You were warned: I started this with "Advanced GL theory" (7_741)
GL fault is not in knowing the world but in using that knowledge to
modify it.
In the same fashion,the point is not to create new magic rules but
to improve our understanding of Glorantha.
So : "Is there a way to describe magic along a 6 & 1 system ?"
BTW what poetic name can we give to the 6 & 1 system that appears in the LB, the 7M, the 7 DH Soul parts, the 7 winds, the draconic world creation ? How about "Rashoranic" ?
2 more viewpoints of the world are needed. Draconic is first in line.
>Alex (751)
>For good reason, perhaps... My understanding is that the term Dragon
>Magic describes at least primarily the practice of becoming/being a
>dragon. YDMV...
>Also exchange with Trotsky on Fire & Lightning.
O Issaries the Conciliator, help me. I need you !
IMHO I think you states the Darudan POV of Dragon magic while Chris, Dave, Trotsky and myself have POVs that try to take in account all Dragon related magic like Dragonewt, Immanent Mastery or EWF.
The core questions are :
"do you think all the above share a common viewpoint of the world ?"
"do you think this viewpoint is not one of the 4 GL traditions ?"
If answer is yes to both, then
"How can we define/differenciate the above ?"
Although I'm no expert of Dragons, my guess is on wether they think "being a dragon" is an aim vs a means and Individual vs Collective.
I think this is MGF of the same kind than the parallel thread Zzaburi vs Malkioni. Although those hairslpitters have a good headstart we can overtake them if we all pull together.
BTW I think there is no Draconic world where HUMANS may HQ. There is likely one where True Dragon dwells and where Dragonnewts perhaps do something akin to HQ but who knows ? who cares ?
>Alex (753)
>I'm still not convinced about a dragon/giant opposition, in the sort
>of sense discussed. The giants in the myth of the war can equally
>well be seen as representing the celestial court and/or theism.
>And if there's a cosmological opposition to be had, it's not yet clear
>to me..
Of course, no myth is worth its name if it's not ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations. The Giants are THE baddies before Time. See this month's myth, there are 3 kinds of giants. They can represent any hostile.
I support "Giant's" as a 6th viewpoint because it's consistent (see below) and doesn't contradict GAG, HW, AR, etc. It is rationalisation but it's nice and it makes sense.
>David Cake (754)
>A perhaps better way to express is would be that dragons
>becoming more otherworldly (and this extends somewhat to the world
>around them, perhaps), giants less (eventually becoming mundane
>themselves). As part of this, Dragons are less bound by the confines
>of their body (their dreams wander around independently), while
>giants eventually become nothing but their body.
>The Dragon Giant war could thus be seen as a fable of a war
>to determine the nature of reality.
Hervé
Powered by hypermail