Re: The Glorantha Digest V8 #440
> Subject: Greg gregs Greg?
> Greg Stafford wrote
> >AHA! This is the source of all the confusion, I
> >Otherworlds are DEFINITELY NOT trasncendant.
> Greg, this is sure a source of confusion. To quote
> your own
> article written a month ago
> >None of the Short Worlds has any link or connection
> with the
> >Transcendant realm. This is their most significent
> difference from
> >the Otherworlds that are the basis for the magical
> perspectives of
> Which clearly implies the Otherworlds DO have a
> link with the
> Transcendant realm. So, somewhere in the last month
> you have changed
> what you mean by either Otherworld or transcendant?
> Or there is some
> confusing semantic issue here?
> I really AM confused.
I have understood the matter this way (and it looks to
me plain enough):
Short worlds are not connected (as a general rule) to
the trascendant reality which lies beyond the
Normal Otherworlds are connected (as a general rule)
to the trascendent reality which lies beyond
Exceptions are known in both cases, but you can define
the shortworlds as not-trascendent and the otehrworlds
as trascendent and you are near an Orlanthi definition
(85% of the cases).
Mispelling and confusion are a consequence of
Mistyping/semantics, as you correctly guess.
Just my two lire.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
Powered by hypermail