Bell Digest v940625p2

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, Sat, 25 Jun 1994, part 2
Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
Content-Return: Prohibited
Precedence: junk


---------------------

From: DevinC@aol.com
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 24 Jun 1994, part 6
Message-ID: <9406240514.tn114637@aol.com>
Date: 24 Jun 94 09:14:48 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4797

Devin Cutler here:

Alex writes:

""a journalism major" (some Quaint Colonialist Insult, I understand), if
one does so."

Yeah, just like when I was in England and everyone on the street told me to
"bugger off", I determined that this was a quaint English way of saying
"Hello" ;-)

"(and I can see
Devin Cutler lathering up at the mouth already)"

RRRROOOOORRRRWWWWFFFFF!!!!!!!!! GGGRRRRRRRR!!!!!!

"They are?  Not impossible, but not likely, I don't think, and not an
explanation to be invoked every time someone strays from the One True
Cult Writeup.  Are all the B'stards in the KoW worshipping Humakt
illuminated,
too?"

Well, I can't say for sure about the Wild Chalanna Arroy Broo of the
Rockwoods, but the Broo Troops of Ralzakark are Illuminated (DLoD page 80).
His Chalanna Arroy Priestess is not specifically mentioned as illuminated,
but considering the trend with Ralzie, I would assume she is as well.

"But not from Glorantha.  In any case, RQ3 uses a different mechanism with
much the same upshot.  7D3 loss to each of four characteristics will
generally ruin your whole week, really."

Hmmm, how do you determine this...that is, what was dropped in RQ3 but not
from Glorantha?

In any case, in RQ3, one usually cannot survive even 5 days dead.

"Probably partially true, but in many cases the Spirit of Reprisal will be
summonned/invoked by a high priest, rather than dreaming it up all by itself,
or doing so under direct orders from God HQ."

I could actually see it happening both ways.

"So if I perform the rituals correctly, I am, by definition, devout?  This
merely leaves the question of how hard it is in practice to be Cynically
Devout."

Maybe a better way to phrase this (so as to reflect what I am saying) is that
if I am devout, I will perform the rituals correctly, not vice versa.

Jonas writes:

"Devin sums up the debate on history rather well, with the
best arguments I've seen so far (in this forum, that is)."

Thanks Jonas. It's nice to see someone at least giving my viewpoint some
credibility.

Scott writes about the availability of Resurrection.

I find that, from the few published materials like scenarios et al, that
Chalanna Arroy Priestesses DO seem to be fairly common and widespread.

Frex, in the River of Cradles area you have 4 in Pavis (per RQ2 Pavis Pack),
1 in Horngate, and several in the Sun Dome. This makes at least 7-8 all
within a 3-4 day journey of each other. Add a Teelo Norri Priestess in Pavis
to take care of Lunars and you're up to 8-9.

Hazard Fort has at least two Chalanna Arroy Priestesses (since on page 114,
Ashalla Cabble is called the "Ranking Healer Priestess. It also has a Teelo
Nori.

In Griffin Mountain, Elkoi has at least one such.

Admittedly, this is not a lot to go by, but then we don't have a lot of
published sceanrios. My point is, however, that it seems as if every
significant place has at least one Chalanna Arroy Priestess.

Regarding how many Resurrections that Priestess would have, if a Chalanna
Arroy Priestess is ordained at age 30, then she will get to make 6 POW gain
rolls (5 seasonal and 1 Sacred Time) per year. Assume she makes 2 of them.
This means that if she expends only half of her POW on Resurrections, she
will have 4 by the time she is 42 years old. I would hate to think of how
many such spells an old 60-70 year old Priestess would have, but it would
probably number around 20!!!!

Is this right? NO!!!! I agree with you that Resurrections should not be as
prevalent as presented. I have always thought that Chalanna Arroy
Resurrection should be one-use, but cost less than Seal Spirit or Daka Fal
Resurrection. Perhaps even as low as one point on-use.

As Glorantha currently stands, Resurrection seems to be widely available
throughout Sartar, Esrolia, Peloria, et al. I would love to see this reduced,
so that death doesn't become a joke.

David (Dunham, that is) writes:

"otherwise
how could his seers identify horrible fates and wisely impose geases on
newborn nobles?"

Hmm, this sounds interesting. From what source did you pick it up?

Nick writes:

"Whyever not? You're the man who claimed to have identified the breed. And 
reticence is hardly your forte."

Yes, I identified the breed and in my own dark depraved mind I might even
have my own opinions on who(m) I think is a scholar, but I don't want to
insult people or "call them names", so I rather thought that I would merely
bring up the issue and let people place themselves into the camp of their
choice. In any case, I thought it was very interesting to see who assumed
what. Quite a little experiment!

Regarding your quote re: Anthropology, I will try to find similar supporting
my beliefs. Tennis anyone?

"Especially if you cunningly conceal your expert knowledge of Ancient Earth 
behind a convincing facade of superficiality and ignorance."

No reply, see Sandy's request below.

"Saying "Glorantha IS just like Earth" -- does anyone really do this?

Saying it differs: fine, we all agree. It's when you get onto the psycho- 
logical and religious specifics of *how* Glorantha differs from Earth that 
our collective gorges rise. Explain if you will how the Aztecs, Samurai, 
Christian Martyrs, Jews at Masada, Nazis, and today's terrorists in the 
Middle East, Rwanda and Bosnia echo your sensibilities. These are, after 
all, people "profoundly similar" at "an instinctual level" to you and your 
so-called So Cal 'rational' attitudes. "

I can find similarities in all of them and will do so privately if you wish.

"Please look at this world, before telling me everyone in it is reasonable. 
For a self-proclaimed expert on World War 2 to assume this is so, is odd.

Yours, in deep psychological disturbance,"

I never said that a common shared trait of humainty was reasonableness. In
fact, I could quite argue the opposite.

Since we seem to be sinking into the depths of name-calling, why don't we
either continue this thread offline, where we might really rip into each
other without burdening the others, or I'll just end this thread and you can
consider yourself having triumphed over Southern California ignorance and
stupidity. OK?

Sandy writes:

"They breed with their god, who visits  
every single one of them once a year on a special sacred night. This  
arrangement suits them fine, as apparently sex with him is 294 times  
as good as with a normal man. "

Cool!

Sandy also goes through some formulae for how Resurrection would be
unavailble in a large town for everyone to use.

I agree with this exercise. In my own campaign, I do not use Chalanna Arroy
Resurrect on the First Come First Served basis. Like you Sandy, I think they
do evaluate the worthiness of the victim. Lightbringers (or Yelmists in a
Yelm-oriented Chalanna Arroy Temple) get precedence. Nobles and worthies over
beggars and thieves, etc. 

Aslo, I say that it is very difficult to find a Chalanna Arory with a freshly
ready Resurrect. Usually, my Player Characters, who are well known and
respected members of their community, have to wait at least a day on average,
to the apologies of the Priestesses "I pray your forgiveness my lords, but
Shrid the Fisherman lay in the Temple hall dead for most of the day and no
others were brought before me..."

In any case, I wonder if your analysis of 1% of the population being Healers
and only 3% of those Healers being Priestesses stacks up with what has been
presented.

Now, I happen to agree that you numbers make more sense. I imagine that,
despite the respect everyone pays you, being a healer is no easy chore,
requiring much dedication to one's job and a true love of helping the hurt.
But when I look at places like Hazard Fort or Pavis or SunDome, et al, I seem
to see a much larger proportion. Maybe it's just because these places are
special or especially dangerous. I don't know.

However, I note that it may be that your death rate for Gloranthans is a bit
low...what with the current state of instant Spirit Magic healing and easily
curable diseases. I have always imagined that the death rate in a Gloranthan
city of 10,000 to be fairly low as compared to a Terran ancient city 

(Uh Oh, here I go again contrasting Glorantha with Earth. I'd better but on
my asbestos jumpsuit!)

On your reply regarding runes, Sandy, you say that Dormal and Argan Argar own
the Communication Rune. Why doesn't Issaries own this?


"I'd like to suggest that both Nick and Devin consider cooling off for  
a day or two. To me, their discussion seems in places to be  
degenerating into considerations of and attacks on one another's  
background and training for the ministry. "

Fine, I will not post the rather vitriolic reply I had drafted to Nick's
latest mega-flame of me. However, I would like to request that even if you
disagree with me (Nick and others) that you not use terms like stupid,
ignorant, superficial etc. There is really no need for name calling, and I
don't think I have engaged in such, but if I have, I apologize. I have a
right to my opinions and a right to post them and stand by them without being
attacked personally or vitriolically.

Graeme writes:

"i) Resurrection as presented in the game is a remnant from the early 
(ie D&D) days of the hobby, when life and death were cheap. It should
either be removed (my attitude) or made a great deal more difficult
(many other people)."

You are right, it seems way too D&Dish. I could stomach it being removed
entirely, but I would rather have it more difficult.

Regards,

Devin Cutler
devinc@aol.com


---------------------

From: bchugg@leland.stanford.edu (Barron Chugg)
Subject: You bring the cult, we'll bring the god!
Message-ID: <199406240918.CAA14584@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 23 Jun 94 17:36:15 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4798



Colin Watson:
>
>____________
>Barron Chugg:
>>  This is the crux of my idea: that runemagic comes from within.  Now, you
>>cannot get it without following some path, that is to say, by emulating
>>your diety.  These pathes were created in the Godtime and are woven into
>>the very fabric of reality.  Religon, in my view, is just the following of
>>these pathes.
>
>This is an Outstandingly Cool Idea IMHO.
>

  Not exactly germaine to what I am going to say, but I am a sucker for
praise.  Anyway...

>My only quibble is: why does one *have* to follow an existing path?
>I propose that fresh paths can be forged and, if these new paths are
>subsequently well-trodden enough (by a cult-load of worshippers all doing
>the same magic in the same way) and the route is complex enough then
>eventually 
>a "new god" may form.
>Did this not happen with Zistor the Machine and the Red Goddess?
>Once the god-track is established then the magic becomes easier; but the
>downside is that it becomes vulnerable to other gods (cults).
>
>Hmm, the idea of gods forming around cults rather than cults forming around
>gods is interesting...

 (Sorry for quoting the whole quote, but it was well put.)

  People certainly _don't_ have to follow an existing path.  Most people
do, but there are plenty who have made their own.  These are (most often)
the Heroes and Super Heroes of the past.  They made a new way and people
followed those pathes.  I really like the comment about "becoming
vulnerable".  There is a very important bit on knowledge there, but I can't
for the life of me extreact it (HELP!).

  As for "which came first, the cult or the god?", I think the god comes
first.  Certainly the two reinforce one another, and I can imagine a clever
person convincing people to follow a previously unknown path.  As the path
fleshes out, the "aspects" of the god become clear.  Hmmm....


Greg Stafford by way of Henk:
>
>Yes I did like it. Feel free to forward my comment:
>
>Very Good analysis! The final point to close this might be to remember that
>our dissassociation of "internal" with "external" is very modern, and not a
>part of the magical realm. The apparant dichotomy of "Personal" and "Cosmic"
>is not the same.

  This is a bit more philosophical than I usually think, but it puts the
point well.  I was wondering if maybe I was going too far towards an
internal interpretation, now I feel a bit safer.  I grant that the way I am
looking at things revolves a heck of a lot more around the individual than
the usual image of Glorantha, but it works aweful well.  I keep having to
remind myself that people _in_ the world _always_ think about things from
an individual perspective.  The more I think of people as individuals the
less I imagine them as aspects of their culture.  I guess what I am saying
is that we spend too much time thinking about how the culture shapes the
person and too little about how the person shapes the culture.


On a slightly similar topic (well, it has gods in it...):

  This brings me to a question I have always wondered about.  Gods _have_
come into being since the Compromise (Arkat, Yelmalio, the Seven Mothers,
Dormal, Hero cults).  But when the Broken Council tried to create a god all
heck broke loose.  Somehow that attempt was "contrary to the laws of
nature".  Did the Council use some particulary evil method (aside from the
Dragon's Egg and all) or is this just a great example of the winners
writing the history books?

Barron


---------------------

From: cullen.oneill@thuemmel.com (CULLEN O'NEILL)
Subject: RE: RQDaily Jun 23, 1994
Message-ID: <940624064838510@thuemmel.com>
Date: 24 Jun 94 15:15:50 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4799

Graeme Lindsell in X-RQ-ID: 4735
G> Like I say, people with "bad guy: kill without moral qualm" written
G> on their shields aren't that interesting to me. (One reason why I'm
G> getting pretty bored with broos, though they are the best evil
G> species I've seen in an RPG)

Yes, but...

A group of disease-free, clean, well-armored & armed, non-chaotic
(detecting anyway) Humakti broos come into town/are met... they talk of
having been a redeemer having cleansed them what does the party do?

ie: By being 'the personification of evil' broos are just as fun as any
other race, you just gotta mess around with the players' minds once the
mindset is created.
_____________________________
Devin Cutler in X-RQ-ID: 4749

D> have been railing against Glorantha as a mirror image of Earth. My
D> argument for this devoutness thread IS JUST THAT! I must compare the
D> differences in Glorantha and Earth in order to support my contention.

I tend to think that comparing the differences and the similarities is
the most useful route to go... The idea that we can't use history
because Glorantha is too different would make the game impossible to
play (IMHO).

C>> but don't expect to make wrong-headed statements about history and
C>> not get corrected.

D> Well, this is all very high-and-mighty sounding, but I will contend
D> that I have not made any wrong-headed statements, and that you
D> have, and that it is I who have been correcting you. Nyaaa!

I guess i should have said "wrong-headed(IMAO) statements"?  I stand
corrected. ;^)  Ha, I out-polited you, so Nyaaaa!!

D> If you want to cite a FACT that I have misstated, that's one thing,
D> but I think one might want to respect an opinion one disagrees with,
D> even vehemently.

Well, the FACT that you have misstated IMHO, is that it is possible for
human beings to be more devoted to gods/God than ancient peoples were.
Take early christians for instance, rather than just SAY that the
emperor was a god they allowed themselves to be executed (some of them
did, that is).  Now IMHO you can't get more nutso devoted than that.  A
number of similar levels of faith spring to mind, but I've already cited
a bunch in a previous message.

[ comments omitted ]

D> Yes, their discussion breaks down on an intellectual level. I am not
D> talking about intellectual or even philosophical levels. I am not
D> talking about paradigms, which certainly change as the world around

But the choice of paradigm is based on a faith in their sources of
knowledge.  This is well above the stimulus/response level.

Ultimately one's choice of epistemology is based, not on intellect, but
on what who you are...  this is based a bit on biology, but mostly on
experience.  If a person is never given the skill/ability to look at
their world view and see its crazy or wrong, they will never notice that
it is wrong... and if the basis on which a determination of what is the
truth is based is different enough, the belief will also be different.

[ comments omitted for sanity ]

D> We study them partially for their differences, as you claim. Their
D> different philosophies, art, literature, etc. can provide insight
D> into our own "root assumptions about the nature of the world" as you
D> wrote.

D> However, if we did not share some sort of basic (maybe almost
D> Jungian) common humanity with Ancient men (and by humanity, I do not
D> mean biologically, I mean we share the same sort of wants, needs,
D> desires, fears, etc.), then it WOULD be useless to study them,
D> because anything we gleaned from them would be utterly irrelevant to
D> our lives. The fact that we do study ancient cultures means that we
D> use their differences to find alternate ways to deal with common
D> predicaments.

I quite agree with you.  But are you saying Gloranthans differ at this
level (making them utterly irrelevant to our lives) or are at this level
the same as us?
_____________________________
Barron Chugg in X-RQ-ID: 4753

B> This is the crux of my idea: that runemagic comes from within.  Now,
B> you cannot get it without following some path, that is to say, by
B> emulating your diety.

This fits in nicely with my conception of initiation (RD&EG)...  The
idea is that getting Rune Spells is essentially the result of a minor
heroquest (that is what you're proposing right?)...

I can see that the rituals to gain Rune magic would be involved, and for
the really good spells, maybe even with an element of risk (Sever
Spirit, etc as you mentioned... ie: the grossly powerful stuff)

I could also see the possibility of a really botched quest losing the
power/or getting the spell at double cost, etc...

For regaining the spell, some sort of mental reliving of the quest might
be in order?

Hmmm... a very, very interesting idea...  All in all it would make
players lives more interesting.
_____________________________
Barron Chugg in X-RQ-ID: 4755
B> note, I like the idea of using Arlaten's ideas as a contrast to Pavic
B> society, but I'd also like to believe that his opinions are not
B> typical of a Westerner).

Well... I'd like to agree that there can be exceptions in Rokari
culture, but SiP is quite clear: 'To him (and his culture)...'

But we only know about Rokari culture being this sexist.  One culture
being this way, especially with a number of cultures leaning the other
way (as pointed out by a number of people) is natural.  Every culture on
the lozenge doesn't have to be a source of adventurers of both sexes.
anyway, you can have female adventurers from there...  they're
outlawed/banished/etc, but so what? ;^)  I'm more concerned with how
they treat foreigners (esp women)... Can Orlanthi even go there, or
would they be persecuted?  If not, it isn't much use unless you start
out there, or for 'strangers' like Arlaten.
_______________________________
Martin/Argrath in X-RQ-ID: 4758
M> split is just varna or "color," not jati, or birth group.  A
M> person's jati determines customs and ritual practices, dietary

Do you know of any sources for more info on this (in RW India), I don't
know much more than what you've stated here and am intigued.

Cullen

---------------------

From: davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake)
Subject: Kingdom of War
Message-ID: <199406241231.UAA17983@cs.uwa.oz.au>
Date: 25 Jun 94 04:41:18 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4800

>>I vote that the KoW turn out to be powerful, well-organized, and
>>dangerous, because even if the PCs are NOT opponents of the KoW it
>>makes the world a more interesting place for them to live.
>
> Like I say, people with "bad guy: kill without moral qualm" written
>on their shields aren't that interesting to me. (One reason why I'm
>getting pretty bored with broos, though they are the best evil species
>I've seen in an RPG)

        Just because the Kingdom of War are powerful, well organised, and
dangerous doesn't mean that they are uninteresting, or that they are 'Black
Hat' bad guys. I see them as an unstable coalition of fighting orders, and
these fighting orders as being quite varied. Some of them are even good
guys. My Sog City campaign folded before the PCs realised that half the
hierarchy of the Humakt temple were secretly Kingdom of War sympathisers,
and indeed idolised the Humakti grouo within the KOW as an ideal society,
where warriors run the show, and the peasantry are secure from attack. Some
of the Humakti within the KOW might even idealistically beleive that they
are the good guys, and atacking Loskalm only because otherwise it will
attack them. At least no worse morally than Viking raiders. Of course some
people in the KOW are psychopathic killers or brutal despots, but the
Humakti are only cooperating with them out of necessity (people can
rationalise almost anything). 
        I also see the fatal weakness of the KOW as not its military
strength, but its inner politics. I think that if Lord Death on a Horse
dies, then the only thing that holds them together is the hope of Loskalmi
plunder, and that will only work as long as Loskalmi plunder is acessible.
I think that if LDoaH dies, the coalition will be lucky to last weeks.
        Cheers
                Dave



---------------------

From: pearton@unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za (Dave Pearton)
Subject: Wind-up gods, take 2
Message-ID: 
Date: 24 Jun 94 16:43:06 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4801

Cullen writes:

> Dave Pearton in X-RQ-ID: 4684
> D> requires the sacrifice of personal POW, POW (at least in RQII) is an
> D> important part of one's "soul", thus when one gives POW to a deity
> 
> I find your line of thought intriguing, but how do you regard
> illuminates then?

Um, very suspiciously .

I would view this as an extension of the illuminate's solipsism.  The
illuminate has a different veiw of the "soul" to others.  It is this cynical
attitude that allows him/her to ignore the promptings of that part of him
that he has "sacrificed" [which a theist would belive are safe in the
keeping of his god].

Btw:  What does an illuminate thing will happen to him after death?  If they
can join more than one cult/ cynically manipulate other cults then what
happens to them after death?  Do the psycopomps of whatever religions he
happened to join "slug-it-out" over his soul, does he go to both....?
Arrrrgh I do hate the illuminates.

Cheers, 
Yak
ps. All of the above ramblings are the result of too many late nights
marking and so can be safley ignored :)
-- 
***********************************************************************
Dave Pearton				* ....As I was saying before I
Biochemistry Dept.			* was so rudely interrupted
University of Natal			* by one of my multiple
Pietermaritzburg			* personalities....
					*
pearton@unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za		* Naked Lunch (W.S. Burroughs)
************************************************************************