>For the average person this happens on a subconsious level, they act
>in accordance with a role which happens to match a particular myth.
I think most in-world analyses of history will tend to interpret historical events to emphasize recurring mythic themes. 'When good king Gundvingkor captured the Praxian Chief, it was just like when Orlanth subdued the Bandit King'. But also of course, myth is powerfull because it genuinely reflects the way the world is.
>A hero is different, they have sufficent understanding of the hero
>plane and their god to deliberately follow complex paths and
influence
>the outcome. A few even reach the stage of being able to deliberately
>create or change myths to achieve their goals. This is generally
>disapproved of not only because of the danger of lethal mistakes
>but also because of unexpected side effects.
I think the main, almost exclusive reason such activities are disaproved of is that to try to change myths, or invent new ones, is to explicitly concede that your existing myths, and hence existing religion, are inadequate or wrong. "You know what? None of Orlanth's myths tell us how to deal with this problem. They're all completely inadequate! Sod Orlanth, I think he's wrong and his religion has falied us. I'm going to go out on the Hero Plane to find a better way to deal with this problem!"
That's effectively what experimental heroquesting means. Which is why I think it's much more likely to be a Lunar activity. They have a much broader, more philosophicaly sophisticated attitude to religion.
Simon Hibbs
End of The Glorantha Digest V8 #551
Powered by hypermail