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, 25 May 1994, part 4 Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM Content-Return: Prohibited Precedence: junk --------------------- From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly) Subject: Re: Gods in Different lands Message-ID: <9405242018.AA09161@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu> Date: 24 May 94 20:18:18 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4142 Paul Reilly here. Well, there are a lot of things to reply to. Just one for now. A good point is made by Aden Steinke, who writes: >>>>> Yes - while regional variation is necessary to provide spice to the gaming environment, and such things as hero questing and regional practices can give this variation - overall the Dieties in Glorantha are real and present in a direct manner not experienced here on Earth. As such the basics of creed/practice/behavior should be the almost the same eveywhere a God is worshipped - Humakti would not be assasins, Orlanthi would not have local relationships with Chaos - or the God would step in and either by cuting off renewable divine magic and intervention or by reprisal. Otherwise you are saying that the Gloranthan Gods are not 'real' self willed entities with likes and dislikes. If behavior or structure is pleasing to Humakt in one place it should be pleasing in another. <<<<< I used to think very much this way, and still think that there is a lot of consistency between regions. HOWEVER, I believe that the gods are big and complex entities with many faces, and appear differently to different worshippers, partly on the basis of the worshippers' expectations. Consider a standard western society Earthwoman for a moment. Look how differently she appears and acts to her children, her husband, her mother, her lover, her dog, her best friend, her employer, the annoying stranger on the bus, a waiter, etc. To each person her behavior is very different - she would never call her waiter "babycakes" or start an argument with him over money, she is respectful and demure to her employer, etc. People at the office might not even recognize her in her dominatrix outfit. So even a human can seem wildly different in different environments. With gods the differences can be even greater. Humakt may seem very different from Humct but they could have a common core. Orlanth Rex and Orlanth Househusband (in Esrolia) could be the same person, like a high-powered executive at the office or with his domineering wife at home. (Note that the domineering wife may act subservient in front of people from the office if she thinks that that will enhance her husband's power and hence her own.) Etc, etc. --------------------- From: eco0kkn@cabell.vcu.edu (Kirsten K. Niemann) Subject: Format for Future RQ products Message-ID: <9405242041.AA01853@cabell.vcu.edu> Date: 24 May 94 20:41:48 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4143 Hello all. Mike Dawson here, not Kirsten Niemann I am working on several product pitches for Avalon Hill (as developer.) One of the recurring complaints about past books is that they are too expensive. In an effort to fix this, and to give players something to buy for themselves, I am considering organizing material for an area/subject into two books. The first, large book would be the GM book. Probably 64-96 pages and full of all the secret, GM level scenario stuff needed to start or add to a campaign. This would run around $12 or a bit more, if the page count went up to 96. The second, smaller book would be for players, around 32-48 pages. It would hold any pertinent cult writeups, character creation or pre-gen PCs as appropriate, cultural information and character level knowledge that would be needed to go along with the GM book. This would be around $10, again depending on the total page count. For example, a current project is "Soldiers of the Red Moon." This was originally pitched as a single book, containing background and scenarios for starting grunt Lunar soldiers in a newly formed legion from the provinces. Instead of doing one book, I suggest that "Soldiers of the Red Moon" be the player's book, with info on the provinces, provincial army, 7 Mothers cult, etc. After reading this, a player would have somewhere between 25-50% "Lunar Provincial Army Lore" skill. While specifically helpful for the following GM book, it would be useful for anyone in or running a game with Lunar characters or NPCs. The GMs book, tentatively titled "In Service to the Emperor" would contain the scenarios based around the training of the new recruits, their participation in the founding ceremonies, the trip to Sartar, and their duty as they attempt to intercede in a clan war while maintaining lunar interests. Comments are strenuously solicited. Mike -- ------------ Gloranthophiles need to contact me at codexzine@aol.com for information about Codex Magazine. UK Gloranthophiles write to cphillips@blue.demon.co.uk "Inquiries into the nature and secrets of Glorantha" . ------------------------------------------------------/_\ --------------------- From: 100270.337@CompuServe.COM (Nick Brooke) Subject: "Very Unheroic" Message-ID: <940524214537_100270.337_BHL61-1@CompuServe.COM> Date: 24 May 94 21:45:37 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4144 _____ Sam's free one-page supplement included: > Q: How many Gregs does it take to change a light bulb? > A: One, but how often does Greg need to change the goddam light bulb? Which had me rolling in the aisles! (Not that the others didn't, but this was particularly fine). _______________ Somebody wrote: > Well yes Nick, they do but I thought that this was the _RQ_Digest. Implying, I presume, that I should tell lies about the relative ages of RuneQuest and Glorantha, out of deference to my hosts' sensibilities? ;-) ____________ Devin wrote: > I would also be curious as to what kinds of compaigns the "scholars" > are running. My hunch is that they do tend to be microcosmic, very > unheroic (i.e. concerned with day-to-day-living), and tend to be short- > lived (i.e. they run a bunch of short term regional campaigns as opposed > to a long-lived and/or heroic/world-spanning campaign). Am I right or > wrong? Wrong, for the most part. Assuming you include me as a "scholar". ;-) Microcosmic, yeah. See my post yesterday for details. We prefer developing the depth of our campaign settings to the shallower, broad-brush approach. Others prefer foreign travel, I know, but to me the old Inter-rail cliche springs to mind: "It's Fireday, this must be Teshnos." I wonder if your interest in standardising religions and societies across the world is in some way connected to the speed with which you move through it? Like the Hilton Hamburger: the creeping Americanisation of Gloranthan cultures. Unheroic, no. We have heroquested, fought in battles, travelled to distant foreign lands (Heortland; Lunar Tarsh; the Grazelands) and fabled cities (Boldhome, Durengard, Bagnot). But we're loyal to our clan and tribe, and always do our bit at the harvests, weapontakes and tribal moots. Only if "heroic" means "powergaming" (as I at first thought your posting implied) are we Greydogs "unheroic". Short-lived, by no means! Although our games are infrequent, David's Sartar Campaign has been running longer than I've known him. Characters have grown from uninitiated youths to near-Rune level. Steve's character, Corwen, is now a Sword of Humakt, but he's a bit strange -- the rest of us are more normal. > In any case, does creativity require inconsistency and multiplicity? Well, I suppose we could separately develop identical new ideas (indeed, Paul and I take it as "proof" we're on the right track when this happens), but barring coincidences of Shakespeare's monkeys' proportions, it's more likely that campaigns will become inconsistent. They're already multiple. > GroY (which I don't yet have) seems to now postulate a bunch of other > Yelmalio clones, so the trend is growing. Not so, IMHO -- and I have read the Glorious ReAscent (a bit). Unless my understanding of the word "clone" is very different to yours. There are two Dara Happan gods who have similarities in some respects to Yelmalio: a god of War (Shargash), and a god of Emperors (Antirius). The similarities are tenuous, and the nature and substance of these deities is, I think, wholly unlike that of Yelmalio. > If Glorantha is not a vehicle to play RQ in, then what exactly is it? Hmmm... why did nobody ask Greg that, back in '66? ==== Nick ==== --------------------- From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk Subject: One True, RuneQuest-friendly, Glorantha? Message-ID: <9405242226.AA12797@keppel.dcs.gla.ac.uk> Date: 24 May 94 22:26:36 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4145 > Devin Cutler here again: > "and not necessarily the players, either. Should the GMly > public be given a nice, simple, set-in-concrete wind-up Glorantha, with > no need, or scope, for significant creative or editorly input? Many GMs > would, and indeed already have, complained about this." > Why do I need to be creative about the rules? Why do I need to be creative > about cults even? I prefer to concentrate my creativity on scenarios and the > role-playing session. The trouble with a One True Glorantha is that many people may not like it. If there is inconsistency, it may annoy some people, but if Glorantha was a rigid orthodoxy, then anyone who happened to dislike it would be considerably more disadvantaged. You may not like the Elmal/Yelmalio schism, but at least the currently espoused attitude makes it relatively painless to ignore. > "How many > people who write, or post, about Glorantha aren't also players (or refs) > of the game?" > I wonder that myself sometimes, given the level of unconsideration to gaming > issues on this Daily. Perhaps an informal poll is in order? I think most of what goes on here has gaming implications, though not, perhaps, direct gaming application. As a "hardware zine", the Daily leaves much to be desired, I suppose. (I'm a player, and more recently ref., though currently inactive, if the poll starts here.) > > The gamers tend to focus on the game mechanics. > > [...] We simply put entertainment value first and foremost. > "Games mechanics as entertainment? Whatever turns you on, I suppose. The > whole "entertainment" line of thought seems to be very much a matter of > personal taste." > Are you a journalism major? You have misquoted me. Indeed I have not. Perhaps you wish to claim that I have quoted you without due context, but the above two, complete sentences were quoted intact, and I'd be rather offended if it were seriously suggested that I'd done otherwise. > In my quote above, I never > directly equated game mechanics with entertainment. Did I say you did? I simply quoted two things which you stated as being true of Gamers, and inferred that you were suggesting them to be corrolated in some unspecified way. > That ellipse you inserted > represents words separating the two concepts, which are in completely > different sentences. The ellipses represent two sentences, which separated the two concepts merely textually. I don't see what your objection is, unless you think I should quote you only by the whole paragraph, or if you perhaps require a less subtle convention than bracketed ellipses to indicate deletions. For the record, the vital two sentences are: > 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. i.e., seemingly miscellenous assertions about Gamers, which don't appear to me to qualify either of the two originally quoted sentences in any way which would seriously misrepresent their meaning when quoted thusly. > "Leaving aside whether this is yet Holy Writ, how exactly would this fact > involve itself in the scenario, and how would the players ever discover > that said fact was false? " > If I can figure out a way to explain the particular scenario (it was a > practice run heroquest) without divulging info to my players, I will do so if > interest is there. Suffice to say that certain parts of the scenario woud be > implausible were Kolat to be a godlearner construct. Heroquest does not unnecessarily distinguish between GL constructs and other entities, and I can't in fact think of any way it would, unless the HQer had other information which would indicate this. This goes double for a practice HQ, where interaction with the Godplane is limited. > I can give another example, however. What if I had set up an ancient ruined > temple to Kolat that was supposedly sacked in the First Age (before the God > Learners). Voila! Despite any rationalizations that it only matters what PC's > believe, etc, my scenario is screwed. Given that Kolat appears to be worshipped shamanically, not theistically, that'd be an unlikely occurrence. And if such did exist, determining which Age it was built in would require rather a lot of archeological expertise on the part of the characters, I think. > No amount of Heroquesting is going to retroactively > create a First Age Temple for a god created in a later age. Au contraire. > "I'm not wild about comparisons which stress the alleged differences in the > nature of religion and deity between Glorantha and Earth. Particularly the > ones on the lines of "Earthly religions are mere ad hoc superstition, > Gloranthan ones are based on Obvious True Facts." " > Does this mean you see no difference between real life religions and > Gloranthan religions!? I'm suggesting the difference is commonly exaggerated. > Also, I was careful not to state that Earthly religions are superstitions or > untrue. Again, you are assuming an intent that I never made. You're asserting an assumption I didn't indulge in. > What's wrong with making something up from scratch? Because it's impossible, for one thing. And if you tried, it'd look correspondingly artificial. > Do you really mean to say > that anything that is not originated from a Terran analogue is unworthy for > inclusion? No. That's why I didn't. > Um...if Glorantha is not a vehicle to play RQ in, then what exactly is it? > Maybe this is what our difference boils down to. At the very least, somewhere to play Pendragon Pass, Glorantha: the Game, the 3 (well, two and a bit) boardgames, and yes, somewhere to read, and write, and argue about. > "Why, if we "dry scholars" are so irrelevant to good gaming, not just > ignore these Dangerous Revisions, and play in _your_ (RuneQuest-friendly) > Glorantha?" > Because I would like to see my RQ-friendly Glorantha grow and thrive along > with the RQ game. Unfortunately for the Scholars, this requires new blood. > New people who are not going to be completely put off and intimidated by the > game and its practitioners. I think what we have is a squabble among the cogniscenti, which is not even going to be particularly _visible_ to newcomers, much less a deterent to taking up the game. Given the stagnation of the player base, the last thing we need is to have one particular view imposed on it, which would do far more to alienate those existing players whose existing diversity is thereby hosed. Alex. --------------------- From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk Subject: Kolat, etc. Message-ID: <9405242228.AA12804@keppel.dcs.gla.ac.uk> Date: 24 May 94 22:28:05 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4146 Nick Brooke: > Devin: > >> 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. > Boris: > > Where did this bit of retconning get revealed? > Can't recall offhand. But if it's true, Kolat has existed in Godtime since > the Second Age. Where's the problem? One might argue that there are two (plus?) different notions here, the Moment, and what happened "before Time" in the sense of pre-history, and the Godplane, the place where one goes when one worships, or heroquests. One might that these are the same thing, or that one or other is an inherently infeasible notion, but that's a separate (set of) issue(s). > [...] given > that there are five Storm Brothers (Kolat, Storm Bull, Vadrus, Humakt, > Orlanth), but knowing that Storm Bull is brother to Ragnaglar, the old list > doesn't quite work. Details, details. At any rate, Kolat is certainly believed to have been one of the brothers by most Orlanthi, albeit not one that's directly worshipped. Kolatings, etc, after all. You'd not be a popular entity if you accused your friendly neighbourhood shaman of being a God Learner Dupe, to say the least. Alex. --------------------- From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk Subject: The prophesies of Saint David in the Hall. Message-ID: <9405242229.AA12808@keppel.dcs.gla.ac.uk> Date: 24 May 94 22:29:42 GMT X-RQ-ID: 4147 David Hall: > I stand by Nick in his views that "the idea that all Malkioni saints are > recognised and worshipped by all of the sects (is) ludicrous, and will not > countenance it." So do I, but I suspect the controversy isn't so much about the "all", as "how many". Sandy: > >[...] Clearly, there are no "false" saints, especially since any saint > >must gain his powers from the Invisible God. > This would seem to me to make the beliefs of the worshippers of the various > sects of Malkionism irrelevant (and merely game contructs). [...] > As long as you worship from the Standard List of Saints you are fine > and dandy. Personally, I don't think the sects even agree as to _how_ to worship saints, much less exactly who's on the list. On one extreme, we have the henotheistic-style types, who worship "saints" as others would gods (or as Joerg suggests, gods _as_ Saints), ranging via the quasi-cultish Saint worship of most Hrestoli, and the more "lip-service" worship of others, where only special sorcery would be granted by a saint, to the other extreme of hard-core Rokari, who reject all active worship of saints, deeming that they have now gone to Solace, can't therefore manifest any legitimately Invisible Goddish powers, and so any entity claiming to do so is obviously a False God masquerading as a saint. As the the Very Reverend Doctor Eeven Bayslee of the Tiskos Free Unitarian Church of Saint Rokar, spiritual mentor to the "Felster says No!" movement, would say (and indeed, regularly does, and six times on Clayday): "Episcopal idolators!" > I wonder > if a Galvosti who has Gerlant as his patron saint gets magic, or is he > denied this because he is of a "false" and fringe sect? He probably doesn't. His religion may well still "acknowledge" St. Gerlant, though, to some degree, and in some capacity. > Gosh! What about the Castle Coasters - they think there is a fifth caste! They do? What's the story here? What is it, even? > In Glorantha belief and faith lend substance to religion. The Galvosti > believe that tapping non-malkioni is correct, and is Malkion's and the > Invisible God's commandment. And so it is, for they believe it.> Saint Rokar, who who > instituted the caste immobilty of the Rokari, is not recognised by the > Hrestoli. I'm not sure I agree with this, for reasons given by others, but I think David is correct, at least, to "get down to cases". We won't get very far trying to decide what every sect believes about every saint, all in the one breath, but if we consider each such on its putative merits, we might get somewhere, if only something concrete to flame each other about. > There are some who may try and claim that there is only one true Invisible > God from whom all powers come. This is false and it is true. It is false > since the powers are different for each sect, as different as their > theological doctrines, and thus the source is surely different. You mean Saint-granted powers, or the clerical magic of the IG, to wit, sorcery? If the latter, I don't think Malkioni believe sorcery is granted directly by the IG, but rather, it's that form of magic arising from the natural world which has been ordained as being "proper". > If only we can all get together, > thrash out our minor disagreements, and in the Holy Spirit of the > Compromise, found a United Church of Malkion! The Compromise? Clearly a crypto-Sytgianist. Burn, baby, burn. > Join us at the 7th Ecclesiastical Council of Malkion at Sog City University > in Storm Season 1625 and together we will forge a new creed. One for all > and all have Won! Talk about advertising on the stable door after the horse has been flogged off at the stud market. Alex.