From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 22 Sep 1993, part 2
Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily)
Sender: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM
Precedence: junk
The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of
Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.
Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM",
they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the
Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying.
Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest. If you
want to submit articles to the Digest only, contact the editor at
RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.
Send enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor:
RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld)
---------------------
From: watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson)
Subject: Nature of Spirits; Easy on the mustard...
Message-ID: <9309211745.AA13007@condor>
Date: 21 Sep 93 17:45:40 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1773
Simon said (about Spirit Combat etc):
>Perhaps these could be rationalised as spells which can only be cast by
>discorporate spirits. Conventional spirit combat would become a special case
>which all discorporate spirits can use instinctively. Then the special
>attack of wraiths and such would just be their own specialist attack mode
>instinctive to them (What if a shaman could get hold of a spell which
>alowed the caster to attack like a wraith? ... Nasty!).
Like it. But why spells? Maybe skills would be better for this approach.
Also note that many spirits (POW for example) cannot even initiate normal
spirit combat themselves (- they don't have the skill?).
>Perhaps we need to get back to
>basics. What do spirits want to achieve, what are their conflicts about?
>Then figure rules for it.
Good question: what *do* spirits want to achieve?
I know next to nothing about real-world shamanic Magick, so I can only
hypothesise with some game mechanics.
Let's try an easy one first:
- Ghosts want to possess a corporeal body so that they can interact with the
mundane world (to right some wrong; seek vengeance; whatever). They will
attack if they think they can gain a body.
- Wraiths are so mad about dying that they don't want to possess; they just
want to kill, kill, kill.
- Power Spirits. Hmm, I reckon they must be spirits of plants. (Trees have
spirits, right? So they have SIZ & POW when alive, but no INT. When a tree
dies it's spirit only has POW left. Makes sense?) What does a tree spirit
want? Dunno, but they're non-aggressive when alive, so I guess they stay
non-aggressive as spirits.
- Intellect Spirits. Maybe the spirits of animals (ie. fixed INT creatures.
Their INT is usually low enough for this to make sense). Live animals are
only aggressive if threatened or in pursuit of food. Spirits don't need to
eat so animal spirits have no aggressive motivation. (If you attack them
and lose, they possess you and you start to act as an animal... perhaps?).
Now I'm starting to run out of ideas. Spell Spirits? Magic Spirits? Elemental
Spirits? What are they all about? Anyone got any ideas?
And Ghouls? Why do they possess *dead* bodies?
(And concering the purchase of Enchanted items)
>The way I see it, every PC
>sorcerer or shaman I have ever seen has personaly created a handfull of
>matrices, binding enchantments, etc, as well as other enchantments. Presumably
>other sorcerers and such do the same, and have been since time immemorial.
>What happens to all this stuff? Much of it may end up in the hands of a
>powerfull few, but most will be passed on as heirlooms to favoured offspring.
Yes, this is a fair point. However, I'd also like to add that the longer
an item has been around the more likely it is that one of it's owners will
have added a Condition to the item. This is especially true of Spirit
Binding Enchantments: if my Sorceress ever gets her hands on a bound INT
spirit then the first thing she'll do is add a user condition so that no-one
else can use it (offspring be damned!). She doesn't want anyone to
be able to steal the spirit (with a control spell) - especially if it holds
most of her spells!
This is not paranoia, it's Good Sense: consider that a Magus might be
Projecting Sight across the world - With Mystic Vision he can spot people who
own bound spirits which have lax conditions - He can control these spirits
at range and steal them for himself and you'll be none the wiser...
It's worrying.
Also, I think most cults would place user conditions on their more powerful
Enchantments.
And assuming your ancient item doesn't have a User Condition, this still
doen't mean it'll be around forever. My sorceress knows too many zealous
initiates who would destroy Sorcery spell matrices as a matter of principle
if she didn't stop them.
Having said all this, I'm not against having the odd curio for sale. In fact,
I kinda like the idea of items turning up for auction occasionally. I just
think the idea of magicians making items to order (for cash) is rather
unlikely.
BTW IMHO control over magic items is the best way for a GM to control
sorcerers (rather than changing the rule system to hamstring them).
--
Greg Fried (asked about selling Magic Items):
>BTW, how do the rest of you price magic items if PCs wan to sell them?
In my game this happens so rarely that I'd take it on a case-by-case basis.
How difficult was the item to make? How useful is the item to the buyer?
(and most important) How much cash do the PCs really need?
I find players usually prefer to hang on to surplus items in the hope
that they can swap it for something else later (or give it as a gift to gain
favour with some NPC etc.).
>I make POW crystals very valuabe: 1000 per point. BUt the problem here is that
>then most tougher opponents are going to have crystal to back up their POW,
>so after any victory against anyone of note, the PCs are going to be very
>rich. Hm. How about matrices? About 500 a point? Yes? No?
(I guess you know this but...) the RQIII book suggests at least 1500 for each
point of permanent POW it takes to make the item. This means, for POW crystals
(MP storage matrices), 1500 per point if you use the old rules, or about 300
per point if you use the errata (which gives 1D10 storage for each POW).
Spell matrices: 1500 per point.
Of course, if the PCs are after a quick sale then the price could much less :-)
There definitely is a problem with Published NPCs having so much magical kit.
If the PCs keep winning they gradually become grosser and grosser.
Then again, maybe this is no bad thing...
===
CW.
---------------------
From: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
Subject: Baroshi!
Message-ID:
Date: 21 Sep 93 17:49:42 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1774
Greg Freid here.
Myth-Makers -- some advice, please!
Instead of fighting trolls and ice-demons this weekend, my players went to
the caves of Snake Pipe Hollow (although these caves are relocated in my
campaign) at the behest of the local Earth temple to recover the statue of
the lost god. Well, not only did they find the statue of Baroshi, they
figurd out the business of placing him in the cradle, and returned to the
astonished priestesses with a living, grain-headed godling!
Now, my question is, what kind of cult would form around Baroshi? My players
are VERY excited about their accomplishment, so I need to work on this, since
I hope to channel their enthusiasm. I take it that Baroshi is a sort of male
version of Barbeester Gor: an avenger of the Earth, whose primary opponent is
Chaos. What should be his runes? Earth and Disorder? What about his divine
magic (assuming he gets enough worshipers)? I am thinking of Face Chaos,
Earth Strength and Counter Chaos -- a kind of Earthen Storm Bull. He has
a head of grain: from this I extrapolate that he is fond of the fruit of the
grain -- grain alcohol. And thus his bull-like battle intoxication against
Chaos.
===
Nick and others:
I have been enjoying your discussion of cult matters. My time is more
limited recently, so I have not jumped in. But I have a speculative
question about what some of you might think (or know?) to be the
evolution of Stafford's myth-thinking. GS was heavily influenced by
Campbell (although also, I now know, Mircea Eliade [see Patterns of
Comparative Religion]) about 25 years ago. The notion of the monomyth
seems to have carried over to the god-learnerish exposition of
Glorantha we have seen in the earlier RQ publications: cult write-ups
with Runic affiliation, standardized religious organization, etc. GS
now seems to have moved decisively away from the monomyth approach in
King of Sartar, where there are manifestly contradictory accounts of
history and gods, and a narrative style that encourages diversity of
interpretation. Is this right, or merely an impression that I get
because I don't know GS well enough? Has there been any radical shift
in GS's thinking on these matters? Has the monomyth fallen out of
favor (as I tend to think it should)?
And here's a question: what stays
interesting about Glorantha after the fall of the Red Moon? (Don't
take this question wrong!) There are cycles of grand events (cf KoS,
270): war against Chaos and the Lightbringer's Quest; Gbaji wars;
demise of the EWF and the GOd Learners; fall of the Red Moon. So
where is GLorantha 'going' next? Is there a GLoranthan eschatology,
in which the events I cited punctuate the development of a grand
life-cycle of the great overaching goddess, GLorantha herself? Or is
there an 'End of History' of Glorantha, too (as has been asserted in
our world by Hegel, and now by anti-communits). Kinda like the
greying of Middle Earth after the end of the Third Age. How many
'Ages' can you have before a world gets tired and drained out? Three
seems about the max. Beyond that, and history begins to seem
meaningless. Will Glorantha eventually 'die' a natural death,
overcome by Chaos (like the entropic 'brown out' hypothesized for our
cosmos) at an End of Time? Or is she immortal, and her death may only
be 'unnatural' ('death' here meaning annihilation, not the myth-death
gods survive)? Or does Glorantha die by being forgotten, by having
myth and magic slowly sqeezed out by secularism, faith and rationality
(which seems to be the suggestion of some of the things I have read
about the time after the fall of the Red Moon)?
OK, that's just about enough wild speculation for now!
GF out.
---------------------
From: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller)
Subject: Orlanth or Worlath?
Message-ID: <01H37OSQA1ZI8Y5DBV@wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: 21 Sep 93 10:04:11 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1775
joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner) writes:
> One God Learner experiment created a god in Umathela which didn't exist
> before. They got a group of natives worshipping this "fake" deity, and
> at their downfall it manifested itself.
And about a paragraph later...
> Did anybody notice the sentence "The earliest practitioners were the
> Seven Explorers, [...]" on p.24 in the Glorantha Book of the Glo Box?
> ^^^^^
> Seven mothers, Seven lightbringers, ...
>
> It really makes me wonder how many companions Orlanth had when rescuing
> Yelm...
This brings up yet another point. What is to say that the GLs didn't
create fake gods more than once? I've heard rumors from the grapevine
that GS is going around saying that Orlanth and Waha started out as
mortal men (heresy!) and that PC heroquesters can end up going the
same route if they want. So what if this umathelan experiment happened
more than once, and they just got caught that time? Let's look for
other gods who are worshipped consistently over a huge range of
cultures and lands and we might find more God Learner experiments.
How about Orlanth?
Posit a powerful sorceror from the west, a buddy of Zzabur's named
Worlath, who is a God Learner type. In the prime of the Jrusteli
ego-trip, through trickery on a mythic scale he inserts himself into
the myths, replacing all the various storm gods (the four winds,
various zephyrs and storms and hurricanes and El Nino) with a
construct based on himself. Now instead of the four winds being
important gods in their own right they are only the thanes of Orlanth
(a pidgin-ized version of Worlath's own name). Same with all the other
zephyrs and floating storms that used to have lots of worshippers. Now
they're all Orlanth's thanes and their cults have devolved to spirit
cults under his umbrella.
Funny that this is exactly what the wizards say about Orlanth. Maybe
they're right?
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
"Enough sound bites. Let's get to work." -- Ross Perot sound bite
---------------------
From: C442196@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu (Newton Hughes)
Subject: kanji o yomu koto ga dekimas ka
Message-ID: <9309211946.AA28679@Sun.COM>
Date: 21 Sep 93 19:38:30 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1776
Colin Watson's highly lucid advice:
>Never domesticate anything unless it can get *at least* +4d6 damage mod
leads me to wonder how those sissy Sable Riders ever managed to survive,
considering their mounts' wimpy +2d6 mod. In fact, if you work out the
sable's carrying capacity using the rq3 errata, it can hardly carry a
normal size rider, and forget carrying any gear. Maybe sable riders are
related to the impala pygmy riders?
David Cake's question (paraphrased here)
> is western script less like Latin and more like kanji?
I liked the article on use of runes in writing (in a digest issue),
but wondered about what medium they were meant to be written in. Runes
range from those suited to carving in wood or stone (Spirit or Earth, for
instance) to those suited to drawing on paper (try carving a fire-sky
rune). Most real-life scripts are very strongly shaped by the writing
medium--compare the early Chinese characters carved in bone to the ones
developed for writing with brush and ink.
The syncretic and philosophically tidy way the runes are mixed and
matched screams "God-Learner!" all over it.
About the Improve(Skill) spirit magic spell suggested on the rq4 list:
This is entirely too GENERIC. Bladesharp is a nice spell,
the Healsharp idea is good, but generalizing the concept without bound
is predictable and boring and GENERIC. Magic is at its best when it
is unpredictable, idiosyncratic, and bizarre. GENERIC ain't it.
Enough from me. I have studying to do.
Newton
---------------------
From: mabeyke@batman.b11.ingr.com (boris)
Subject: Lot's o' Stuff
Message-ID: <199309212247.AA07349@batman.b11.ingr.com>
Date: 21 Sep 93 22:47:48 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1777
Lot's of things in today's daily. Let's go!
vvvvvvvvvvvvv
Donald Wilton in X-RQ-ID: 1741 said:
>A character with heal 6 is by definition a Healer, a pc dedicated to
>healing magic and freligion, and incapable of using magic to do harm, or
>use force. I never allow more than heal 3, to non-healer pc's. I have
>Babeesta Gor temple guardians go out and kill people with Heal 4 or above,
>who haven't taken the healer vow.
They must have a hard time with all the Storm Khans around, then, who
are required to know Heal 4. I will agree that any with Heal 6 are
probably Healers, but they may be Xiola Umbars rather than CAs, and
perfectly happy with causing harm (see the Minaryth Purple notes included
in Troll Gods for an example).
Of course, your milage may vary.
vvvvvvvvvvv
Nick Brooke in X-RQ-ID: 1743 said:
>I also quibble:
>Loren's post presupposes a "true form of the god". Is this Platonic, Runic,
>a God Learner Construct, or a Real Thing? I mean, do you think *anyone*,
>*anywhere* in the world worships the "true form" of Orlanth? Or is it just
>me and the rest of the Greydog Clan who do that?
>
>Nick says: there *are* only versions, masks, avatars. "True Forms" are a
>Jrusteli philosophical (misosophical?) construct, an interpretation of the
>world only possible to those with the RuneQuest Sight . Don't
>let them get you down! The best way to worship Orlanth is the way he *is*
>worshipped, not the way someone tells you he "ought to be" worshipped.
At the risk of being branded a god-learner (yeah, right, along with
everyone else on this list), I can't help but ask about the gods'
conceptions of their own selves. These are (according to the cultic
viewpoint) intelligent beings who have a personality of their own. Now
perhaps any worshipper would only be capable of seeing what they expected
to see (at some level or another) when heroquesting to meet their god, and
so it may be a meaningless question as far as *any* cultists are concerned,
but at some level of the reality we call "Glorantha", doesn't there exist
a deity we call "Orlanth" that has a view of him/her/it/themself?
But now that I think of it, there's no reason why gods are any more immune
to self deception than humans are, so even this would likely not be the
"true form". With millions of different beings each in a "soul pact" with
you (to use Steve Maurer's phrase), each with a different view of what you
are supposed to be, even a god might go schizoid. So the only ones with
any chance at all of viewing the "true form" are those who are both capable
of questing to meet the gods, and without all the mythic filters cluttering
their perceptions denying them clear sight, i.e. the God Learners. So
maybe the RuneQuest Sight is simply the ability to see without cultic bias?
No, I don't think I buy it. Doesn't sound possible. Even the God Learners
would have some cultic bias. So I guess, after all this, I agree, Nick.
>
>Deep stuff, this. I enjoy it.
Yeah, me too.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Graeme A Lindsell in X-RQ-ID: 1745 said:
> On a related note: suppose some people in Pamaltela have started a
>spirit cult worshipping the mysterious Red Moon that appeared in the
>northern sky 400 years ago (I would be surprised if no one had). Would
>their spirit cult have to include the same elements as Pelorian Lunar
>Worship? They had no contact with Genertela until Dormal ~40 years ago.
>Would they even see the Moon as female? The earthly link of Luna to
>the menstrual cycle wouldn't exist in Glorantha, except to the Blue
>Moon.
I like this idea! Of course, they're going to bite the dust, and quickly,
once Harrek get's to Pamaltela. I don't think he'd care that they're
not really affiliated with his hated foe, and without the might of the
Empire and it's magics to help, they've not a chance.
Still, I think the elf kingdoms down there would make fertile ground for
the cult.
>(Comments on the reactionary nature of the Orlanth cult deleted)
> My question: is this reactionary stance real, or have other innovations
>by the Orlanthi during time been accepted into his mythology ie by
>Heroquesting?
This is similar to one of the charges that the Lunars make against the
Orlanthi. I would say that, for most of history, it is unfounded, however.
In the First Age, the Lightbringer Cultists brought together troll, elf,
dwarf, dragonewt and human into the First Council. They supported,
initially, the (re)creation of Osentalka (I believe; at least they didn't
oppose it enough to leave the council as the trolls and Dragonewts did.
After Gbaji's chaotic nature was revealed, Harmast recreated the
Lightbringers' Quest to seek help. The Orlanthi taught Arkat much he
needed to know to figure out deliberate heroquesting (though they didn't
realize that at the time). In the Second Age, the EWF had Lightbringers
among it's founders. During the Third age, the cult has been reactionary,
but this is largely a reaction to the EWF and the God Learners. Now they
are realizing that the old ways aren't working against the Lunars, and
again they are trying new things. I believe the writings in KoS are
most likely compiled the Third Age, and thus have the slant of that era.
vvvvvvvvvvv
Nick Brooke in X-RQ-ID: 1751 said:
>(a lot about worship that I'm still digesting, plus)
>"HOW ULERIA ADOPTED THE BOGGLES", WF 5 p.29
>"THE FOUNDING OF THE WOODEN SWORD", WF 11 p.13
So, how is the Wyrm's Footprints coming? Many of us await it's appearance
anxiosly.
vvvvvvvvvvvv
Chris Pearce in X-RQ-ID: 1762 said
>The Zola Fel river valley, therefore, seems an anomaly. The cultures of the
>valley are not isolated geographically from each other. Also, except for the
>insular Sun Domers, they don't really seem to be isolated politically.
>The other major settlement of the river valey, Pavis, is a cultural
>polyglot, mixing Praxian, Lunar, and Orlanthi cultures. Finally,
>there do not seem to be any pidgins or creoles that have developed--
>except, perhaps, Tradetalk.
I agree with most of what you have here, but I think you are missing one
point. New Pavic is very much a creole language, combining elements of
Old Pavic (itself a creole of Auld Wyrmish and Praxian, I think), Sartatite,
Praxian, whatever is spoken by the riverfolk, and some Sundomer as well
(Firespeach?). It won't be long until a good bit of New Pelorian gets
added, either.
vvvvvvvvvv
Tom Zunder in X-RQ-ID: 1764 said:
>God Learners and Gods
>Well, do the gods really exist?
>
>That's it, innit?
>
>Well the answer is of course No and Yes.
>
>Alternativley all the retrogressive muddying and dirtying of
>Gloranthan mythology is a God Learner attempt by Nick Brooke
>and Greg "Nick Illuminated Me" Stafford!
>
>I try and keep my mind open by refusing to decide on this, thus
>I can achieve the God Learner ambiguity of believng orlanth to
>be as Cults of Prax said he was and also recognis that he's a
>cultural fiction and also only a game construct..
>
>This does induce paranoia and schizophrenia, of course..
Boy, this sure seems to sum up my feelings nicely. I think we should all
chip in at RQCon and get Nick a shirt that says "Official God Learner
Representative". And maybe one for Greg that says "Don't look at me,
everything I say is wrong!" on the front, and on the back "Blame Nick!".
That'd fix 'em.
-----
(*) ZZ [] (.) @ e K| o8- |> oK <>< )o 3 8 <|
Every dark cloud is a pretty cool thing.
Orlanthi proverb.
Boris
|><| +- (| >- .: K * =|= <- (O) ( ) (o) (|) X-