanthi look easy pickings, they are divided and unsophisticated. And finally, who on earth remembers the lessons of history????
> The only motivation that I can perceive is a need for the Red Goddess
> to defeat Orlanth for control of the middle air, and to integrate
> Orlanth into the Lunar way. Is this an accurate view? If so, what
> would the mytho-religious effect of that be?This view might be touted by some and believed by others and might even be true in some respects. However, the main reasons are political. Tarsh expansionism has a lot to do with it. Remember to the people of Tarsh, Arim, their founder was King of DP, so really its all theirs anyway...
> Martin and Nick seem to agree on one point:
> << there are two kinds of officers, the ones who shout "Advance!" and
> the ones who shout "Follow me!" Yanafali tend to the latter; they >
> embody Lunar heroism. >>
> So, by that logic, what would a Yanafali be expected to do when
> confronted with a choice between exemplifying bravery, and pursuing a
> more tactical path? If it makes more sense to send in waves of
> hoplites before putting the officers at risk, would they consider that
> cowardly?
Yes. Firstly, the leader of a unit must follow his mythic path to leadership, as displayed in the myths of his god. It would be perfectly fine for a Polaris general to sit on the hill, by his tent watching and directing the battle, because his god did this. It is both expected of him and gives him power to do so. Tarnils is the opposite of this. He is a Marshal Ney in 1812, he leads his men through hell because he is a leader of men! For an officer of Tarnils to sit back and direct the troops he would:
a). suffer a negative to his skills if I were GMing him b). cause some concern among the men for the uncharacteristic behaviour.
> I personally had always thought that would be a distinction between a
> Yanafali and, say, an orlanthi warrior: that the Yanafali wouldn't
> feel as constrained by immediate displays of foolhardy courage, but
> would be more able to sacrifice others if necessary. Indeed, this
> would seem to be one of the strengths of a civilized army confronting
> a barbarian one (to use some loaded terms).
Not at all. If one takes Rome for example, during the early Republic, they were firm believers in hand to hand combat for their officers and nobility. They had a huge casualty rate among officers and awarded their most pretigious award to the leader of their army who _killed_ the enemy army leader in mano e mano combat! Many armies expected incredible sang froid from their officers in the face of terrible risk. Marshal Ney had no less than 33 horses shot from under him in his career. Marshal Oudinot suffered 23 wounds in the course of his career.
There will be exceptions to general Tarnils courage but they are exceptions just like the heroic individual is an exception to the norm.
>What does it mean, Martin, that Tarnils is an includer? That his cult
>includes Humakt's? Am I off-road?
Peter replies:
>"The Lunar religion is one of [...] all embracing unity" p30 Glorantha
>Book. Inclusion is a manifest example of this. By magically revealing
>to a group of people that they, despite their differences, are all one,
>the Lunars can work wonders. Yanafal includes the many different troops
>that fight under him even though they worship different gods. An
>excellent example of this is Yanafal's Morale spell that Nick's already
>mentioned.
Yanafal Tarnils became a god after a career of military excellence that specialised in unifying the divergent groups within the Goddeses army into a coherant fighting force. Hence when he became a god, his powers of inclusion stayed with him, aided by his illumination, thanks to the goddess.
>Lunar Inclusion magics doesn't work on Orlanth worshippers.
I would disagree with this. It does not work on unwilling worshippers but Sylilan troops follow Tarnils and receive his aid too.
Martin Laurie
Powered by hypermail