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