>Me>I do not believe the potency of gloranthan magic depends on
> >how well its philosophers can split hairs. For a philosophy
> >to enhance one's magic, it should at least be relevant.
> >Secondly, no amount of philosophical speculation will ever
> >turn Elmal into the equal or superior of Yelm.
>I believe that keenly developed philosophy helps worshippers get
>the most out of their religion and god. In crass game terms, that's
>neat feats.
Since feats are easy to come by, I really do not see how a keenly developed philosophy can amplify this further. Is a Uroxi going to improve his connection with the Storm Bull merely by learning the rudiments of Socratic dialogue?
>The Yelmites have a well-developed philosophy, which gives them
>an extra edge over the Elmali.
No, they don't. Yelmites have an edge over Elmali because they worship a Great God whereas the Elmali does not. Everything else is chrome. Even if the Yelmites forgot their philosophy entirely and the Elmali uniformly subscribed to a well-developed philosophy then the Yelmites would _still_ have an edge over the Elmai.
To put it another way, the Entekosi have a well-developed philosophy yet they do not have an edge over the unphilosophical Orlanthi.
>So yeah, Elmal will never be the equal of Yelm, but if the
>Elmali had access to Solar philosophy and could recooncile
>it with their Storm Tribe roots, there would be less of a gap.
The gap will remain the same because it is dependent on the God and not the worshippers understanding of him. What any philosophy might do is prevent the Elmali apostatizing to the Fire Tribe quicker than one can say "Dara Happa". Likewise the purpose of Dara Happan philosophy was not to improve their religion but to resolve troubling questions of doctrine and myth.
> >If you want your original point to stand (that philosophical
> >speculation is what makes a god great), it is necessary for
> >you to prove it.
>I'm really not interested in arguing over what makes a god great
>anymore;
Whereas I am still supposed to be totally interested in continuing to deal with your attempts to overturn the substance of my objection?
>the current question is whether the Orlanthi engage in
>philosophical speculation or not.
And the simple answer is they don't. To prove me wrong, point to anything in Storm Tribe, Thunder Rebels, King of Sartar or RQ3 material that shows the average Orlanthi engaging in philosophical speculation. Everything they do think about is thought about in concrete and tangible terms.
Because of this, I do not see why then in the matter of their religion (which to them is completely and utterly real as this world) that they should somehow engage in abstract thought. I have even less time for the idea that they do engage in abstract thought when thinking but keep it to themselves.
> >So cows can reason how Orlanth saved the cosmos, can they?
>Nope.
Then why the remark about how the Orlanthi might as well be cows if they can't engage in philosophical speculation?
Powered by hypermail