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, Wed, 18 May 1994, part 3 Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM Content-Return: Prohibited Precedence: junk --------------------- From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (Alex Ferguson) Subject: Replies ahoy. (Saints, Peloria, cities, more stuff) Message-ID: <9405172214.AA05925@pebble.dcs.gla.ac.uk> Date: 17 May 94 22:14:36 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4048 Sandy, confusing Lokarnos and Mastakos, as he is wont: > I make this stupid mistake all the time. What did I tell you all? ;-) > Not only do the damn names sound alike, but they're both gods > of movement. If only Mastakos had a more Orlanthi-sounding name. For > some reason his name sounds Pelorian to me. You're not kidding. In fact, if you pseudo-etymoligise "Mastakos" from the unknown form of Dara Happan and/or Pelorian found in GRAY, you end up with "Changing Air" (or perhaps "Good Change"). Maybe Greg believes in some sort of quasi-pan-Gloranthan Noscritic-type proto-language, or something equally weird. I can see players demands every language default to 1/10 value in every other language now. > Nick Brooke sez: > >someone else who claimed to officially know it [God Learner secret] > >said that he could explain it in 5 words, but was rather put out > >when I told him Greg said he could explain it in three! > I could probably do it in three [...] I wonder if we all now have second-and-a-half-ary knowledge of it. > Unlike Earthly saints, Malkioni > saints give actual magic powers to their devotees. Clearly, there are > no "false" saints, especially since any saint must gain his powers > from the Invisible God. I think this is fishy: after all, much the same could be said about the False Gods, and indeed isn't. I suspect there are radical sects of Malkioni who think that worship of Saints who grant such powers is, in fact, crypo-Stygianism. > [...] Saint Rokar can be worshiped by the Hrestoli. > All they need do is claim that the Rokari have "perverted" the > original saint's teachings. Indeed they could, or they could claim him to be a False God, or that the Rokari mode of worship of him is Stygianist, or whatever other dirt they can dig up. (Not necessarily a great example, but I'm sure it's said of some, by other's adherents.) > In addition, I believe that mainstream Malkioni have the > belief that any good Malkioni, of whatever sect, can attain Solace. I suspect this is true, but I insist that we don't neglect the non- mainstream. Wee Free Rokari, anyone? > >Does this mean there is no pure-broadleaf forests in all of Glorantha? > You mean besides in the tropics? Yes, I mean pure "brown", as opposed to "yellow". Should have said "deciduous", in this context, I spose. I'll try to dig up some earthly facts before opining further. > I suspect whale song is "personal", varying with the > individual whale, rather than with the pod. No, at least for orca, the variation is (broadly) by pod. I'd not be surprised if the baleen whales were Making It Up As They Went Along, though. > Especially when you > consider that a whale's song can be heard for hundreds, even > thousands of miles under the sea (so I've read). Not true for "little" whales, though. > This would imply > that whales may have a species-wide "culture", which is what I'm > suggesting for trolls. I agree that trolls do, broadly (with some exceptions) have the same (alleged) culture, but I don't think this is (entirely) because it's based on instinct. > >Is Peloria really very monoculturous? I'm sure all sorts of grains > >are found in various places about Peloria, > I'm sure this is true, but even if you get lots and lots of > different kinds of grains, your diet is still fairly dull without any > meat. And I believe that in much of Peloria, poor peasants get little > meat, whereas I believe that an equally poor Orlanthi eats goat or > venison on a fairly regular basis. Yes, I'd agree with this: Peloria is more citified (so more poor people who haven't just starved to death) and not unrelatedly, more inclined to "large-scale" arable farming, so more grain, and (proportionately) less meat. On the other hand, poor Orlanthi _do_ eat more vegetables... "Less venison, more turnip." > Someone said: > >>Light Priests may become Yelm the Elder members, their children may > >>become Yelm initiates > What if _only_ the kids a Light Priest had _after_ becoming a > Yelm the Elder got to be Yelm candidates? Well, maybe not. I assumed that was what Joerg meant. Personally, I think the reaction to this would be "who was he having sex with, and more to the point, why?" Wouldn't work for Harvar, though... Martin Crim: > Gary Newton (isaac@twics.com) asks about compatibility of magic > across the good old GL divisions. > [...] A weaker analogy, which I came up with myself, is > that it's like training yourself to be a doctor or a lawyer. Perhaps being a nuclear fusion specialist and a hippy mystic aromatherapist simultaneously would be a more pointed comparison. Hippy mystic nuclear fusion physicist cum aromatherapists need not reply to this message. > Re: Heroplane > Alex says, "assuming it has an 'objective' existance [sic]." You > know what happens when you assume, don't you? Or is that > just an American joke? It must be, I think. At any rate, I meant "assuming for the purposes of talking about it", not "assuming, since it's obviously true". We customarily speak of it as existing in a "not purely mythical" sense, though, since if it isn't, our model for heroquesting is going to have (even) more problems than we thought. Of course, agreeing that the heroplane exists objectively would be a bit like agreeing that all moral values were absolute: it'd still leave the small matter of what they _were_. > Alex on Peter: "Peter said 'What if there were a mythic "truce" > or mutual understanding between Solar and Storm worshipers?' > (pardon my paraphrase, Peter)." > Well, I don't know if Peter will or not, but I think you > ought to go back and look at what he wrote before you use that > particular paraphrase. 'tain't what he said, nor even close. Well, it may (well) not paraphrase _everything_ he was saying, but it was what he appeared to be saying on the aspect I addressed myself to. That he was also making a more general point about mythic reinterpretation changing reality shouldn't prevent me from picking holes in his example, even if I agree with said point. > Nick in X-RQ-ID: 4011 finds the GoG statement of all-saints-to- > all-cults ludicrous, and will not countenance it. > [...] In Islam, Jesus and John the Baptist, along with the Hebrew > prophets, are recognized prophets. While perfectly true, this doesn't really go to Nick's point. That different religions or sects share _some_ deities/prophets/saints isn't very compelling evidence that if two religions agree as to who their important figures are, they have to agree on _everyone_. After all, Jesus and John _predate_ the founding of Islam, while most (?) saints cropped up afterwards. The more divided a religion is, the more desparate the hand-waving required for them to "share" common entities becomes. David Dunham: > Alex Ferguson said > >I've noted that city-dwellers are an irreverent lot. > Another possibility is that city dwellers are a far more reverent lot. > Right there, within walking distance, is a Major Temple. It's _easy_ to be > religious! You don't have to walk two days just to get to a temple! You can > show up every week! I'm sure temple attendances aren't bad (at least on Holy Days), but I think the total ammount of religious commitment is likely to fall off. Perhaps not much of a factor in "cozy" Sartarite cities, though. I wonder if weekly worship makes much of an impact on the religious "oomph" of a temple/cult: we may have to wait for The Primal Order: Glorantha to find out. Alex. --------------------- From: DevinC@aol.com Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Tue, 17 May 1994, part 1 Message-ID: <9405171918.tn214909@aol.com> Date: 17 May 94 23:18:48 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4049 Devin Cutler here: Jesper Wahrner makes some good points about RQ and Glorantha, but I think he fails to realize that their will always be a schism between Glorantha as a literary creation and Glorantha (RQ) as a game. While a good literary creation does have to possess internal consistency, it does not have to provide, in full view of the public, a formulised mechanism for its inner workings. Because a literary creation is bereft of such a requirement, it can be as imaginative and complex and as richly woven as the author's mind can imagine. A game, needing to provide consistent functional mechanics with which to describe not only a finite list of set circumstances which might arise in a literary creation, butalso any number of infinite situations that will arise during role playing, can only approach accurate description of a literary setting at a cost of complexity and playability. Let's face it, for RQ to mirror Glorantha even closely, the way Glorantha is currently evolving (i.e. one god = 250 cults or vice versa), there would probably need to be a 50,000 page rulebook. This dichotomy between Glorantha (the literary creation) and RQ (the gaming creation) is often at the heart of many of the debates on the net. It is also, IMHO, one that is key to the question of RQ's survival (and Glorantha's) and has roots in my well documented beefs with Greg Stafford. I will leave my finer points to anyone wanting to discuss this with me in private, but suffice to say that I see two camps in the RQ/Glorantha field: 1) The Scholars 2) The Gamers The scholars really tend to focus on Glorantha as literary creation. They tend to despise the RQ rules as God "Learnerisms" and generally seem more interested in Glorantha as a vehicle for examining ethno/socio/mythological processes rather than as a medium for entertainment. The gamers tend to focus on the game mechanics. They enjoy Glorantha for the most part, but only as a vehicle in which to enjoy role playing games. Not all gamers (I include myself here) are hack and slashers. We simply put entertainment value first and foremost. We still crave a consistent and "realistic" gaming world, just not one that has become hostile to the fact that it was designed to be gamed in, not to serve as a tool of study. IMHO, Glorantha is daily becoming more and more hostile to Gamers. The constant switching and playing around with "game world history", et el, makes it extremely difficult to engage in any sort of campaign. For example, I try to follow Glorantha as much as I can, but I do not enjoy setting up an entire scenario around the fact that Kolat existed in Godtime, and then finding out that he was a God Learner construct. Similarly, despite any brilliant explanations to explain the Elmal/Yelmalian switcheroo, the move sucks, and has really bolluxed a number of campaigns out here in California. Changing rules (i.e. from RQ2 to RQ3) is one thing, and that can be traumatic enough to a campaign that strives for internal consistency, but taking established facts (i.e. in CoP, Yelmalio IS the one who is revered by Hill Barbarians, he IS the one ambushed at the Hill of Gold, he IS the one worshipped in Dragon Pass) and then tossing them into the shitter really rubs me the wrong way. Similarly, I am becoming less enamoured of how cults are being handled. Why this need for so many different cultic variations over Glorantha (i.e. "...what we really need is a cult of Yelmalio for Peloria, one for Prax, one of Pavis, one for Grazelanders, one for Sartar...")? Yes, cults varied wildly here on earth, but Glorantha is not earth. I do not find it unreasonable in the least to find that, say, Humakt is worshipped in exactly the same manner in Esrolia, Prax, and Ralios. Why? Because Humakt lives in the world of Glorantha. He speaks directly with his worshippers, he shatters the swords of apostates, he grants Divine Magic. In other words, unlike Terran deities, which are notoriously absent from direct intervention during modern times, the Gloranthan deities manifest themselves actively and continually. I do not find it unreasonable to believe that Humakt himself, through Divinations and the like, has prescribed a single mode of worship throughout Glorantha. I mean, let's face it, if the Jews were constantly receiving direct updates from Yaweh on a weekly basis, Judaism (or any other religion) would probably become a very uniform affair. Regional differences in religions arise because of human interpretations (which differ) regarding how God wants people to act. Back to the two camps, suffice to say that I don't see the purpose of Glorantha as primarily a means of mirroring and examining Terran people's relationships with myths, and therefore, Gloranthan society should not deign to mirror Terran analogues. I see Glorantha as a superb place in which to role play Runequest. As long as the scholars continue to "run the show", I feel that Glorantha will likely become a wonderful literary creation (and fiction should be published) but will die as a game. Certainly, new players will be extremely intimidated by a game system where the world can change at a whim, where the gods they read about in one supplement (GoG or CoP) are determined to be later constructs in another. Such multiplicity and changeability make for great scholarly debates but they really bite when you try and GM in that environment. Regards, Devin Cutler devinc@aol.com --------------------- From: ddunham@radiomail.net (David Dunham) Subject: Initiate divine magic; Thanes; Gustbran Message-ID: <199405180255.AA16604@radiomail.net> Date: 18 May 94 02:55:38 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4050 Jonas said (about Tricksters) >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. The RQ:Adventures in Glorantha rule is that initiates can regain one point of divine magic every year. (I now use something similar in PenDragon Pass). This means the proto-priest doesn't have 9 points of POW totally wasted while he waits to become a priest, but still makes Rune level much better (priests get rune magic back the way they always have, one point per day of prayer). and about Orlanth Rex in Heroes I.4: >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? My interpretation is that "thane" is an Orlanthi title which is probably best translated as "noble." In an East Wilds tribe, only the clan chieftains are considered to be thanes (though I suspect Aruzban Ironarm has named the members of his Ring as thanes). In more-civilized Sartar, not only members of a tribal Ring, but other leading individuals are granted the title of thane. Don't forget that many of the thanes mentioned are weaponthanes (these are called housecarls in the East Wilds). This is a term of respect for their combat ability [probably 90% skill if not Rune Lord], but they don't have the privileges of true thanes. Sandy said >Sure, Gustbran is a pure smith god, but I don't think the >lowfires are worshiped much by themselves -- I picture them as >subcults, not associates. Subcults of who? I have a smith character in my Ralios game, who was just initiated to Orlanth but is interested in Gustbran. It seems unlikely that there would be Lodril worship in the East Wilds (or Sartar) -- King of Sartar characterizes Lodril as being an enemy deity since he's from the Fire Tribe. BTW, Gustbran is a semi-popular deity in Sartar [KoS.246], though it would appear there aren't many temples [no mention on KoS.255]. >If only Mastakos had a more Orlanthi-sounding name Gosh, Greg got a name right! Mastakos isn't originally Orlanthi, he was captured from the Sea Tribe. Klaus said >I would think that Gustbran, god of smiths, would have enchant bronze I give it to him in my campaign. Although, with few initiates, it's probably difficult to get most of the magic. --------------------- From: garydj@ditard.dit.gov.au Subject: Trees and other woodlands Message-ID: <9404187692.AA769290925@ditard.dit.gov.au> Date: 18 May 94 10:55:25 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4051 Alex asked whether there were any pure broadleaf forests in Glorantha. Sandy responded he didn't know of any. He wrote all the forests he has seen in North America were a mix of evergreens and conifers. In Australia, we have few native conifers. Almost all the native trees are angiosperms. They keep their leaves all year round whether they live in the tropics or the more temperate south. I'm no botanist, but the only native conifers in Australia I know live in tiny isolated pockets, usually in mountainous areas. All the natural forests I have ever seen are made up of native "evergreen" angiosperms and a few exotic conifers, chiefly the ubiquitous pinus radiata. I can certainly imagine the mixed forests Sandy talks about, but I've never seen one. In Gloranthan terms, I don't see why there wouldn't be some pure broadleaf forests. Earlier, Sandy wrote there must be some green elves in brown elf areas, presumably to ward the forests in winter. Therefore, there would have to be some conifers in every forest. I don't see such a compelling need. I imagine the brown elves locate defensive plants around the edge of the forest to protect it during winter. I expect such passive defenses involving a bewildering array of impenetrable thickets, poisonous thorns, camouflaged traps and carnivorous plants are as important as elf warriors in protecting the forest from its enemies, be they human, troll, dwarf or elf. I'd like to think somewhere in Glorantha there are forests of temperate non deciduous angiosperms. Maybe in Pamaltela or Jrustela. If there are such forests, would they be populated by brown elves, green elves or some other race of elves (gray? orange?). Maybe the reason there doesn't seem any such forests is the gray/orange/whatever elves are extinct. Any ideas anyone? Sandy explained that Jrustela was once "a great big, rather pear shaped" continent before being destroyed/submerged by the Waertagi and the Gift Bringers. Tell us more. Did it have a land god? (Jrust?) Were the East Isles once a continent? Could Jrustela be destroyed/submerged because it didn't have a land god or because its god was dead, like Genert? I always thought of Jrustela as a big fragment of the Spike which somehow survived destruction in Godtime. Gary --------------------- From: 100270.337@CompuServe.COM (Nick Brooke) Subject: Heaven or Hell or Dusseldorf? Message-ID: <940518070624_100270.337_BHL45-1@CompuServe.COM> Date: 18 May 94 07:06:24 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4052 _______ Martin: > Nick has his usual gracious and so-relevant comments about the legal > profession (whilst misreading what I said). Beats me why, when we're > all friends here. Well, nobody else complained so I guess they all agree with me ;-) Nah, I was just making that Netiquette point. Nothing personal at all. Only legal in that the most tedious man in history (I SHOULD KNOW!) also thought that way, and was also a lawyer. Sorry if you took it amiss. Wicked Nick! Bad Nick! Naughty Nick! I'll shut up, now... _____ Joerg tells us: > 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 remember a Central American people who found out the Christian heaven was full of Spaniards, and decided they didn't want to go there after all... _____ Sandy on troll smiths: > in fact, [Lodril]'s the ONLY smith god among trolls) What about their demigod Gadblad? And where does all this "foolish/peevish" stuff come from? Did I inadvertently do something to piss you off? _________ On Runes: > In a very early writing by Greg, he stated that the Runes > were largely unknown to the population at large. Initiates of temples > learned their own cult Runes in big secret ceremonies, and that was > about it. Most folks didn't even know that other religions had Runes, > too, and thought that only their own society had this great secret. > Obviously that's not the case in Third Age Glorantha, but it > might have been in First Age. I like to think it was the Middle Seas > Empire that spread knowledge of the Runes around the globe. I like that interpretation, too. The God Learners would also have codified the runes, turning the various Dara Happan solar eye-emblems, Orlanthi spirals, etc. into their "pure" forms we're all familiar with. It was refreshing to find a bunch of "unorthodox" runes in the margins of a new (and very good) French fanzine, "La Toile d'Arachne' Solara" ("Arachne Solara's Weaving"): some are simple changes or weird variants, others apparently unconnected to the usual set. BTW, Dan Barker and Jon Quaife are very keen on developing some variety in the acceptable forms of runes. __________ On Saints: Thanks to Martin for a better expression of how 'development' occurs. I think Mohammed and Martin Luther are perhaps better examples of how sect- founders/heresiarchs are treated in the real world by the churches they leave behind them. And, indeed, Joseph Smith: not many copies of his Book of Mormon (or Mohammed's Koran, for that matter) in my local church. > Unlike Earthly saints, Malkioni saints give actual magic powers to > their devotees. Clearly, there are no "false" saints, especially since > any saint must gain his powers from the Invisible God. We English burnt Joan of Arc as a witch. Her followers said her "visions" came from God, but they didn't fool us. Given the "hands-off" approach of the Invisible God (no, Martin, not an Islamic reference ;-), and the old, underdeveloped hints of a Faustian Gloranthan demonology in the West, it seems to me your qualification isn't universally valid. 'Heresies' can be battle-proven -- Asgolan Fields springs to mind -- in which case, is the Invisible God on the side of the big battalions? Not so, sez I: Bailifes' Hrestoli and Stygian opponents would leave the field complaining that he somehow 'cheated'. Or that God was smiting them to chastise them for their pride/other sins (cf. Attila the Hun, "The Scourge of God"). But not that one victory in battle had "proved" the righteousness of Bailifes' Rokari faith. > In addition, I believe that mainstream Malkioni have the belief that > any good Malkioni, of whatever sect, can attain Solace. Naturally, it's > easiest in _insert_name_here_ sect. Sadly, I find this 'reasonable' attitude too wishy-washy to be much fun if generally applied in the West (though there could well be pockets of it -- somewhere in Ralios seems a reasonable bet). There are more role-playing possibilities (and more entertaining historic inspirations) to be gained by adopting a "real-world", hate-the-heretics approach. Though, of course, I pray daily for the success of the upcoming Seventh Malkioni Ecclesiastical Council... ==== Nick ==== PS: by staying on at work til midnight for a week or so, I've convinced my bosses to give me next weekend off. See you German RQers in Dusseldorf! ---------------------