Yup, I understand that.
But don't you think all those NPCs are going to be puzzled when they see PC behaviour totally change? :)
"That Humakti over there, tight as a Durulz's arse he was, hoggin all his loot for training,
until a month ago.
Now he's couldn't care less what he spends".
> From: Philippe Krait <philippe.krait_at_uk.airsysatm.thomson-csf.com>
> Subject: Re: Orthopraxy, a small detail
>
> From: "Thomas McVey" <tmcvey_at_sric.sri.com>
>
> > This is in the same way as a politician might believe that the "other side" might triumph
> > in the next election or in the long-term. Or in the same way as some Soviet apparatchiks
> > (or even some western politicians) doubted the long-term viability of their own side
> > during the Cold War. Or a political activist who believed sincerely in an idea in their
> > youth, but now is not so sure the other side isn't right. Similarly, you could have a
> > Gloranthan who secretly doubts that their god is more right than another god. Or was
> > enthusiastic about killing chaos in their youth, but now is more circumpsect (like Oddi
> > the Keen).
>
> While I don't dispute that it could be the case and sometimes interesting as a character, as
> far as I know, Oddi has been illuminated which is a near-magical effect allowing to use his
> personal system of values while still presenting whatever external front he chooses.
>
> So I don't think he's a good example for your theme unless it is to prove that, unless you
> become illuminated, you cannot be an "hypocrite".
Yup, as it turned out both the examples I used were (probably) illuminants. But I don't think that the analogy just has to hold for just those blessed by Rashorana's great insight. I think that you could have that doubt over whether your God's way is the "right way", without being illuminated. Particularly for Lhankor Mhy, Issarians, and Chalana Arroy cultists, who are going to encounter more people from different walks of life than most lightbringer worshippers, and whose lunar counterparts are less diametrically opposed than, frex, Urox and Danfive.
(Humakti meet lots of interesting people to - but mostly kill them shortly afterwards :)).
Even more likely that this kind of angst is more prevalent post-lifting of the Syndic's Ban, and after the Lunar occupation of Dragon Pass and Prax, and the population movements that entails.
But I'd say you could draw out this Cold-War analogy further. Including the "is it OK to use nasty methods in a good cause".
Here's a quick scenario outline:
The local Lunar fort is being a major thorn in your side. Several of the best thanes in your
clan were executed after getting into a brawl in a local tavern with Lunar hoplites. You want
revenge, but the Lunar fort is too strong for you to take.
You are approached by a mercenary working for the Lunars in the fort. He offers you a chance of revenge. Orders have come in for most of the Lunar forces to go on remote patrols, leaving a skeleton force in the fort. For a payment he "and his associates" will turn on the remaining forces. They'll use some "weird magics", so they want you to stay clear during the operation, plus they want the pick of the loot from the fort. They then will send you a signal that the fort is taken, they'll disappear with their loot, your clan's forces can march in, and then "you can easily hold the fort from the returning Lunars". Their benefit is that they can get well away from the area while the Lunars are left trying to retake the fort from you.
Sounds like a good plan, and your chief is keen on the idea. After agreeing to the plan and making payment, the PCs (or an off-stage group of hunters) spy a broo and a man talking together. When spied, the man and broo flee in different directions. If caught, the man insists he was trying to convince the broo not to kill him. If they catch the broo and kill it, the broo will have a pouch. If they open the pouch (risking disease) they find a letter of correspondance between a broo troop and the (ogre) infiltrators at the Lunar fort.
The ogres and the broos will slay the skeleton force of lunars at the stead (the orders for the expeditionary patrols are forged). They pull out of the fort, you move in, there's a long fight between you and the returning Lunars to retake the fort. The ogres and broos intend to kill the survivors, and then, with most of the local fighter dead or wounded, prey on the surrounding clans at their leisure.
In the letter: "There'll be rutting stock for you, and plenty of carrion for us. Plus, if we get the windheads and the moonies at each others throats, we can prey on their steads all the easier".
So, what do the PCs do? Do they let the Lunars know of the danger they're in, or do they let the chaotics kill them? Nice dilemma for the Uroxi in the clan.
(IHMO, the Hero Wars are a metaphor for the Cold War anyway. Red Empire? Sickle Emblem? Nasty dark secrets behind a benign face? And we find out the whole thing collapses in the early '90s?)
>
>
> Philippe
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 03:06:07 -0500
> From: "Buckmaster, Paul" <pbuckmas_at_de.ittind.com>
> Subject: Hype-ocricy?
>
> `Trotsky :
> `
> `> My dictionary claims that a hypocrite is 'a person who pretends to
> be
> `> what he is not'. No other definition is given, and the word root is
> `> apparently the Greek expression for 'one who plays a part'.
> `
> `"Actor" : Root of the Donandar cult.
>
> Sorry guys, I stand corrected, my definition of hypocrite came purely from
> what 'I' thought the term meant, personally I can't be bothered to keep a
> dictionary by my side whilst I'm reading the digest, anyway, please accept
> my humblest apologies.
>
> Paul
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 15:49:52 +0200
> From: Nils Weinander <nils_w_at_yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Avatars
>
> Simon Hibbs:
> >
> > It gets interesting when you consider beings like
> > Teelo Estara, who before realising that she was in
> > fact (and always had been) a divine being thought
> > she was just an ordinary street waif. If she was
> > in fact always divine, would it have been possible
> > for a neutral observer to determine this before
> > hand?
>
> While that is certainly one interpretation of the myth,
> it does sound very much like lunar rationalization of
> the murder (and possible rape) of an innocent girl.
>
> > >As per my definition an avatar is aware of that status
> > >and is created/born with it. That wouldn't fit with a
> > >lunar noble becoming the mortal vessel of the RE.
> >
> > Even if he was born many years before the last RE died,
> > and was in fact one of his best buddies?
>
> The more so, because if this best buddy was really the
> RE all along, not just the bodily vessel, then the RE's
> Great Self would have been present in two people at the
> same time (albeit very discreetly in the best buddy).
> ____________________________________________________________
> Nils Weinander
> The world is a beautiful place and it's worth fighting for
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 15:50:12 +0200
> From: Nils Weinander <nils_w_at_yahoo.com>
> Subject: Eastern/Mystic issues
>
> Terra Incognita:
> >
> > Nils Weinander:
> > >Yes indeed, what I mean is that Durapdur is not an otherworldly
> > >realm. It's a non-realm or possibly neither a realm nor a non-realm.
> > >It's not a place you can go to and come back from, like the spirit
> > >world, the gods world or the sorcery world though.
> >
> > OK, Nirvana in RW image suited to Mystic's personal usage rather than
> > gathering consciousness.
>
> Yes, generally this is so. A special then is Mashunasan:
> when you áre liberated through Unrealization (M's method)
> you are neither there or not there any more.
>
> > Maybe my application to otherworld diving has similarity of such as
> > Cyberpunk Game or "Neuromancer" style otherworld is mistake for this
> > expression
> > connected alien sense to normal five sense.
>
> Then again, mystics do heroquest, in order to refute the
> Otherworlds as well.
>
> > Maybe I only intended to say about circumstance of like
> > Renegades of Road of Enlightenment ShangHsa / Sheng Seleris and
> > converts Kahar / Dogsalu and (his son) Govmeranen maybe can be
> > seen shifting from Mystical World to Theistic World and vice versa.
>
> I don't think the failed mystics became theists themselves,
> they are too selfish to fit in the theist mode, but they
> can have followers who start hero worship of them.
>
> > Such as Andins saw this dimension because
> > they don't see themselves merely opponent of Right-thinking people same as
> > Vadeli in Logician's World and used symbolistic easyness such as Icon-Click
> > System MS-WINDOWS against MS-DOS.
> > (But if they are only scheme in Game World, I may do fruitless effort....)
>
> I'm sure the andins don't see themselves primarily as enemies
> of the world order. They are good worshippers of the antigods,
> whom the worshippers of the gods consider as enemies of order.
>
> > The three rivals prophesied at three contest.
> > Nenduren said,
> > "Someday, I will commit suicide, and succeed winning this contest"
> > Larn Hasamador said,
> > "Someday, I will make everyone forget my all deed, and succeed winning this
> > contest"
> > Mashnasan said,
> > "Someday, I will let you two both succeed finishing your opinion, and
> > succeed winning this contest"
> > paradoxically all they won, all they lose.
>
> Very well put.
> ____________________________________________________________
> Nils Weinander
> The world is a beautiful place and it's worth fighting for
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 15:51:12 +0200
> From: Nils Weinander <nils_w_at_yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Kralori Emperor
>
> Alex:
> >
> > > So, can anyone who has realized his dragon nature fulfil
> > > the office? Can there be more than one realized dragon in
> > > Kralorela at the time?
> >
> > I think draconic realisation is in part a question of degree,
> > so this question is at least 'fudgeable'.
>
> Hmm, perhaps there is a degree once you have realized the
> inner dragon, but surely there is a definite line you have
> to pass in order to be consisered a dragon in the first
> place?
>
> > In a sense though,
> > potentially some scatty monk someone might be _more_ realized,
> > just not playing quite the same self-sacrificing boddhisattva
> > role, or in some way 'just not quite be the sort of dragon
> > we're looking for, my good fellow'.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > It's possible that some
> > monks would just be taking the bee-line to personal liberation,
> > without the whole boddhisattva lark, or in any way detaining
> > oneself in the Summer Land Heaven (that's for wimps!), but I
> > think more commonly if there were some other great draconic
> > mystic rolling around the place, he'd be seen to be serving
> > some _other_ role in the grand scheme of things (serving as
> > an example to the masses, ensuring that the next emperor is
> > found and installed on schedule, preserving the empire/world/
> > cosmos in some manner...).
>
> But if he server a purpose in the greater scheme, that would
> mean acknowledging there _is_ a greater scheme, a real and
> important world outside the mystic... (I basically agree
> but there's _always_ worms wriggling out of the can when
> we discuss mystic issues).
> ____________________________________________________________
> Nils Weinander
> The world is a beautiful place and it's worth fighting for
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 10:10:00 -0400
> From: Douglas Seay <douglas.seay_at_marconi.com>
> Subject: runes and languages
>
> Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie> replied to my post
>
> > > Question of my own: how does Valind fit into this? Is he a Great God?
> > > Would he be something like
> > >
> > > [Theism] [Storm] [Valind] [Valind]
> >
> > I'd say he's 'normally' a GG 'Orlanth' divinity, just a slightly
> > off-beat one. Depends partly on the cultural context of the worship.
>
> I wondered because Valind is not part of the Storm Tribe. IIRC he runs
> his own tribe (Cold Tribe?).
>
> > I wasn't at all sad to see this 5 runes stuff (largely) dropped
> > from the rulebook. Most of the information in the first three
> > runes is either blitheringly obvious, or serves no real purpose
> > besides a mania for categorisation. But if people find it
> > helpful, I'll be glad to be proved wrong.
>
> I am OK on the first two being dropped, but I like the Great God field.
> I can see where it would be useful, as in your Ernalda Yinkin example.
> I wouldn't care if all 5 stayed in, but on occasion I can be a bit anal
> about classification (ie- [Theism] [Storm] [Orlanth] [Buserian] :-)
>
> > > Why shoudn't I let them start as devotees? I wouldn't
> > > for a bunch of initiated newbies
> >
> > Why not, though? It'd be unusual, perhaps, but not impossible. Devotion
> > is a matter of depth of commitment, not of skill or experience.
>
> I ment to write "UNinitiated", as in 12/10/8/6. They shouldn't be
> devotees as they are just now going through clan initiation. That typo
> kinda ruined my whole point. I too think that just about anyone should
> be able to be a devotee.
>
> > > French and Korean is a bad example, but
> > > French/Spanish/Italian with improv penalities works for me.
>
> > You'd be hard pressed to argue that HW 'simulates' the difficulty
> > of 'Speak Generic Romance Language'.
> >
> > As other people have observed,
> > it _does_ make sense to allow 'unrealistically' broad abilities
> > at a single rating, where those things aren't individually very
> > vital, narratively speaking.
>
> I play down languages. All PCs can communicate with each other. Other
> than that, it is kinda boolean, you speak it or you don't. If I want a
> NPC to talk to the PCs, the NPC knows tradetalk. While I may be guilty
> of simplification, I once ran a non-Glorantha game (using RoleMaster no
> less) where I had everyone speaking slightly different dialects and
> "similar skills". I still wake up with nightmares from that. Never
> again will I go down that path. Maybe I've overcorrected, but lets call
> it my MGF and leave it at that.
>
> > I _still_ hate Digests, mind you...
>
> Does Issaries have plans to get a real machine that can serve the GD via
> NNTP? I'd imagine that this is an old question, but life would be
> easier for me if it were done that way.
>
> - --
> Douglas Seay Marconi Communications - RTP, NC, USA
> douglas.seay_at_marconi.com iFLX development
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:04:49 -0500
> From: Andrew Larsen <aelarsen_at_facstaff.wisc.edu>
> Subject: Re: the orthopraxy thing
>
> > From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> > Subject: Re: The orthopraxy thing
> >
> > Andrew Larsen:
> >
> >>>> Hypocrisy implies an intent to deceive. A worshipper would only be
> >>>> hypocritical if he claimed that he loved the god when he didn't (since the
> >>>> issue of existence isn't really relevant in Glorantha).
> >>>
> >>> Tell that to the Brithini.
> >>
> >> Yes, but the Brithini are much closer to an orthodoxy system, having
> >> been modelled essentially on the medieval Catholic church.
> >
> > I can only assume you're thinking of the Rokari, here, or the liturgical,
> > deist West in general. The Brithini are immortal, atheistic cyphers,
> > who have no (known, at least) credo, and whose 'philosophy of life'
> > one might regard as being 'orthopractic', in the extreme...
>
> A complete brain fart. For some reason, I was thinking Malkioni, not
> Brithini. Not the same thing by a long stretch.
>
> >> The whole reason that I brought up this point in the first place was to
> >> demonstrate that there is a completely different way to think about Orlanthi
> >> religion than by focusing on the question of belief, which is certainly far
> >> less important than practice.
> >
> > For a sufficiently broad definition of 'practice', and a sufficiently
> > narrow one of 'belief', at least. Certainly the Orlanthi have nothing
> > one would really characterise as a 'dogma', 'doctrine', or 'credo'.
> > Not as distinct from social norms. custom, and law, at least.
> > However, you seem to be taking the large area in between the two, to do
> > with non-ritual behaviour, morals, ideals, etc, etc, and either
> > ignoring it, or redesignating it as 'orthopraxis', which seems to
> > me to at least be counter-intuitive.
>
> It's a question of what's the most important thing in a religion--what
> you think or what you do. For an orthodox religion, the key is proper
> belief. There may well be important rituals to observe, but the over-riding
> issue is what you think. For an orthopraxis religion, the key is proper
> ritual. There may well be important ideas, such as virtues, but the
> over-riding issue is what you do.
>
> Andrew E. Larsen
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #701
> ***********************************
>
End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #703
Powered by hypermail