Martin:
>Answer me this, if you will. In what article, precisely, done by the RMM is
>there a detailed description of the Imperial succesion?
Wrong question. I said "already widely-understood, resonant and entertaining **GA** version", not some definitive "published version".
But, if there wasn't an existing GA view to challenge your brand new surprise interpretation, we (me, Nick, Mr Gidlow, David, David, David, Alex, Trotsky, Loren, Neil, Guy, Keith, John, Andre etc.) wouldn't be debating/questioning/rejecting your model, now would we? Petitio principii.
>You argue as if everyone knows your postion and yes, many, many
>people dislike the model _I've_ discussed, but many of those same
>people have picked quibble and have not fully agreed or understood
>some of the points put forward by you or Nick either.
Yes, so in other words, they "generally accept" the position Nick and I et al are putting forward!
>I find this GA approach irritating when there is plainly a whole wad of
>_opinion_ and very little indeed in print to be GA in the first place!
Come on Martin, you're begging the question again! It's obvious that a concept can be "generally accepted" without every detail having to be spelled out, chapter and verse, black and white, "in print". The "whole wad" of what you dismiss as "opinion" derives from a variety of sources, including works by Greg, RMM stuff, other "fan" (spit) material, freeforms, panel discussions at cons and of course the ongoing debate here.
>I can't find it in any RMM product I have. Occasional snippets, hints
>and sound bytes perhaps, but no serious step by step essay as Nick has
>produced.
One fortunate consequence of this acrimonious debate is that a detailed description of the GA version is coming to light, and it is interesting that virtually everyone - even you it seems? - prefers it to the "ultra-greggly bland succession of identical Moonsons" that you're nevertheless pushing.
Some observations. Unnecessary retconning - especially unnecessary retconning on the run - *is* intensely irritating. As I've already pointed out, it burns otherwise potential collaborators ("The final result of which was that I vowed I would never work on anything based in Glorantha again", Mr Danny GD V7 #583). And it makes currently productive collaborators wonder, "why did we bother? And why should we ever bother again?" (Nick, GD V7 #579). Such a state of affairs is hardly productive, nor professional.
Earlier in this debate, Nick described the Gregging of Sun County as "the most egregious, unacceptable, downright idiotic thing I have *ever* seen inflicted on a productive collaborator." I was that productive collaborator, and I can only agree. Greg's handling of his Elmal revelations ("the cult of Yelmalio is only 60 years old") some three months after the publication of SUN COUNTY, the first "RQ Renaissance" release, an official product he approved and (presumably) read - left me bewildered, confused and hurt (Ken Rolston wasn't that thrilled either). In the end, constructing a plausible reconciliation of what he wanted out of his new ideas and the existing material was not too difficult (in a nutshell, that "the cult of Yelmalio is only 60 years old IN SARTAR"). Shame this couldn't have been done before Greg went public.
IMO he was wrong then, and Martin/he are wrong now. As I said before, if Glorantha stalwarts such as Nick, Peter, David, me et al are reluctantly compelled to reject HW content, I'm sure Issaries Inc would prefer we did it now, rather than later, when it's in print. This unfortunate circumstance would be unlikely to happen if HW authors worked with the sensible notion that the existing "fan" oeuvre should be looked at and used where appropriate.
Martin is right when he says many of the details of the GA model need to be ironed out. But many people here have also commented that the "if it ain't broke, break it anyway" model Martin proposes is ill-conceived, inconsistent and clearly *not as much fun* as what we already have. Martin and his hapless sidekick Wesley tied themselves in (Pelorian) metaphysical knots attempting to explain it, before Martin seemingly gave in and admitted that it is indeed dull and boring and not what he'd do in *his* games anyway.
IMO, change for change's sake is just egregious scent-marking of the worst kind, particularly when we can ably demonstrate that Greg can have what he wants without another deeply unnecessary Elmal/Yelmalio debacle in the making.
Cheers,
MOB
Powered by hypermail