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 4
Sender: Henk.Langeveld@Holland.Sun.COM
Content-Return: Prohibited
Precedence: junk
---------------------
From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly)
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 24 Jun 1994, part 4
Message-ID: <9406241952.AA01237@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu>
Date: 24 Jun 94 19:52:41 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4813
Paul Reilly here.
Nils Weinander writes:
>I prefer a rule where really devout worshippers, priests, rune lords
>and exceptional initiates can get divine favours. If you have done
I think it's important to keep in mind that ancient religion as represented
in Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Egyptian, and other sources (leftout some examples)
had much more emphasis on the correct perfomance of rituals and/or promises
of sacrifices than on 'faith' and 'devoutness'. Even ancient Judaism
matches this description. Catholicism moves away from it but we only get
the full blown "God favors you if you are giddy with faith in and love for
Him" with Protestantism. Now, SOME ancient religions had emphasis on this
kind of relationship (Dionysian worship comes to mind, and Cybele) but
I would say the standard in the Mediterranean and Near East is closer to
the RQ description where you do the ritual right and make or promise the
right sacrifices and you get the juice. Some Roman priests were notorious
for near-atheist beliefs, Julius Caesar for example. He was Pontifex and
coldly cynical rather than devout, and this was OK as long as he did the
rituals right.
Perhaps the "devout" quoted above means "dutiful, performs correct
sacrifices, etc." rather than "loves the deity, etc." I am not trying to argue
with Nils W., he just reminded me of something I've been meaning to say for a
while.
Joe Lannom writes:
"I suppose I look at the God plane like a giant couch with all the Gods
sitting there, munching on chips and viewing Glorantha through the lens of
the Hero Plane. Only the good myths get syndicated and played as re-runs"
We view it this way to, at least some of our characters do. One character
thinks the gods are always butting in on her life to make their entertainment
more interesting. (No, they don't 'show up, she just attributes it to
Orlanth when she gets rained on, etc. - and the gods who supposedly are
helping her, she suspects are getting her into predicaments because they
are entertained by watching her try to get out of them. Buttinskies.)
Alex writes:
>According to the Box-Shaped Oracle, English shephards who were dugless
>used bull-roarers to Encourage the sheep on their way.
Excellent, fits in with Heler's cloud-sheep and Orlanth's thunder.
Question: Did the shepherds with dugs try to lure the sheep on with the
promise of breast-feeding? (Couldn't resist)
Barron Chugg writes:
> This is the crux of my idea: that runemagic comes from within. Now, you
I wrote something like this in a letter to Greg, if he replies I will let
you all know...
- paul
---------------------
From: jesper.wahrner@hts.ct.se (Jesper Wahrner)
Subject: Rules vs Reality
Message-ID: <2dfbc12b@hts.ct.se>
Date: 13 Jun 94 00:15:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4814
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
--- Blue Wave/RA v2.12 [NR]
---------------------
From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly)
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 24 Jun 1994, part 1
Message-ID: <9406242225.AA02891@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu>
Date: 24 Jun 94 22:25:04 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 4815
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 106
Hi everyone. Paul Reilly here. Here is my original message on Malkionism
from a while back. I will send this and see what the response is before
posting more...
Hi everyone. I am thinking about the origins of Malkionism. here is
(I hope) some food for thought.
If you are not interested or too busy, just ignore/delete this message -
otherwise I would like to get a discussion going. These ideas are
growing out of discussion with Mike Holliday.
- Paul
More on Malkionism:
Hi guys. I think that we should investigate Malkion's original group of
converts, and that this will give us more of an idea of what Malkionism is.
My supposition is that during the Darkness, the Brithini were forced into
a society-threatening level of both warfare and breeding. Many forbidden
actions were required for survival. Many people were involved in actions
such as The Spell Forbidden by Urostio (sp?), dooming them to slow death,
and many more were called upon to breed to make up the losses of the wars
and natural disasters, dooming them as well. Let us call these people
the Doomed Ones.
I postulate that following the general pattern of the world wearing down
that the zeroth generation of Doomed Ones would age only slowly, by normal
human standards. They could live on for decades or centuries. This seems
like a quick enough demise to a Brithini...
Now, the Doomed will include people from all classes. And because some
were involved in the last-ditch protection of Brithos and its colonies,
they will include some
of the best commanders (Talars), war wizards (Zzaburi) and soldiers (Horali).
The ones selected for breeding will also be talented, to breed good stock.
OK, so we have a large pool of people who have every reason to resent the
uppermost Talars and the other still-immortal Brithini around them. They
have good potential leaders. I think rebellion or at least social disorder
(practically rebellion by Brithini standards) is a possibility. The upper
Talari think so, and carefully make sure that Brithos itself is relatively
free of the Doomed by rotating them into the outland colonies (Akem,
Seshnela, Arolanit).
It is this disaffected group that I think will provide Malkion with his
converts. His revelation of Solace is pretty meaningless to the still-immortal
Brithini on Brithos and he won't make much headway with them. However, it
is acceptable to the authorities as a belief for the Outland Doomed Brithini
because it may serve to quiet them down. The zeroth generation of Doomed
is dangerous, because they hve millenia of training - their children should
be no problem. Once the original Doomed die off, the colonies can be
brought back into line (think the Talars).
OK. Now, knowing this, what is Solace all about? And who is the
Invisible God?
Consider the people who are converting: they are Brithini by birth and
training, so the 'solution' that Malkionism presents must seem logical or
they would not be convinced. It must be grounded in their existing belief
systems. It must fit the name of Solace - solace for what? Their main
problem is that they are going to die, which seems stupid, pointless,
and possibly unjust to them - they are doomed to die because of their
heroic actions which saved the OTHER Brithini - not them! Commendable
but disappointing.
I will digress for a moment and throw in some notes I have on what
I think the Brithini beliefs are - about their own identity and
about death and dying. I have some more notes on the Brithini as well -
will send if anyone asks.
More later, Paul
Brithini:
We are the heirs of the Kingdom of Logic and the only true human race.
Various other races are traitors
(The Vadeli - do you think they were Tribe of Law or Tribe of Chaos?
The Ogres - Tribe of Chaos and descended from true humans, but lost their
humanity)
inferior counterfeits,
(Teleosi, Veldang, maybe Agimori)
degenerates,
(Westerners)
other beings forced into the human shape
(Most other human races, Hsunchen, Aldryami)
or alien beings
(Kralorelans, Dragonnewts, Uz).
The world obeys certain laws. There is no evidence of a Creator responsible
for those laws; postulating one is unnecessary. The world and its laws
ARE; there is no need for an aetiological explanation.
We also obey certain laws which define our humanity. Those who do
not follow them become non-human and subject to aging and death.
Death is a return to component elements. The body decays, returning to
its formative elements, although it may retain its general outline for
some time. Similarly the spirit also decays, returning to its component
energies, although it may also retain its general outline for some time.
Neither the spirit nor the body constitute a living person; a person is
the combination of spirit and body. Their separation constitutes death.
Death is to be avoided. Pain is to be avoided. This is self evident.
Excessive pleasure brings on pain as a reaction and is to be avoided.
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: default
X-Sun-Data-Description: default
X-Sun-Data-Name: Malkion2
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 99
David and Nick:
Object if you want to be taken off this thread. I am trying to get my own
thoughts together.
Yesterday I sent some preparatory stuff - today will be partly preparatory
also.
-----
We have established (for the sake of argument at least) that the ones
doomed to die are those in need of Solace and thus the ones likely to
become Malkioni.
Now what exactly is Solace?
Boring answer: Just another afterlife.
Digression:
On Earth, many religions are not particularly concerned with the afterlife.
Furthermore, even if they are, they do not necessarily hold out rewards and
punishments in the afterlife for how you act while alive. This sort of thing
is ingrained in popular Christianity and several other religions, but I could
give many examples of religions that say little (Biblical Christianity) or
nothing (Main line Buddhism) about the afterlife. Judaism is concerned with a
covenant between God and Man in _this_ life; in exchange for obeying the
Law and worshipping YHWH the descendants of Abraham are made a great nation
and given the land of Israel. Other ancient religions are also concerned
with benefits in this life. Even 'good' Mexica got only a short afterlife,
after which (according to their belief) they were extinguished utterly.
Etc. , etc.
However, the RQ Cult writeup format and the 'Who the heck are we?' question
format both prominently feature the afterlife. The Christian idea of acting in
a certain way because your god will reward or punish you after death is
present as a common feature in these writeups.
OK, I can accept this as a cultural feature of Central Genertela. BUT I
see no reason why it should be world wide! I will offer an alternative
below (actually developed more by Mike Holliday than myself, but also drawing
from other sources).
Let's take as a given (for the duration of this missive) that the Brithini
do NOT believe that a 'spirit' or 'ghost' is the person. Now, promises made
by pagan gods to care for and nurture the ghost of a person do not seem so
attractive - little more so than saying "After you die, your body will be
carefully preserved in deluxe accomodations. You will lie on silk sheets,
be rolled around in a wheelchair by beautiful women, and receive a hot
bath once a day." Not very attractive, because your body isn't YOU. Similarly,
the offer of a cushy afterlife doesn't seem so great if you don't think your
ghost is YOU, just a decaying complex of spirit energy.
-----
End of digression...
OK. There is a need for a new belief. The Brithini elders find it useful
to allow one to exist, so it can happen. The social conditions match what
we know of the history of Malkionism.
SO what can these people believe in?
1. Logic
They are descendants of the Kingdom of Logic. They have lived for millenia
on the basis of Reason. I don't think that the habits of thought of such
a lifetime can be easily abandoned. So the new belief should seem logical.
2. Useful
The belief should somehow seem useful. If the new believers can't get their
immortality back, they should be getting something that can console them for
this potentially infinite loss.
------
OK. Is the Belief in the Invisible God logical?
I think so. Argument follows, derived from conversations with Mike Holliday.
There seems to be a general Law on Glorantha concerning personalization.
It is explicitly mentioned in some of the writings on Chaos - anything on
Glorantha gets a personalized representative of some sort, even the non-being
of the Void.
A second law seem to exist: that power and freedom are inversely correlated.
From these premises, we can deduce the existence of an all-powerful entity
that does nothing. As part of Glorantha - since
ARRGH I JUST LOST ABOUT FIVE GOOD PARAGRAPHS BY HITTING THE WRONG BUTTON
more later,
frustratedly,
paul