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, Tue, 17 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: JARDINE@RMCS.CRANFIELD.AC.UK Subject: Various Bits Message-ID: <9405161207.AA12946@Sun.COM> Date: 16 May 94 11:42:00 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4026 Hi All Just an assorted collection of bits today. Alex: Why not write up your GLC scenario as a Free Form and run it at Convulsion?!? Paul Snow: (Ref: how mant death runes does a Humakti Carve on his sword?) Perilously close to being a Nysalor Riddle. Answer either one or none as his sword IS the other DEATH RUNE! Matt Thale: Lorkarnos = MAstakos? Answer 1; as a God Learner I would agree that this is probably one god being worshipped by two different societies. Perhaps Lorkarnos is to Mastalos as Yelmalio is to Elmal. Answer 2; his is an example of two very different gods who happen to share the motion rune with the particular aspect concentrating on wheeled vehicles drawn by animals. However, we know that Mastakos uses his chariot so that he can still enter battle beside his lord, even after his hamstrings have been cut removing his unsurpassed running and jumping ability. Lokarnos on the other hand is just a rich trading god who uses wagons to carry his trade goods from one place to the next. The Solar pantheon probably adopted him because of his wealth and the fact that he could make golden coins. P.S. I wonder if Lokarnos was originally connected with the Sun Wheel Dancers. After all the spell Coin Wheel is a bit unnecessary but what if it was an important part of SWD reproduction? We all know the story of Urrg the Ugly so there is obviously a connection between wheels and SWD (appart from the name). Mostal Worship: Question; Do dwarfs have to sacrifice 1 POW to become initiates of the *Cult* of Mostal? After all Mostal is DEAD and offers NO benefits or even an afterlife! What is the Cult of Mostal anyway? Points: 1) I believe that Mostali are automatically tied to their creator Mostal (thus NEVER needed the crude and primative mechanism of using 1 POW to tie their spiritual organ to Mostal). 2) Dwarves are a cheap mass produced form thus they might be required to tie their spiritual organ in the primative fashion. Solution: Non-apostate dwarves join their spiritual organ to the World Machine NOT Mostal. The *Cult* of Mostal is a social rather than religious organization. Because Mostal is dead and thus unable to confirm/deny/change/clarify his original laws this has lead to the various herasies springing up. Because of their tie to the World Machine which is broken but not destroyed dwarves become immortal, but still subject to breakage. They also gain access to Mostali Magical Mechanics instead of the "primative sorcery" used by apostates. Also because they are joined to the World Machine Dwarves are able to feel its condition and are thus highly motivated to repair it in order to lessen their own discomfort. Have you ever wondered why dwarves are such a stuffy and dour race? The Great Initiation Debate WARNING SEVERE GOD LEARNERISM APPROACHING We known and have had recently had reaffirmed by Sandy that an Extra point of POW is NOT REQUIRED in order to join a subcult. A GL viewpoint would describe Barntar and Voriof etc. as subcults of Orlanth which have just got a bit bigger than normal and evolved an independent existence. Hence in areas where they are still worshipped as part of the pantheon there might be no need of separate POW sacrifice. This argument could be extended to Orlanth Lore Master, Orlanth Herald, Orlanth Trickster, Orlanth Death Wielder, Orlanth Charioteer (aka Lhankor Mhy, Issaries, Eurmal, Humakt (arround the upland marsh) and Mastakos). Oh, and by the way, I suspect that The Secret is arggggg... --------------------- From: jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se (Jonas Schiott) Subject: Turning Tricksters. Message-ID: <9405161240.AA14746@vinga.hum.gu.se> Date: 16 May 94 16:40:48 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4027 It seems I'll have to give up on using weird Macintosh characters, it makes my postings look so silly... Alex: >When a Eurmal acolyte becomes a "priest", he gets a shrine >to sleep it off in, regular buckets of slops on the head, and jeers and >derision on demand. >[...] >I'm resistant to the idea of Trickster being a monolithic GLised entity >with only one universal mode of worship. The idea of splitting the cult into priests and initiates seems less repulsive after Joerg informed me of the the RQ4 suggestion that initiates should regain their divine spells once a year. >I assume "you" is John Hughes, not, say, me. What's in a name? Answer: on the Net, it's all you've got. It seems I got confused by your replying to my reply to John. Apologies to everyone involved. But it _did_ seem like you were arguing for a position similar to his. Reading your "Level-headedness" posting, I can see my interpretation was slightly off the mark... Jonas --------------------- From: jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se (Jonas Schiott) Subject: Rex Rulers. Message-ID: <9405161240.AA14749@vinga.hum.gu.se> Date: 16 May 94 16:40:55 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4028 Martin: >The Orlanth Rex cult appears in the long write-up in Heroes Vol. >I, $4. Those who serve on tribal councils in Maniria, Ralios, >and Peloria are temporary members, and tribal kings or chieftains >get to be permanent members. Also in this write-up is the infamous suggestion that O.Rex initiates bear the title of "thane". In KoS, on the other hand, half of every clan seems composed of thanes. This was up for discussion once before, but petered out. Does anyone know if there is some official word on what O.R. initiates are 'really' called? Or is it "Report on the Orlanthi" we're supposed to ignore? Jonas --------------------- From: MOBTOTRM@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au Subject: Pavis Character List Message-ID: <01HCFASR9YYQ8ZEW3P@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> Date: 17 May 94 09:27:46 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4029 G'day Everyone! ________________________ Pavis Personalities List RE: Eric Rowe's List of Pavis Personalities. Great list; I was surprised to see such obscure low-lifes as Bung the Bright and Grovman the Sand Reader from an article I wrote with Trev Ackerly in TotRM #8. By featuring on the same list as Sor Eel and Krogar Wolfhelm does this mean they've entered the Gloranthan canon? [By the way Eric, another of the beggars listed, Unkle Kevin (a baboon spirit guide) is spelt with a "k", and the "insane beggar (who) leads begger king's enforcer gang" is called Sludge, not Slarge. He's an insane ex-sage, not a big reptile!] You included such one-shot low-lifes as Bung and Grovman, so what hasppened to Jaxarte Whyded, Sor Eel's young and niave nephew, who's exploits have featured in SUN COUNTY, as well as Tales #3, #5, #6 & #8? It'd just be poor Jax's luck to miss out, however, I suggest you add something like: Jaxarte Whyded - Lunar - nephew of Sor Eel. Cheers MOB --------------------- From: jesper.wahrner@hts.ct.se (Jesper Wahrner) Subject: Rules vs Reality Message-ID: <2dce9668@hts.ct.se> Date: 9 May 94 14:00:00 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4030 John Hughes wrote a lot of stuff about the importance of keeping different aspects of Glorantha apart namely: 1. Glorantha as Combat- Simulation, 2. Glorantha as derived from RQ rules, 3. Glorantha as literary creation and 4. Glorantha as a closed, fully functioning world. I can't help feeling that these distinctions are artificial and ought not to be there at all. I can understand why he makes them though. The problem with RQ and Glorantha has always been that it has been that while Glorantha is a world that is a work of art and a true masterpiece, RQ has always been a gamesystem that is mediocre as best. Characters does easily become stereotypical, the resistance table is a mathematical fumble, but worst of all, the gamesystem start to break down about at the same time as the scenario is getting interesting. ie when you get to play something but generic adventurer type characters which seems to be all the gamerules are meant to cater for. When You advance to priest for example you're told that you're supposed to spend 90% of your time with priestly duties, but instead of providing means of handling this in play it is supposed to happen off play, and if you get to be a RuneLord your skills are so good at about everything that the gamesystem start to work badly. You CAN play ordinary people and get away with it, but the gamesystem is still so centred at adventuring that the rules gives little advice on how to handle it, neither for GM nor players. Thus people who are rooted in a society or those with the most mythological scope gets little help from the gamesystem. In fact I would go so far as to say that there are only two real reasons to play RQ, but those reasons are strong enough to make me shut up and suffer the gamesystem most of the time. (Although I need to let of my steam like this sometimes, thanks for bearing with me.) The most important of these reasons is Glorantha. (The other one is of course the "Dropped oil-lamp table". I can't understand what players of other games do when they drop their oillamps. Games without DOL-tables are incomplete and not worth playing! :-) ) The problem I have with John's distinctions is that he seems to want to separate Glorantha as derived from RQ-rules into a separate object from the Glorantha we all know and love when what we really ought to do is to work to transform RQ into a gamesystem that can handle John's categories of 3 and 4 (whom I incidently make very little difference between). I see the gamerules as the natural laws of the world I play in, and every world - even those as relativistic as Glorantha - needs natural laws, if only to explain why they are relativistic. Sure, the rules will by necessity be incomplete. There will always be exotic magic and situations which the gamesystem doesn't cover, but this is not really a problem. Thats what our imagination is there for. I want a Glorantha that is a closed, fully functioning world that works as a literary creation and which I can play in. (I want it to work as a combat simulation as well whenever it comes to battle for that matter.) What is true in Glorantha as a game-simulation should be equally true in the closed, fully functional world of Glorantha. If they don't work together something is definetly wrong. (Most likely with the gamesystem.) Yours, Jesper --------------------- From: joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner) Subject: What is initiation? Message-ID:Date: 16 May 94 15:24:18 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4031 Alex in X-RQ-ID: 4022 > One of the reasons this topic Won't Die is that I'm having trouble seeing > what it is that Joerg proposes for, or even _wants_ from, Pantheon > Initiation. If we work out exactly where we differ, perhaps we can at > least agree to differ/sulk quietly. I'll try to sort this out on a private channel. Subject: Aeolian initiates > (After all, sorcery is sometimes taught in cults, even theistic cults.) Sorcery is nearly always taught in cults in western and central Glorantha. >> This low magic he learns from both the pantheistic offers of the Aeolian >> church > This is a very confusing way to describe sorcery, which isn't even theistic > in origin. Not in the God Learner sense of "theistic". Yet wizardry is tied firmly to the religion of the Invisible God. >> If he desires so, he may learn a bit divine magic - those >> spells the deities involved grant to their associates > I've pointed the problem with this out before: this isn't a well-defined > set. _Every_ spell each spell gives to _every_ associate? From my understanding, the spells granted from a deity to associates always covers one imortant aspect of the deity. For each aspect of a deity belonging to the pantheon there would be one spell in the spell pool. A worshipper may gain access to this spell if he is somehow involved in this aspect. Call it heroquesting for an ability, if this sounds more RuneQuesty to you. > I don't think this method works in general, else (pre-Lunar) Dara Happa > would be hip-deep in Yelm worshippes. In the unlikely event of Yelm > the Sage members being allowed and able to procreate, I suspect their > children "don't count" as Yelm candidates. I think this was how Harvar Ironfist was admitted into the Yelm cult during Home of the Bold (RQ-Con session). Could any of the involved confirm or correct this? >> He is an Aeolian initiate, which means he may worship at any sacred place of >> the church, plus he will experience somewhat friendly reception at Orlanthi >> and Lightbringer temples, if only as lay member. > Shurely shome mishtake: sorceror, burn, kill? Sorcerers are burnt regularly by the Aeolian wizards when they are found guilty of abusing the magic. Visitors from God Forgot make sure to contact church authorities for protection as soon as they enter Hendriki lands. This protection is not dissimilar to that an Eurmali gets from the Orlanthi he swore fealty to, and involves supervision as well. Black Arkat worshipping sorcery-users travel under the protection and supervision of the Kitori tribe. Other sorcery-users are rare, and most abstain from practising sorcerous arts. There have been sorcery-using mercenaries in the service of the Hendriki king from 1615 onward, whose vows of service to the king had involved vows pertaining to their use of magic as well. These bands have served in the border marches of Prax until 1617, when one of them became a contender in the inheritance struggles, and finally won. (Sartar is sorcery-user friendly: look at Apple Lane. The TEB smith family lives without fear of pogromes.) >> He is an initiate of the church, first of all. > Is this in the sense of theistic initiation, or more like wizardly > apprenticeship? This is more like theistic initiation. (I regard apprentice wizards as rough equivalent of acolytes or apprentice shamans.) > I think this person's link to Issaries, or at least "the usual" Issaries, > is fairly slight, so I wouldn't use the above description. As a general > principle while discussing cult structures, I'm inclined to ignore claims > of an afterlife: better filed under "cult propaganda". I don't follow > what you mean about his ancestors, in any case. Thoughts of the afterlife were more important in people's lives than you seem to be willing to accept. There was one famous Viking reaction to a missionary's attempt to convert him. After accepting everything the christian priest had told and taught him, the Viking asked: "Will I meet my ancestors in heaven?" The priest denied this. "Then I'd rather go to hell." I see the Orlanthi culture as similar to the Viking culture in this question. Your family and clan is made up not only by the living, but also by your ancestors. If joining another creed would separate you from their assistance in this life as well as the next, the decision to do so would be a desparate one. Such as joining Humakt. Whenever possible, a person would retain his family ties. > Well, I can't imagine _any_ Heortlander of "humble origins" doing so, I'm > not clear whether you'd have only Hendriki doing so. [speak of e.g. St. Chalana Arroy] If that's what the clergy has told them to say in the sermon, they will. Just as the Irish were quick to say St. Brigid instead of Goddess Brigid. > A Saint, in Earthly X.ian terms, and M.ioni terms, is basically a formula > for saying "Just a man, but because he was so holy, we'll let you pray to > him a bit." (Apologies to RCs in the audience for the paraphrase.) > While some pagan deities have been co-opted as Saints, this is really a > way of permitting their worship to continue, but implicitly denying their > Godhead. I view it rather as defining various degrees of Godhead. >> The Aeolians have a simple definition of Saint: an entity worshipped >> by the church and its members. > Okay, but to a theist, especially one who knows how the church in the > west uses the term, this is likely to sound like "Not-a-real-god,-honest > -guv Barntar". I think you're likely yo get away with this for heroes, > but not for entities the populace sees as honest-to-god gods. RuneQuest has a simple definition of a deity: an entity worshipped by cults and their members. "When Orlanth was just a godling"... Not even deities are born to full power. And to Orlanthi outsiders it sounds more like the Hendriki have an odd way to call all deities except the King of Gods "sent" or so, some outlandish word for god, most likely. -- -- Joerg Baumgartner joe@sartar.toppoint.de --------------------- From: joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner) Subject: Divine personalities Message-ID: Date: 16 May 94 16:10:46 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4032 Cullen O'Neill in X-RQ-ID: 4012 >> All (85%) Orlanthi males are initiated to Orlanth (KoS p.245f). > To me the idea that 'All Orlanthi males' need to be actual > initiates is ridiculous. Most are probably just lay members. I > regard all information from KoS with suspicion anyway. One of my main characterisations comparing lay membership to initiatehood is the question of the mutual commitment between deity and worshipper. An initiate has made a commitment lasting past his death, a commitment which affects his soul, spirit or whatever. This affects his afterlife, but as well his spiritual life before death. Being initiated into a certain cycle of myth allows participation in these myths via reenactment, aka worship, or heroquest. (Most of these myths have their roots in Godtime, although by the cyclical nature of Time events within Time may become mythical as well. Arkat's struggle against Gbaji is the most prominent one.) A standard form of (religious) initiation is to a specific deity. Except in rare cases (like Humakt, or the majority of the Invisible God sects) there is no claim for exclusivity of this worship. In several cases more than one entity is recorded as recipient of a cults worship. Generally only entities sharing a cycle of myths are worshipped as a group, such as the Seven Mothers. Sometimes this cycle has been fudged with to create a common cult, as in the case of Caladra and Aurelion (assuming Tales 7 tell the "truth"). More often a whole group of entities worshipped is projected into the worship of a single deity, as is the case with Ernalda, Orlanth, Pamalt and Yelm, who reign over a plethora of (locally divergent) subservient cults. Sometimes around one of these entities a cult of its own evolves, fuzzying up the myths. As a result, loyalties get mangled, and cultic relations are at a strain to be explained. The concept of associates tries to step in, but fails to answer all demands: >> Is this worthy associated with e.g. Eiritha, Babeester Gor or other >> associates of Ernalda? Since he uses oxen to plow, possibly with Eiritha >> If he tends an orchard, maybe even with Aldrya? Is he associated with >> the Lightbringers? With Heler? With Mastakos? Urox? Humakt? Valind? > I think associate cults were created to address this exact point. The published lists don't answer my questions. > The whole idea of initiation to me is of the initiate identifying > himself with a particular god(dess). His relationships with the > other gods then would be similar to his gods relationships with > that god. He would probably have his relationships with those > other deities laid out in myths. Also the word associated comes > up... he would be associated with those religions that there is > a mythologically defined association with. He might be a guest > at the worship services of some of these other deities, but they > are not his Archetype (ie: he isn't trying to become like them) > as is the case of Orlanth (in your example) In Orlanthi society: if you are a male, act like Orlanth, if a female, like Ernalda. If you are a plowman, act like Barntar, if a charioteer, like Mastakos. If you're a warrior, act like one of the following: Orlanth, Humakt, Heler, Elmal, the Thunder Brothers, Urox, any greater hero. You are what you do, and what you do reflects your role model. Sometimes, as for the warrior, you have the choice how to do something, but mostly you are required to do what the master does. -- -- Joerg Baumgartner joe@sartar.toppoint.de