From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Thu, 05 May 1994, part 1
Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
Content-Return: Prohibited
Precedence: junk
X-RQ-ID: Intro
This is the RuneQuest Daily Bulletin, a mailing list on
the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's
world of Glorantha. It is sent out once per day in digest
format.
More details on the RuneQuest Daily and Digest can be found
after the last message in this digest.
---------------------
From: sandyp@idcube.idsoftware.com (Sandy Petersen)
Subject: yelm, Vadeli, etc.
Message-ID: <9405041813.AA01165@idcube.idsoftware.com>
Date: 4 May 94 06:13:44 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3907
Alex says:
>Do any primates practice polyandry? Thought not.
Sure, (some) humans do. For that matter, I can't think of any
primates off the top of my head that practice polygamy. Chimps and
gorillas certainly don't keep harems. I don't have my books readily
available, but I recall that when a female chimp or gorilla becomes
fertile, all the males strive to mate with her. The boss sometimes
tries to keep his not-friends from mating, but that's hardly
polygamy.
I also can't think of any primates that practice mating for
life except humans (I'm sure there are one or two -- though not among
the great apes). The aberrant human sexual behavior of monogamy
(i.e., aberrant for a primate) is doubtless the result of our having
evolved as cooperative group predators.
>>To summarize my belief: polygamy is cultural, based on a male
>> dominance. Monogamy is biological. Polyandry is biological, unless
>> it's culturally based on a female dominance.
>If this were true, there would surely be many examples of higher
>animals exhibiting polyandry, and none that are polygynic. The
>reverse appears to be true.
I was speaking only of humans. Polygamy is obviously a
feature of a number of animals, but the classic polygamous animals
are pinnipeds and herd ungulates. Note that the animal practice of
polygamy has almost NOTHING in common with the human one -- human
polygamists mate for life. Seals and antelope only mate for the
duration of one (1) season. Human polygamists are expected to tend
their children. Mormon polygamists, for instance, were required to be
financially able to build a separate house for each wife. The animal
polygamist father contributes little or nothing to the upkeep of the
young. Lions even murder their young (not their own -- the cubs from
the previous father).
And there are cases of polyandrous-like animals -- cases in
which a younger sibling will help tend his nieces and nephews. I wish
I had my damn books to give you chapter and verse, but it's true for
both some birds and some carnivores.
Anyway, I've wasted way too much time on this subject. I'd
better try to apply it to Glorantha.
DWARFS: the whole dwarf society cares for its "young" (in
whatever form these take). I don't think that the father and mother
of a particular offspring stay together any longer than is absolutely
necessary. This pattern may change somewhat for dwarfs that are no
longer part of the Decamony. The dwarfs in Pavis, for instance, I
think are likely to remain paired at least until any offspring is
able to fend for his- or her-self.
TROLLS: females rule the roost. Males are rather like rogues,
that wander more or less free, but return home to bring food and
receive the benefits of that stable home. I think that trolls
commonly practice two "marriage" styles. First, very powerful females
may have multiple husbands. Second, sisters often live together,
sharing husband(s). Really, the first type is just a subtype of the
second. Third, many women probably live more or less alone, depending
on occasional liasons to produce offspring, and depending on
brothers, adult children, or cousins to provide what food they cannot
get for themselves.
In troll towns, troll children are raised in creches with
multiple guardians, but they also know who their mother is and spend
plenty of time with her. Lone trolls bearing children must raise them
by themselves. They probably go feral after a while.
ELVES: because I picture elves as slow to change their
opinions and feelings, I think of them as having long-lasting
relationships, monogamous for Brown and Green elves. For Yellow
elves, mating is probably a religious ceremony (yellow elves are all
male -- they mate with dryads to continue the species). Offspring are
raised by the community, I suspect.
BROOS: no parental care.
>> Each combination of two lineages has one result that comes from
>>it, often modified by the exact sex of the parents and location
>>born into. For instance, if your Dad was Bluewood, and Mom was
>>Puffberry, you are also Puffberry. etc.
>Is there a general pattern to these rules, or are they just
>hap-hazard, being made up by the local Geneological Frustrated
>Symbolic Logician Elder when he's stoned?
More the latter. Though no doubt the Elders would point out
that they're based on (irrational) Natural Principles. I bet the
Six-Legged Empire tried to make up general rules and follow them.
>Do [dwarfs] possess the man rune?
I would say they do. If plants and mermen can, why not
dwarfs? I submit that when Grandfather Mortal/Wild Man (whatever you
want to call him) was being used as a mold for all sorts of critters,
that not only Aldrya and Kyger Litor, but also Mostal used him to
"cast" his Mostali in. The usefulness of Grandfather Mortal I believe
to be in the fact that he wasn't associated with any elemental or
power runes, so _everybody_ could use him. Maybe he was the
first-ever Form Rune?
John Hughes, in the middle of a very impressive work on Levels of
RolePlaying, mentions:
>GLORANTHA AS A LITERARY CREATION (LITERARY REALITY)
>This is where Glorantha began. Most rpgs don't have this level to
>deal with - even the companies that print game-derived 'novels'
>produce linear little adolescent fantasies where you can usually
>tell when the dice are being rolled. The major exception is Middle
>Earth, and like Glorantha it pre-existed the game.
Although it's no longer a "major" exception, I feel
inexplicably compelled to add that the world of Tekumel is (IMO) the
only other commercial gaming world worth playing in (i.e., as opposed
to making up your own), and it, too, existed before the game.
>I would see a clan trickster's main role as being part of major
>pantheon ceremonies, almost a cult 'hero' (pet? valuable captive?)
>of the ruling deity rather than a separate cult. An Eurmali on a
>leash during Orlanth temple ceremonies?
I seem to recall that during the holiest most solemn Navajo
ceremonies, guys in clown suits would make rude noises, throw things
at the participants, and generally make Official Nuisances of
themselves. No doubt the periodic belches, drunken songs, and hiccups
from the chained Trickster serve a similar function for the Orlanthi.
Lewis claims:
>Even now, [the Blue Vadeli's] spirit is fighting its way back to the
>world to be >reborn so that the Vadeli can once more unite to
>finally crush the >EVIL AMMORAL Brithini.
>a) The Blue Vadeli will be reborn to another Vadeli so that it can
>be taught how to be a Vadeli and what its caste restrictions are.
You'll never hear me arguing about the evil nature of the
Brithini. However, your suggestion here has caused me to take off on
a wild tangent. What if the Blue Vadeli was NOT reborn to a Vadeli,
but to someone else. What a great campaign idea! The Vadeli, warned
of the kid's birth by Portents in the Heavens, are after the child,
so they can raise it as their King. The Brithini, warned by the same
portents, are after the child, so they can ritually destroy it. The
PCs are caught in the middle. Now, how can I adapt this to my
campaign? My players spend most of their time in Seshnela, so both
Vadeli and Brithini are readily available. Hmmm.
Paul R. sez:
>I do think that adult Irondwarfs will have iron skeletons, etc.,
>even if these are installed later as you say. Perhaps when they
>reach full size their bones are replaced? I think the old Mostali
>certainly had metal skeletons of the appropriate type.
I seem to recall a case of a dwarf (the founder of
Octamonism) whose skeleton turned into something unusual as a result
of his "piety." I agree that the old Mostali had metal skeletons (or
stone).
>>I believe that the dwarf castes are NOT hereditary. Instead,
>>the Gold Dwarfs do career testing, and assign the young dwarf into
>>that caste to which he or she is best suited.
>This makes sense IF the reproduction process has become tainted with
>Disorder and produces essentially uncontrolled offspring, with
>randomly distributed talents.
I imagine the dwarfs explain it otherwise -- as the result of
all dwarfs being interchangable when first produced, so children
simply should be assigned to whatever caste needs new recruits at the
moment. Of course, this doesn't explain why different children might
or might not have proclivities for a particular caste.
>[ducks] don't need teeth to grin. Bills are funny just
>as they are, anyway.
Aw c'mon. You _know_ that Daffy, Donald, and Howard have
toothy grins. Why not Yurek Chodak's Storm Duck (mebbe the only duck
in Glorantha with a damage bonus, and a good Uroxi)? You take on
yourself so many handicaps with a duck character, at least let us
have teeth.
Bryan says re: Dwarfs
>every Dwarf was given one of two "manufacturing functions". The
>Vesselers each have a small copy of the Vessel of Clay in their
>bodies. The Stirrers have a device that works that Vessel until a
>new Dwarf is made. That's right, Dwarven "sex" and "gestation" are
>the same thing. No wonder Dwarves don't like it too much.
Wow. I like this idea so much it hurts. *snort* Wait'll I
tell my dwarf PCs.
Alex responds in horror to my barefaced claim that Mastakos is
important in Pelora:
Oops, sorry. I meant Lokarnos, not Mastakos. Bad, bad Sandy.
>That's quite a small number of Yelmites (5-20% in Dara Happa
>cities): you basically think everyone worshipping Yelm is "noble",
>ruling or not, then?
Firstly, my numbers are open to argument. They're my gut
feeling, but I'm perfectly willing to alter them upon being presented
with good evidence otherwise.
Second, yea, I think that the Yelm worshipers are "noble", at
least in Dara Happa and Peloria.
Third, this "nobility" may not be too impressive. With up to
20% of the population being "noble", there are doubtless thousands of
impoverished slum-dwelling Yelm-worshipers, proud of their heritage
and right to worship Yelm, but basically ordinary peasants. Like the
family of "_Tess of the D'Urbervilles_" or in "Persuasion", by Jane
Austen. Po' folks, but stuck-up. Even with a 5% Yelm population,
that's way too many for them to ALL be "real" property-holding
nobles, though certainly ALL the nobles could be Yelm worshipers (and
probably were, before the Lunar Empire).
>Your numbers imply lots of "other" [Pelorian] worshippers: what are
>the rest, Lunar worshippers?
Yep. I feel that the Lunar Way has made significant inroads
on the traditional Dara Happan religions, especially in the case of
Yelm, who is a fairly rigorous cult to worship. I'm positive that
lots of Yelm-nobles find their children abandoning the old ways for
the new. And of course, once your kids are no longer Yelm, that means
your grandkids can't be (since your father must be Yelm for you to
qualify), so the line stops there.
---------------------
From: MOBTOTRM@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Subject: Blue Vadeli
Message-ID: <01HBY8RKKVYO99SSA2@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: 5 May 94 04:25:10 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3901
G'day all,
Thanks to Sandy, followed by Nick and others for the fascinating stuff
about the Vadeli.
A question: when the renascent Vadeli arrived off the Pamaltelan seaboard
claiming they were gods (neato trick!), what did they think of the
wretched Blueskins (Veldang) of Fonrit? Or are they the wrong shade of
blue?
---------------------
From: MOBTOTRM@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Subject: Got the Blues...
Message-ID: <01HBYD2IBE4C99RYJ0@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: 5 May 94 06:34:28 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3902
G'day all,
Thanks to Sandy, followed by Nick and others for the fascinating stuff
about the Vadeli.
If Nick's theory is true - "The Vadeli know that a little bit of us lives
on in our descendents, and have worked out ways of getting it back" - no
wonder everyone hates the Vadeli so much! Makes me shudder...
A question: after the lifting of the Closing when the renascent Vadeli
arrived off the Pamaltelan seaboard claiming they were gods (neato trick!),
what did they think of the wretched Blueskins (Veldang) of Fonrit? Or are
they the wrong shade of blue?
And while I'm on the subject of immortals, Bryan J Maloney's comment about
the Brithini - "The Brithini have NO natural sexual urges. Immortality
means that there is no logical or mythological imperative to
reproduce" - is a rationale that makes a lot of sense. I recall that there
is or was a Christian sect in the US (where else?) that proscribed sex
and seemed to have pretty abstemious and deliberately ritualised
and mundane lives. They made very simple but beautifully crafted furniture
which is now bought for outrageous sums by rock stars and tv personalities.
I think that they're called the Shakers?
Dat so?
Cheers
MOB
---------------------
From: devinc@aol.com
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 04 May 1994, part 6
Message-ID: <9405040651.tn130220@aol.com>
Date: 4 May 94 10:51:48 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3903
Devin Cutler here:
Peter writes:
"This is Glorantha and _not_ Earth we are talking about here.
No amount of academic knowledge is a substitute for a poor imagination
This is a Role-playing game and it's supposed to be FUN!
Well, that's what I think. But there again I'm not an anthropologist or a
biologist or an historian or whatever ;-). "
I would tend to agree, and I suppose this relates to Mr Hughes' theory of
different levels of Gloranthan Reality. I suppose I generally reside on the
second level (i.e. the rules reflect Glorantha). Why? Because I PLAY the GAME
of Runequest. I play it to roleplay and have fun, as do my friends. I am
afraid that I do not really go into the third level (Glorantha as literary)
because inherenlty, when you enter this level, your prospects for gaming
start to become grim. Why? Because no game can accurately reflect real life
or even an imagined real life.
There are too many variables (it is like trying to create a perpetual motion
machine, you can get close, but it will never happen).
I do try to keep the level of gaming above that of hack and slash and D&D
type happenings, although combat certainly is a big part of most adventures
(though it happens for a good reason, not indiscriminantly).
But I know that my players, and most players, would probably become rather
bored if I started roaming too much into the Literary level of Glorantha
during agaming session. After all, not only is my preparation time as a GM
limited, but the actual gaming session is of a limited time.
This is where I often get into conflict with the way Greg is taking RQ. He
seems to be delving into the Literary level, at the expense (by necessity) of
the gaming level. This is, IMHO, a Bad Thing, since it is gamers who support
Glorantha, and therefore priority should be given to describe Glorantha in
gaming terms before literary terms.
Otherwise, why not simply chuck RQ altogether, just put out Gloranthan
Literary products, and get Gms borrow a system (like GURPS) and modify it to
suit Glorantha, or allow people to make up their own systems?
Regards,
Devin Cutler
devinc@aol.com
---------------------
From: jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se (Jonas Schiott)
Subject: Eurmal, World Levels.
Message-ID: <9405041517.AA04734@vinga.hum.gu.se>
Date: 5 May 94 00:28:26 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3904
Yay! Tricksters are back in the discussion!
Charles:
>Some while ago, a request for the "official" Eurmal cult writeup was posted
>here on the digest. Since Phil Davis is my GM
So this is official, is it? Who's Phil Davies? Why does this 'official'
Eurmal cult contradict both normal cult structure _and_ the special
Trickster structure? Anyway, the writeup has some neat ideas; I just have a
few minor quibbles.
>Eurmal is associated through his parentage with the runes of Disorder and
>Life and, through his reluctant fealty to Orlanth, the Storm Rune.
I'm not arguing against any of these, I'd just like to know what became of
Illusion?
>B. Social/Political Position and Power
>[...]
>Outside Orlanthi lands, Eurmal is treated as any of the other Trickster
>Gods and considered fair game.
Hm. This section is somewhat in conflict with the sources (not that I care,
just thought I'd mention it). Essentially, it gives eurmalites an
_official_ place in the orlanthi order of things, which seems a bit
non-trickster to me. The consensus seems to be that they are tolerated at
best.
>Initiates must sacrifice one point of Power on each Holy Day and all Magic
>Points plus one point of Power on the High Holy Day of the cult. This must
>be done only if there is a shrine or Temple within five days travel of the
>initiates location.
Is this really supposed to say "Power"? If it does, that means you get to
blow 6 points of POW each year. Or spend a lot of time on the road. Knowing
what tricksters are like, the later seems more likely, so what you will get
is essentially ceremonies with nobody present. Why, then, do they have an
organized cult at all? It makes for a good meta-joke, of course, but for
how long can they keep that up?
Otherwise an interesting piece to scavenge ideas from.
John:
>While Alex's idea of
>Tricksters worshipping together has some intriguing scenario
>possibilities, it also strikes me as somewhat odd.
I second that... wait a minute, I think I already have?
>Some unpublished stuff I have on Trickster
Intriguing stuff, thanks for sharing it with us. BTW, who wrote it?
>Now perhaps I'm a cynic and of little faith, but I like to draw
>distinctions as to what 'level' I'm discussing. I see at least four
>fairly distinct and (IMHO) ultimately unreconcilable levels of
>Gloranthan 'reality'.
Bravo! The best piece of analytic philosophy I've seen on the Daily so far.
And I say that with absolutely _no_ smileys intended. Your distinctions are
clear, to the point, and explain what a lot of the confusion is about.
I'm just not sure the bulkheads between the levels have to be as
hermetically sealed as you make them out to be. In particular, I'm
concerned about the relationship between RQ-derived and Gloranthan
realities:
>The RQ rules [I] WERE NOT however,
>designed to simulate large scale social, environmental or magical
>effects.[I] Certain of the more
>'absurd' Gloranthan phenomena (cult membership rules, initiation,
>certain spells) were derived for and work only at this level [that of
>adventuring].
I agree that the rules, _as they stand_, lead to absurdities when you try
to extrapolate a society from them. But couldn't one work from the other
direction? Trying to modify rules so that at least a small-scale social
situation can be played out without complete suspension-of-disbelief
failure is my number one RQ priority. By "small" scale I mean the
clan/tribe kind of thing. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "large"
scale, but assuming it includes things like wars, migrations and the
founding of new religions, I would agree that the RQ rules have nothing to
say on such subjects. Oh, and to avoid more confusion: I am _not_
suggesting that the rules should be directly applicable to the workings of
a society, just that they should be compatible with what we (the GMs)
intuitively, common-sensically, mythologically or whatever have decided
will happen anyway.
Jonas
---------------------
From: mabeyke@batman.b11.ingr.com (boris)
Subject: Questions, snipes, and spppam.
Message-ID: <199405041525.AA16951@batman.b11.ingr.com>
Date: 4 May 94 15:25:10 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3905
Boris here, with a few snide comments and questions
In X-RQ-ID: 3900 John P Hughes comments:
>*** SEX, POLYGAMY, POLYGYNY, POLYANDRY AND MARRIAGE
>(SPPPAM)
SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM! SPPPAM!
Wonderful SPPPAM, Wonderful SPPPAM!
(sorry. A python spirit suddenly possessed me.)
>Just how DOES magic affect sex, fertility and marriage in a given
>Gloranthan culture ?
(a lot of good speculative questions deleted)
All excellent questions, but the one I am really interested in is, how
long is human gestation in Glorantha? With a year of only 294 days,
normal Earthly gestation (9 months ~ 273 days) seems a bit long. I have
heard mentioned that the average human lifespan on Glorantha (barring
unforseen accidents such as stumbling onto a StormBull keg party) is
"three score and ten" Gloranthan years. Is gestation shortened by a
similar amount to three fourths of a lozenge shaped year (220 days,
not quite four seasons)? I know this will please the young assistant
shaman in my game who rolled quite low after an all night party.
In X-RQ-ID: 3891 Paul Reilly comments:
>Sandy writes:
>>This is also why
>>Greg and I concur that ducks have teeth (so they can grin).
>
> Whoa there. They don't need teeth to grin. Bills are funy just
>as they are, anyway.
As someone else said (geez, I can't remember who) ducks *do* have teeth;
they need them to hold their cigars.
----
Boris
---------------------
From: staats@MIT.EDU
Subject: Nature vs the Physical Universe (That Invisible Guy again...)
Message-ID: <9405041532.AA29732@m66-080-8.MIT.EDU>
Date: 4 May 94 15:32:46 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3906
Greetings!
I have to agree with Sandy that an Orlanti or Storm Bull or Ernalda
worshipper is more in touch with the Earth, but I think a sorcerer understands
the physical nature of the universe better. Nature conjures images of birds
and bees and waving fields of grain, and Genert (may his imaginary spirit rest
in peace) would have been directly involved with these things. Arachne Solara
is a step removed from these things. Arachne Solara is more than just a super
powered Earth goddess. So, the sorcerer, who may not have the spiritual
relationship with the Earth/Nature the Orlanti does, would probably have a far
better grasp on how the physical universe fits together. Those wacky God
Learners were just sorcerers who got a bit too clever for their own good! Did
they perhaps figure out a way or get close to a way of contacting Arachne Solara
directly? *ZAP*
[System Mail Handler: this transmission is terminated as Mr. Staats has
been turned into a pile of calcium dust by a stray lightning bolt. Must get that
electric caging fixed one of these days!]
---------------------
From: dragon@netcom.com (David Swanson Millians)
Subject: Receiving
Message-ID: <199405042348.QAA05219@netcom.com>
Date: 4 May 94 09:48:03 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 3908
Please, help. How do I subscribe to this information?
Thanks in advance for your help.
David