Re: Trial by Combat

From: Paul Andrew King <paul_at_morat.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:31:26 +0000

>Paul Andrew King <paul_at_morat.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>>Which is why it's up for grabs. As I said originally "pull" counts
>>to determine who wins the case. And a chief can simply choose a
>>Weaponthane as his Champion and go for the Combat Option.
>
>Just a random thought here...
>
>In the real world, a Trial by Combat between a professional full-time
>warrior and an ordinary Joe would, barring freak accidents, always
>result in a guilty verdict against the ordinary person.

That's right. That's why it's a good idea to have Clan backing to go up against a Tribal Chieftain.

>So how does this work in Glorantha? Do Heortlings believe that
>Orlanth, or Humakt, or whoever will actually intervene in a trial by
>combat to augment the innocent party or curse the guilty? Are there
>any extant myths about this happening? Game rules?

According to KoS Orlanth is SUPPOSED to hinder unjust attacks (and to a lesser extend defences). But it's part of "Violence is always an option" and if there's a valid excuse there's no interference. And even then it doesn't give any guidelines on how effective the interference.

-- 
--
"The T'ang emperors were strong believers in the pills of
immortality.  More emperors died of poisoning from ingesting minerals
in the T'ang than in any other dynasty" - Eva Wong _The Shambhala
Guide to Taoism_

Paul K.


--__--__--