Indeed yes. Well, Stephen Martin _did_ get at least three separate credits per book that's been published so far. which explains a lot. ;-) Let's hope the player's books will be a good deal less so.
While I can see the need for a certain amount of 'crispness' for purposes of gaming managability, what we get in the rulebook seems neither fish nor fowl. Vague about things that one could, as a Gloranthan, see with one's own eyes (such as the sorts of thing a particular Feat can accomplish); specific about the True Nature (allegedly) of the Other Side. All most odd.
> (Carmanian humakti: another planet).
And another adjective, let's hope.
> (mind you: we know what some Ernaldan priestesses
> believe about the *real* Lightbringers quest, even as they actively
> facilitate the Orlanthi quests based on the Orlanth LB myth)
We do?
> On the less
> essential, there will be variation; perhaps seven or eight different
> versions of a particular myth across Sartar, with different gods and
> incidents involved, different descriptions and paths, different secrets and
> slightly different outcomes. Most of these myths will be closely tied to
> particular rituals (a key component of the anthropological understanding of
> myth that differentiates it from the classicist/historian's conception) and
> of course the rituals *work*.
Right. That's a key point much discussion of this topic seems to miss: Orlanthi ceremonies are not (simply) ritual-as-sacrifice, they're significantly, if not primarily, ritual-as-emulation, with specific reference to the myths. Thus the myths themselves are not simply 'stories', but also magical formulae, and moral and practical exemplars.
> Therefore each version of the myth is *true*. (A barbarian QED).
Nonono -- therefore _our_ version of the myth is correct: _your_ clan is in league with wakboth, and storm knows whom else, from whence you gain your faux-magic, heretic. ;-)
> Another aspect of this is, given the limited utility of written *literature*
> in the tribes and the essentially oral nature of Heortling culture, is that
> most cultic learning will be passed on from a particular teacher to his or
> her pupils; an intense and ongoing relationship like that of guru and
> sanwasan. If a clan has say five sword godar of Humakt, each will have
> particular secrets and ceremonies learned from his or her teacher, each will
> have a particular emphasis and particular myths / ceremonies / secrets / /
> feats / skills / weapons styles not shared with all of the other godar.
That I find rather less likely, I just admit. (Or rather, a less significant aspect.) If a clan has so many Humakti kicking around, it's almost certainly due to a clan tradition, rather than a happenstance agglomeration. That clan treadition implies a large degree of collective ritual, which in turns means sharing of the initiatory secrets, at least with those whose perception of same is 'correct'. A degree of different private gloss on the same common ritual is possible, perhaps, but certainly not predominant.
Having said that, I do think some lineages/sub-clans maintain their own traditions, to a greater or lesser extent. How significant this is, is clearly going to vary a great deal: the organisational level 'clan' covers a multitude of different forms of family arguments.
> Did I say 'briefly'? :)
I think you might have a little Arkati Trickster Shaman in you yourself. (But not in a gay way, as our Pendragon game catchphrase would have it. <g>)
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail