From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 24 Sep 1993, part 1
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: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
Subject: overachiever god
Message-ID:
Date: 23 Sep 93 06:13:05 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1799
GF here.
Nick:
You are right about Baroshi. Too many powerful spells too soon would be
wrong. What I was looking for was some inspiration for what that one divine
spell for Baroshi spirit cult would be... Hint hint.
And thanks for confirming my notions about GS's evolving thinking on
mythology. Unfortunately, I only (!) have WF 6 and up, so the WF 5 issue on
the GOd Learners is a mystery to me.
===
Richard:
The Cradle adventure is contained in the out of print Pavis pack, as I am
sure ten other readers will also tell you.
GF out.
---------------------
From: watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson)
Subject: Re: Binding Shamans' Spirits
Message-ID: <9309231037.AA09484@condor>
Date: 23 Sep 93 10:37:32 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1800
Tarka Jabig gave some sound advice:
>1 You might summon a *dead* shaman complete with 200 POW fetch (Ops!).
Yes, an embarassing situation. This is why I would suggest using the Name of
a specific Shaman. It removes some of the risk. I'm not too clear whether
the common name of the target will do for this, or whether you need its
Truename (to coin a D&Dspeak phrase).
I'd also recommend multispelling as many Dominate spells as you can muster
when you cast the summons. Even Shamans of Extraordinary Magnitude have to
roll 00 for their resistance sometime! One must play the percentages.
>2 The shaman's body will die before too long and then his/her fetch will
> come to join his/her spirit. Now what are you going to do with this
> 50 to 500 POW angry fetch which is hovering over your right shoulder sending
> horrible spirits at you. Remember the shaman and his fetch know that when
> you die all the spirits that you have bound are released.
The Fetch, aye there's the rub. I make a few assumptions (which are as yet
untested):
1 - The fetch is an extension of the Shaman.
2 - The fetch's cooperation with the Shaman is *not a conscious, voluntary
act*. The fetch, by its very nature, *must* do as the Shaman directs.
3 - So, he who controls the Shaman controls the Fetch (indirectly).
For example, if you Dominate your bound shaman, you can force him to
continually cast spells *using the fetch's MPs*. This effectively cripples the
fetch. The Fetch is indirectly *forced* to free any spirits which it holds
when its MPs get low.
If you start this process early, you can be certain that the Fetch will be
helpless by the time the Shaman's body dies.
It's possible that this precaution is unnecessary. Perhaps control of
the shaman gives *direct* control of the fetch. Who knows?
How much independent awareness can a fetch have?
Some experimentation is obviously required.
>3 Due to the hazards of binding experienced shamans with large fetches it is
> only safe to bind lesser shamans who are of little practical use. And, even
> these often have fanatical followers who will come and interrupt you just
> when you are at critical points in rituals.
Indeed. 'tis the very stuff that Scenarios are made of. :-)
I'm not suggesting for a moment that any sane PC would attempt such summoning
tomfoolery. It does, however, lend itself as an interesting plot-device to
get the PCs involved in a scenario.
---
This discussion has forced me to consider a couple of other points:
1. Assuming every generation of Shaman's dies and travels to the spirit
plane with a large-ish fetch; does this mean that the spirit world is
gradually filling up with titanic fetch spirits? Where does all this
Power come from? I think it would make sense if a shaman's fetch gradually
dissolved after death, otherwise we must ask ourselves...
2. ...are shaman's immortal?: What's to stop a dead PC shaman possessing
a new body? (Assuming she can cast Visibility this shouldn't be a
problem). Can she continue to to build, build, build the POW of her fetch
after her initial death?
The idea's frightning.
Or is there something about the Spirit Plane that makes Shamans want to stay
there after death?
Questions, questions...
---
CW.
---------------------
From: bennil@jamvax.hos.se (Bengt Nilsson Mid Sweden University Tel.+46 063 165300 Fax. +46 063 165454)
Subject: testing
Message-ID: <9309231044.AA13970@Sun.COM>
Date: 22 Sep 93 16:19:46 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1801
If you get this letter please contact bennil@adm.hos.se
---------------------
From: s.manning@ic.ac.uk
Subject: Re: gods?
Message-ID: <9309231114.AA05223@mega>
Date: 23 Sep 93 13:14:20 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1802
After a dose of Tarsh tummy I only read the digest yesterday and bay, has it got
good again, especially the discussion about the nature of the gods, thanks to
Nick Brooke etc. Here are a few personal opinions on subjects raised recently.
Worlath/Orlanth
Simon Hibbs in (X-RQ-ID: 1790) wrote that Worlath would have to HQ the paths
laided down by Orlanth. However, this is not what the Malkioni say, as for them
Orlanth doesn't exist, but instead Worlath was trapped within a storm, which
presumably meant that he became emeshed with the physical cycles related with
the powers of Air. No paths of myth exist, just basic Gloranthan "physics",
which seems to be pretty much synonomous to sorcery, in the Western way of
thinking. Similarly, for the Malkioni there is no Umath, but Primal Aer (see
below).
Nick Brooke and the Malkioni Origin of the Gods.
Related to the above and Nick's comments. The trio of False gods in the
Prosopaedia, Worlath, Ehlim and Humct, have all become apostate by tying
themselves up too closely with the physical world, thereby either becoming too
loaded down with mudane existence to pass on to Solace, or just by rejecting it.
This is one of the Malkioni, here presumably post Hrestol, views on the origin
of the gods.
Nick mentioned the creation of gods through the personifaction of emotions and
desires. Well, in the past, discussions in the Digest on how myth is changed
have accepted that belief in a god can create that god, even if it didn't
previously exist, indeed, didn't the GL do this once in Pameltela? Sorcery is
the ability of the individual to effect the world through the power of their
"will", albeit after training. But, training merely improves the natural talent
present in everyone, so if enough people start believing, say, that a terrible
being lives under the bridge used to get to market, then I would imagine that if
that belief was strong enough, through an act of subconcious sorcery, then that
terrible being would appear. Since it "fed of" the "psychic" power of those
people, then worship, with its "feeding" aspect of POW sacrifice, would not seem
too distant a prospect. ( ASIDE: Would some really cynical Malkioni view
worship to gods as being little better than being voluntarily tapped? Could be
related to the Western origin of those False gods? ) So finally, yes, belief
could indeed generate a god.
The third Malkioni view on the origin of the gods in mentioned in the Monomyth
in the Gods of Glorantha book. They believe in huge "potentialities" that
devolved to become the many of the beings, such as the elementals, known in
Glorantha since all but these earliest days. Thus, I imagine that they would
view Aer devolving to give, amongst others "Kolat", who may be viewed as an
entity, but I not sure, who in turn gives rise to the kolati. These, I think
that the Malkioni would accept as free entities, linked to the element of Air,
e.g. they might appear in a "demonology" of airy beings. I mention these,
because they are, along with similar beings of water, are believed to sire
humans, according to the Westerners. (NB, when I raised this previously, it was
objected to on the grounds that kolati is an Orlanthi term. Maybe, but a
Malkioni and a barbarian need not view the same thing in the same way, to the
former they are part of the fauna of Air, to the latter they are demigods.)
Does any of this make sense?
Western Tongues.
Nice idea Nick, but I think that the for the Brithini we should think in terms
of Greek and not Latin, 'cos the Latins were duff at science, while the Greeks
weren't half bad.
Kingdom of Logic.
Was it really such a golden time? It may have been free from trouble, at least
to begin with, but surely Malkion's Kingdom (see Trollpak) is the real golden
age that the first Malkioni, the Brithini, and maybe others, look back too.
Now some questions. According to the unpublished Cult of the Invisible God,
some gods accepted the Invisible god. Who were they and what became of them?
Also, Malkion apparently spread the news not only to the people of the Kingdom
of Logic, but to other races too. Any info on these?
Simon Manning.
P.S. Who is this "Lord Sagon, Sorcerer of Lost Brythos, older than your god
(certainly)" character? Claims to a Brithini, but uses the spell of immortality
( a Vadeli or Kralori piece of work no doubt), when all true Brithini shun such
vile magics. An imposter!
---------------------
From: shillada@gatwick.sgp.slb.com
Subject: SORCERY etc
Message-ID: <9309231218.AA21973@icarus.gatwick.sgp.slb.com>
Date: 23 Sep 93 12:18:06 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1803
Neil Shilladay here
I've been reading the digest for a while, and thought it about time to submit.
Greg thanks for the scenario, haven't played it yet, I'll keep you informed.
SORCERY.
This has annoyed almost everyone at some point. Here's how we've changed the rules:
Firstly, get rid of the Intensity 'skill' and let intensity be governed by the
skill in the spell. 1/10th the spell skill gives you a base intensity. A normal success in casting gives you this intensity. To get higher intensities, the
caster must roll better, 1 intensity for every 20 or part thereof.
eg Bod the sorceror
Palsy 46%.....gives base intensity of 5 (=46/10 normal rounding)
Bod wants to cast Palsy 5 - he must roll 46 or less.
Palsy 6 " " 26 or less (=46-20 for increase by
1 intensity)
7 " " 06 " " (46-40)
Bod cannot cast a more powerful Palsy than this. He doesn't HAVE to cast to
the die rolls max intensity, its his choice.
The beauty is the rolls work below base intensity -
Bod wants to cast Palsy 4 - he must roll 66 or less (46+20)
3 " " 86
2 " " 96
Think about it - good sorcerors are guarenteed SOME result, it just may not be
earth shattering; poor sorcerors CANNOT overpower the scenario, and drop the opposition with one lucky roll. I know this 'partial success' isn't traditional
in RQ, but if anyone is interested/confused by the above I will post a more
detailed and clear explanation of our rules.
BAROSHI
I agree - he should be a Hero cult of Babesteer Gor, though I haven't got any
divine magic for him yet.
SPIRIT COMBAT
I always allowed the casting of spells at visible spirits, such as Demoralize
or Befuddle, does anybody else do this ?
---------------------
From: eosgg@raesp-farn.mod.uk (Geoff Gunner)
Subject: Bits and pieces ...
Message-ID: <9309231316.AA11612@raesp-farn.mod.uk>
Date: 23 Sep 93 13:16:24 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1804
___ Jarek writes about spirit magic not working on the spirit plane ...
Spells on spirit plane - don't work ? Well, what about visibility? (yeah, I'm
being pedantic). Does this mean the energy/power for a spell is a sort of
short-circuit ? And how do you visualise the spirit plane ? Most of our ideas
are a hangover from the spiritualism movement of the 1800's (grey, wispy, etc).
I could argue that places like the happy hunting ground or Valhalla are spirit
planes. And think about what happens when, say, a bunny rabbit dies. Terry
Pratchett (why does the man have so many good ideas?) I think is near the mark
with his 'morphic resonance' - the spirit starts off with it's former shape,
slowly loosing it over time. Thus you have a spirit plane which looks like the
real one, but subtly distorted. Vision doesn't go too far (attenuated spirits
blocking out the view). And (call me a alticamelus if I'm wrong) the idea of
spirits having a movement of their POW (and perception as well?) is AWFUL.
Where are all those ghosts drifting about slowly ? Does the spirit plane have
an ecosystem ? If not, what happens to all those old spirits - do they fade
into the 'background POW'. I get the feeling that the mechanics of the spirit
plane need to be tied firmly down so that shamans and their ilk can function
properly, but once you do that a LOT of people's ideas will be offended.
Perhaps it's all down to what you believe (Pratchett again - damn his ears!).
___ Simon Hibbs writes about sorcery, and how the rules should be loosened ...
Yup, would be nice. But I thought (naively) the sorcery system was nice. Put
it in the context of Spirit and Divine Magic, you get a nice feel for the
science of the thing, rather than a ritualised formulae for a desired end.
I'd never change the spirit or divine magic side of things; I`ve too much
emotional baggage attached from my youthful RQ2 days ! ;-)
But there's a lot of interesting stuff out there - the extensions found in
'Vikings' are a good start to extending the concept of magic. I'd like to
think that Spirit, Divine and Sorcery are well-mapped points in the whole area
of Magic, and there's a lot more in between. In the end, it would be nice to
have a whole armoury of magics that characters can equip themselves with.
Geoff - who'd like to stop his players using magic; except he'd be lynched.
---------------------
From: eosgg@raesp-farn.mod.uk (Geoff Gunner)
Subject: Steading
Message-ID: <9309231346.AA12055@raesp-farn.mod.uk>
Date: 23 Sep 93 13:46:18 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1805
'Doraster' has a very nice bit on steading, but it's flawed in that it's too
generalised no mention is made of how many people constitute a 'stead'.
In true Scientific Principles, I put up my extension to get shot down in
flames. Bring on the patriots, please ...
'How To Be A Farmer', or, 'Watch your PCs die of hunger'.
Food needed per year:
Adult = 40 units (42's nicer - 1 per gloranthan week).
Child = (age x 2) + 10, up to max of 40 units at 15 years.
It *is* possible to eat less and get away with it - how about a CON x 10 roll
per year, -1 per 4 units (or fraction) less (or more ?!) than the required
roll. Failure gets you a disease (diseases) of the referee's choice ? Death ?
So Pongo the deprived, given 30 units of food (thus -3) must make a CON x 7.
I'd put a minimum of 20 units here. And perhaps people going off doing hugely
exerting things (i.e. adventurers) should eat more ?
Maximum work done per week:
Adult = 100 hours (50 alert, 50 active)
Child = (age - 5) x 10 (use a -ve for under 6 as attention needed to
care for child ? == more work !)
note: active hours should be >= alert hours.
Note that for part of the year it may not be possible to work - think of the
long cold viking winters! Also characters may be off adventuring. Or just
be bone idle. So get the average hours worked per week.
Skill used one (or average of):
(in our campaign we have skills like 'Rural Lore, City Lore, Forest Lore'
which are used - in this case, rural lore. But more standardly;)
Plant Lore
Animal Lore
Hunting (use Track % x Missile % - hunting's not as effective as farming !)
Units of food gained:
Average Work Hours x :
Seasonal variation ................ 3D10%
+ method yield [50% to 100%] ...... 85%
+ land fertility [-50% to +50%] ... 0%
Incidental note - given crop rotation, wooded areas for firewood, wasted land,
and so on, a good rule of thumb is 1 hectare (100m x 100m) is needed per
person if you're a farmer. Any more and you get into a whole new can of
diminishing returns.
Any comments ? Using the two examples in the Doraster book gives a result that
feels very much like their summary of the situation. I feel it's quite a nice
model, you can cut out bits if it's too complex, and it gives me the potential
to kill off hoardes of PC's without ever lifting a monster at them! :->
Geoff.
---------------------
From: kenrolston@aol.com
Subject: Nature of Faith
Message-ID: <9309230935.tn16967@aol.com>
Date: 23 Sep 93 13:35:52 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1806
Nick:
Re: I like your Malkioni doctrine characterizing personifications of fear,
ignorance, and doubt as gods of the pagans. It just reminds me that
speculations on faith require some tenet or theory to account for the
existence of spirits in general. Since shamans and spirits seem to me as one
of the major unfinished designs of Glorantha and RQ, I shy away from
contemplation of such enigmas. It also reminds me that one of the almost
universal tenets of Gloranthan cults is the religion's promise to bind
spirits to the service of the worshippers. It certainly suggests to me that
the root of all Gloranthan religion is in the propitiation of spirits.
Excellent analysis of "are the gods telling the truth" (ie, do cultists know
what they're getting into and is the cult a false front for another god) --
and fine fodder for conflict in fiction. Thanks.
Re: Polytheism: Greg once said something to me about conceiving pantheons as
a sinlge religion, so in a sense I can see how the Orlanthi and Yelmalions
might not class themselves as polytheistic. Yes, I did mean polytheistic
society in the sense of Pavis and the Empire, where the society and politics
affirm the right to the polytheism of its citizens.
Agreed on not needing to forsake Orlanth for Chalana Arroy, at least in the
sense of leaving one religion to join another, though it certainly seems
that, in moral choices, one forsakes the faith of Orlanth to follow the faith
of Chalana Arroy. I suppose one must say that finally that a Chalana Arroy
worshipper has faith in Orlanth's wisdom in encompassing his contradictions,
that Orlanth's morality is the umbrella, and the various subcults are various
conflicting and often contradictory elements of one faith.
I think there is abundant evidence of religious feeling in the Gloranthan
canon, but much of it is implied, not explicit or developed. I think Sun
County and Gaumata's Vision come closest to giving me a sense of religious
feeling. Still, in fiction, I need to see more little Sunday rituals and hear
folks expressing religious sentiments ("Lords, with Haemon carrying on with
that little hussy and Mother sinking in the Creeping Chills, all I got is my
faith in Yelmalion to carry me though).
I always liked the notion of the Pavic Orlanthi who forsakes his religion to
join Seven Mothers to minister to the poor in the particularly powerless
subcult of Teelo Norri. Yes, his family and friends would think he'd joined
the Moonies, for sure, while he would think of himself as having become
civilized, compassionate, and modern.
I always conceived as Gloranthan cult heroes (ie, gods) as being spiritual
batteries charged by the faith of their worshippers. I thus imagine dead
gods, like dead batteries, and new gods -- that is, new things -- probably
spirits -- getting charged with worship and becoming as gods. Thus, on the
level of exchange of POW, yes, I do see Gloranthan cults as essentially quid
pro quo.
Imperial Rome stikes me as a fair model for multi-pantheon polytheism of the
Gloranthan kind.
I would certainly celebrate an evolution of cults from wargaming mechanics to
Pendragon-style trait and passions mechanics.
Yes, you are right. Most PC cults are eccentric, strange, exotic, and
dangerous. I tend to forget that when I am surrounded by eccentric, strange,
exotic, and dangerous PCs and NPCs, that I am not among the common folk of
Glorantha.
Re: Non-Heroic Gaming: In one of local campaigns an entire session was
devoted to elaborate development of one player's sheep farm. He loves sheep,
and loves money, and everyone else is getting into the act. But I forgot
about the traditional animus toward foreigners. Our local group still has a
romantic attraction to exotic races and nationalities -- an unconscious
legacy from our heroic fantasy days, I fear.
Cheers,
Ken
---------------------
From: dickmj@essex.ac.uk (M Dicks)
Subject: unsub
Message-ID: <9309231512.AA06766@serdlc10>
Date: 23 Sep 93 20:12:19 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1807
Alas, this is the last message that I'll be sending to the RQ digest for the
forseeable future as my University career (and access to this terminal) has now
ended (sniff).
It's been fun talking to all of you even if I can't follow some of the
discussion about Loskalm or Stygian heresey! But this is it, the end. Fin.
If anyone wants to keep in contact, my address is
Matthew Dicks,
64 Foxbourne Rd,
Balham,
London SW17
Also, if anyone out there ever wants to drop in, feel free to do so (honest).
Until we meet in Humakt's Halls, goodbye
-Arganth
---------------------
From: s.phillips@gla.ac.uk
Subject: Anybody out there?..
Message-ID: <23_Sep_93_16:19:50_A117BE@UK.AC.GLA.VME>
Date: 23 Sep 93 15:19:50 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1808
Harry (Keep the buggers guessing !)