Re: Are Gloranthans Human?

From: Trotsky <TTrotsky_at_blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:49:28 +0000


Gian:

>My opinion (as the narrator) is that the
>drawback is implicit: magic in glorantha is easy to
>obtain (given a determined powergaming attitude) but
>it tends to mold, focus, refine the hero's "humanity"
>much more than technology does.
>

Theism does require that the practitioner follow certain tenets in his life yes, especially the high powered Disciple stuff. But I don't think its true of sorcery, and I doubt its true of Common Magic, either.  Aside from saintly blessings, sorcery merely requires that you think about the world in a specific way (and, moreover, one that isn't all that alien to us today) so in that sense, I don't believe it moulds people any more than high technology does. Finding someone to teach you the magic might be easier if you agree with their particular religion or philosophy, mind...

>Also, magic encourages the repetition of past acts
>(heroquesting) and so epytomizes (sp?) conservatorism.
>

Not all magic epithomises conservatism. The Lunar Way doesn't, for instance.

>Ttrotsky:
>
>
>>> True enough, but this doesn't make you 'not human'.
>>
>>
>
>if you become part of Orlanth, you are wind, not man
>anymore.
>

Oh, yeah, if you attain the Great Secret. Most magic's short of that.

>Gloranthans tend to become less and less
>human (according to the POV of a XX century astronaut
>lost in XVII century Glorantha like in my campaign)
>when they advance on the roads of their magics.
>

In the case of theism, it will change him, certainly. Animism and mysticism might also require a mindset that seems alien to him. I'd argue with the characterisation of such people as less human, but I guess the PC is entitled to his opinions! I don't think the change to sorcery would be so great, though its a bitch to learn.

>>> The ancient
>>> Egyptians, for instance, didn't change all that much
>>> in thousands of
>>> years.
>>
>>
>
>Are you sure?
>

That's my understanding, yes. 'Progress' wasn't really part of their lexicon from what I gather. Which isn't to say that they didn't make any advances, such as pyramids from mastabas, and whatnot, but their life changed far less than ours has over the last couple hundred years or so. We're living in an anomalous time.

>We tend to flat ancient cultures and ancient peoples
>when we look at them from 2002 AD.
>

The historical events may blur into one another, but I think its safe to say they didn't change all that drastically, nor did they really want to.

-- 
Trotsky
Gamer and Skeptic

------------------------------------------------------
Trotsky's RPG website: http://www.ttrotsky.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/



--__--__--

Powered by hypermail