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, Thu, 06 Oct 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.
X-RQ-ID: index
6480: igorlick = (ian i. gorlick)
- Living in wetlands
6481: lipscomb = lipscomb@vax.ox.ac.uk
- non CA resurrection
6482: Vingkot = Vingkot@aol.com
- non-Chalana Arroy resurrection
6483: igorlick = (ian i. gorlick)
- Yelmalion armouring geases
6484: sandyp = (Sandy Petersen)
- Re: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 05 Oct 1994,
6485: erisie = (Sven *Erik Sievrin)
- Re: Shamans&Resurrect
6486: Mike.Dickison = Mike.Dickison@vuw.ac.nz
- Help wanted with Karse and Esrolia
6487: erisie = (Sven *Erik Sievrin)
- Re: Wizards v. Sorcerers
6489: joe = (Joerg Baumgartner)
- Resurrection debate, again
6490: joe = (Joerg Baumgartner)
- TradeTalk = Free INT in English
6491: ddunham = (David Dunham)
- Zorakarkat
6492: hasni = (Richard Ohlson)
- Re: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 05 Oct 1994, part 2
6493: hasni = (Richard Ohlson)
- Re: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 05 Oct 1994, part 2
6494: CHEN190 = (Peter Metcalfe, CAPE Canty)
- Mostly pamaltela...
6495: 100270.337 = (Nick Brooke)
- Recent Digests
---------------------
From: igorlick@bnr.ca (ian i. gorlick)
Subject: Living in wetlands
Message-ID: <_5978_Wed_Oct__5_08:56:49_1994_@bnr.ca>
Date: 5 Oct 94 04:54:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6480
re: ddunham in rq-id 6476
>I do know the area surrounding Tenochtitlan [today's Mexico City] was
once
>quite swampy; apparently it didn't prevent a large number of Aztecs
from
>living nearby, and obtaining many food resources from the swamp.
The Aztecs practiced a specialized form of agriculture in the wetlands.
They built up connected plots of land like narrow fingers with narrow
canals between them. They raised corn and other crops (gourds, dahlia,
etc.) on the built up beds which they fertilized with mud dredged from
the canals. Fish from the canals were also harvested. The system was
called chinampas or something like that (mesoamerican scholars, please
correct me). It was apparently highly productive. I seem to recall that
they could take off up to 3 crops a year without depleting the land or
needing to fallow. This system was what allowed them to feed one of the
largest cities in the world.
Personally, I have long thought that the ducks in Sartar practiced an
agricultural system a bit like this.
---------------------
From: lipscomb@vax.ox.ac.uk
Subject: non CA resurrection
Message-ID: <009857EC.D93BC951.1@vax.ox.ac.uk>
Date: 5 Oct 94 16:18:42 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6481
Just a quick reply to the comments that cropped up in response to my post.
Nils points out where Kralorerlan souls go when they die. Fair enough. I don't
know much about Kralorela, but I think we still basically agree that they
wouldn't want to be brought back.
Lewis disagrees about the Malkioni. In the original post I wrote, I mentioned
that heresies might exist that allowed resurrect, but then the system crashed
and I had to start over and wrote a shortened version. I think what I wrote
would hold true for the Rokari, but certainly Aeolians with St CA might allow
it. The Brithini are a seperate case IMO. My impression from the description in
Crucible etc. is that they fear death so much because they don't believe in an
afterlife or that the soul retains its identity upon death. Certainly they
would want a method of resurrection but may not feel it to be possible.
How the Brithini would explain away the fact that primitive savages (in
their eyes) performed resurrection I don't know, but I feel that they would say
that its not the persons original soul inhabiting the body, but some
opportunist spirit-demon-thingy pretending to be that person until it gets a
chance to suck out your eyeballs (or whatever), and thus view "resurrected"
people as possessed and very suspect.
This doesn't explain the quote from Arkat's Saga however. Perhaps the
Brithini _have_ discovered a method of resuerrection. The Zzaburs have had a
long time to ponder over it after all.
Simon Lipscomb
---------------------
From: Vingkot@aol.com
Subject: non-Chalana Arroy resurrection
Message-ID: <9410051048.tn390479@aol.com>
Date: 5 Oct 94 14:48:39 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6482
Subject: non-Chalana Arroy resurrection.
Hello, Curtis Taylor here.
In X-RQ-ID: 6426 writes:
>I agree that shamans should be able to bring back the dead (but only
>after a struggle). For one thing, a lack of resurrection kind of
>torpedoes non-humans who don't worship/aren't affiliated with
>Chalanna Arroy (what do trolls do? Throw those dead bodies on the
>trollball field?).
Please note the following cults besides Chalana Arroy that provide
resurrect(ion) or resurrect(ion)-type Rune/Divine magic:
RQ 2:
from Cults of Prax:
Daka Fal-Resurrection (one use)
Daka Fal-Incarnate Ancestor (reusable; may permanently bring back
ancestor)
Daka Fal-Seal Spirit (use ?; listed in Appendix I, not in cult description)
Daka Fal-Summon (Specific) Ancestor (reusable; ancestor summoned
may have a resurrection type spell)
Seven Mothers-Resurrection (reusable)
Eiritha-Seal Spirit (one use)
Aldrya(The Gardeners)-Recover Spirit (reusable) and all special Daka
Fal spells
Aldrya(Elder Sister)-Recover Spirit (one use) and all special Daka
Fal spells (all reusable spells available for one use only)
Good Shepherd-Seal Spirit (use ?)
Issaries-(through Spell Trading Rune spell)
from Cults of Terror:
various of these slimy cults have gross ways to get access to
Resurrection magic
from the Trollball rules in Trollpak:
"Trolls killed in play do not learn from the experience, but they are
automatically ressurected by the god of the game after they are taken
off-field."
from Kyger Litor cult description from Trollpak:
"The cult of Kyger Litor is intimate with that of Daka Fal. The priestess
are urged to become priests of Daka Fal and to gain access to the many
Summon spells."
from Zorak Zoran cult description from Trollpak:
"True worshippers of Zorak Zoran have no fear of death."
"Worshippers of this god expect their only funeral rite to be a Create
Zombie spell."
RQ 3:
cults printed in various sources:
Aldrya(The Gardeners)-Resurrect(ion) (one use)
Daka Fal-Resurrect (one use)
Daka Fal-Summon Ancestor (reusable; ancestor summoned may have
a resurrect type spell)
Daka Fal-Incarnate Ancestor (reusable; may permanently bring back
ancestor)
Issaries-(through Spell Trading Rune spell)
Thanatar-(don't ask)
Yelm-Resurrect (one use)
from Kyger Litor cult description:
"The cult of Kyger Litor is intimate with that of Daka Fal. The priestess
are urged to become priests of Daka Fal and to gain access to the many
Summon spells."
from Zorak Zoran cult description:
"True worshippers of Zorak Zoran think nothing of death."
"Worshippers of this god expect their only funeral rite to be a Create
Zombie spell."
Note that a shaman in RQ 3 may bind spirits and force them to cast
any Divine magic that the spirit knows (including Resurrect-type
Divine magic). Shamanistic cults include:
Aldrya
Aranea
Bagog
Daka Fal
Gorakiki
Hsunchen (Hykim/Mikyh) cults
Hungry Ghost (Cult of the Cannibals)
Kyger Litor
Pamalt
Also note that some of the RQ 2 sources have not been converted
to RQ 3, and are probably going to be similar when they are converted,
thus expanding the RQ 3 list above.
--Curtis Taylor
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Stick with me, I'll make you a repo wife.
Send your repos to .
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
---------------------
From: igorlick@bnr.ca (ian i. gorlick)
Subject: Yelmalion armouring geases
Message-ID: <_4242_Wed_Oct__5_11:53:05_1994_@bnr.ca>
Date: 5 Oct 94 07:52:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6483
Nils W in rq-id 6466 about geases (geasa?)
> Why would Yelmalio want to impose geases on his
>devoted worshippers which make them worthless in combat?
My best guess about this is as follows:
Yelmalions at key points in their career undergo minor heroquests, and
their geases are apointed by the consequences of the quest. One common
theme in Yelmalio is the sequence of combats at the Hill of Gold, where
he loses bits of his power to Orlanth and others. In the minor version
these could easily be pieces of armour that are lost in combat or stolen
by victorious opponents. Such a loss would then become a ritual
obligation for the Yelmalion for the rest of his life.
This interpretation opens a new possibility. If, in a subsequent ritual,
the Yelmalion managed to take back a corresponding piece of armour, then
the obligation would no longer exist.
---------------------
From: sandyp@idcube.idsoftware.com (Sandy Petersen)
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 05 Oct 1994,
Message-ID: <9410051803.AA27262@idcube.idsoftware.com>
Date: 5 Oct 94 04:03:01 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6484
Nils
>Kralorelans in good standing with society get _out of_
>reincarnation.
Technically, Kralorelans believe in the dragonewt philosohy
of "progression". They do believe that good Kralori that have
mastered their earthly lives go to Vithela, ultimately to continue
this progression and expansion of capacity.
Peter
>The marshes are not exactly the healthiest places to live in the RW,
>(note how we like to drain our swamps?)
There are plenty of people who live in swamps and love it.
There are swamp Arabs along the coast of the Red Sea, who have reed
boats and hunt marsh boars. There are the bayou folk of Louisiana.
There are the Seminole swamp indians of the Everglades. And there are
many many other examples.
I stick by my statement that the Doraddi do NOT think that
the swamps are inherently a bad place. And in fact, that they believe
that the swamps are basically good, though obviously you can get
killed in them. Yes, people who live by swamps may occasionally get
swamp fever. Yes, on rare occasions the goblins may surge forth and
decimate the land. But if you live away from the swamps, you have to
deal with drought, prairie fires, dinosaurs, etc.
Most humans are agricultural, and don't like swamps because
we can drain them to make good agricultural land (at the cost of
losing waterbirds). The Doraddi, non-agricultural, see the value of
the swamp's wildlife and edible plants, and have no need to drain it.
Not that their technology would be up to it in any case. It's not
just coincidence that Lodril's mountains were upthrust to keep out
the jungle, but _not_ the swamp.
---------------------
From: erisie@utu.fi (Sven *Erik Sievrin)
Subject: Re: Shamans&Resurrect
Message-ID:
Date: 6 Oct 94 01:07:50 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6485
Regarding what some other contributors wrote yesterday:
> Since one of the primary myths of Daka Fal/Ancestor Worship is the
> separation of the dead from the living, resurrection might be seen
> as sacreligious.
Not really. If you resurrect someone the case can be made that the guy
ought to be alive, so by resurrecting you put him in his proper place.
Thus according to Daka Fal certain persons who are dead may be considered
"accidents" and the judgement he passes on them may be "you go back
to life". That is probably what happens when somebody who seems to be dead
recovers anyway (out-of-body experiences?). The difference when a shaman uses
a Resurrection is that the Gramps of all humanity gets the message that
this is an accident in a rather different way- sort of storming in at the
trials and shouting "stop! that man/woman/baboon is innocent!". Just as a
mundane Judge does not like that, Daka Fal doesn't either, so most
shamans could not do that - only those who specifically serve him,
because he trusts them. (And if he is to continue to trust them, shamans
ought to be be careful with whom they resurrect!) If another shaman would
like to try that, I would most certainly call that a HeroQuest.....
> Rather than trying to resurrect your companion, you should see to it
> that she is sent to the spirit world with the proper ceremonies, and
> that she can be called back if the need arises. "Alas, poor Yorick.
Agree totally
> Because a spirit can't possess a dead body. Binding a spirit into a dead
> body makes a zombie (well, it does in RQ3).
Unless it is a ghoul spirit, in which case you are annoying Humakt in a
different way :-)
> If there was to be a ShamanPak, what I would really like to see is
> just a lot more about the geography and denizens of the spirit plane.
> Basically a less abstract version of spirit travel, and a large number of
> examples of the variety of spirits that exist and how shamans interact with
> them.
I agree heartily. For something similar, although it is non-RQ and
non-Glorantha, I recommend "Shamans" for Ars Magica. The ideas of
shamanistic practices is much more closer to my ideas of how Gloranthan
shamans act than the current rules. Rules-converting should be no
problem, especially if the skills of Spirit Combat and Spirit Travel from
RQ4 or something similar is employed. The "Far Lands" mentioned in the
text even corresponds fairly well with the idea of the Hero Plane, IMO.
> 5) I doubt that Malkioni are so dead set against resurrection as one poster
> implied. Their attitudes are to some extend influenced by the Brithini.
> Brithini abhore DEATH, they hate the concept of aging and also violent death
> above just about everything (except the Vadeli of course). One thing I rememberfrom a sneaky peak at Arkat's Saga was the cry of "Save the Bodies" from the
> ranks of the Brithini army when some of their number were killed and swept out
> to sea. Obviously they have a means of resurrection and would have used it!
Total agreement. Somewhere (the all too short writeup of the Brithini
in Glorantha:Genertela, I think) it is stated that soldiers expect to be
resurrected if they are killed, or at least the responsible Zzabur doing
his very best.
> I tend to adhere to the idea that newly-dead spirits retain their STR, CON
> and DEX for a while after death (though these characteristics are fairly useless
> in the spirit-world and tend to dissolve in a matter of days). If you recovered
> the spirit quickly enough and used a 5-POW binding enchantment on the body
> (to bind the pseudo-ghost's INT POW DEX STR and CON) I think you'd essentially
> restore the person's life.
I don't know. It sounds like a good thought (mixed metaphors are my
hobby), but I feel DEX,STR and CON are part of the body, not the soul.
The already existing mechanism that reduces these characteristics if a
body lies dead for some days IMO fits nicely with the decomposition of
the corpse. A similar thing for the decomposition of the soul? I feel
that there is not only a break between body and soul at death, but the
body looses something in addition, the spark that makes the heart beat.
When you zombiefy a corpse you force the spirit who once inhabited it to
use its magical power to keep the corpse moving - which is why the POW of
a zombie is suppressed (Zombies of the Bind Ghost-type has POW, not
merely MP's as most other undead have). A spirit bound to its old corpse
but free-willed should in my opinion not be entirely alive - not a
zombie, but something undeadish who is moving and breathing by sheer
willpower. A "liche"? >
> In addition, the enchantment might give the shaman some sort of hold over
> the resurrectee - like knowledge of how to break the enchantment thereby
> severing the beneficiery's spirit.
Easy. Any magician, or person with some knowledge of magic, can do that.
As I interpret it, all Enchantments in Glorantha are made by marking the
enchanted object, in this case the guy we are trying to resurrect, with
runes (not necessarily Runes). If the runes are destroyed, the
enchantment is destroyed. So if the skin where the runes are written is
merely slashed, not even deeply, the guy will die and his spirit depart.
I actually likes the idea of a "pseudo-resurrection" where the character
in question is resurrected but does not live a normal life - compare with
someone who has got an artficial heart. Perhaps he would have other
trouble as well - being unable to heal naturally, as well as registering
as "undead" to spells concerned with them, comes to my mind.
Cheers,
Erik.
---------------------
From: Mike.Dickison@vuw.ac.nz
Subject: Help wanted with Karse and Esrolia
Message-ID: <199410050930.AA21207@rata.vuw.ac.nz>
Date: 6 Oct 94 10:30:35 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6486
(Henk - this is a re-posting. Arachne Solara ate yesterday's one.)
OK, folks, I'd really appreciate some help here. And we may even start a
useful thread.
My PC group has unexpectedly fragmented and shifted their base from
Kaxtoplose to Karse. They want to reform a new group of traders and
diplomats and get involved with the Lunar/Esrolia standoff (it's Storm
Season 1620).
Now, I'd love for that to happen, and play out some of the events and
battles in King of Sartar, finishing with the Battle of Pennel. I'd
especially like them to meet Harrek again, since his sacking of Kaxtorplose
stopped the previous plot of the campaign.
But I really need to find and make up a lot more information about Karse
and Esrolia before I can do this effectively. All the information I have
is:
G:G,CotHW 2 paras on Esrolia, 1 on Karse
RQ Companion 4 paras on Esrolia
KoS A few pages on events in Esrolia
And a downloaded piece on a Grazer's guide to Esrolia
Firstly: Is there more Official info I've missed?
Secondly: Is there unpublished or gleaned info willing to be shared by
those in the know? (I'm looking at Sandy, Nick, and the Daily's other
scholars)
Thirdly: Since I'm going to be making most of it up regardless, I'd be
very keen to know how each of you have fleshed out Karse and Esrolia in
your own campaigns (I know MOB has done a fair bit on Nochet). I'm most
interested in the mechanics of governing a matriarchal theocracy. At the
moment, I'm just taking a standard civilised theocracy and reversing all
the gender roles, but I'm sure someone like John Hughes could give us more
insights into the complexities. I have a bunch of ideas for the
husband/protector roles I'll post real soon.
For me, the most valuable aspects of the daily are not bickerings over what
to call moose or whether Elmal is "actually" X, Y or Z, but the real game
ideas I get from, for example, the Truestone discussion or Sandy's
morokanth notes. So if anyone has any neat ideas about Esrolia they want to
share, I'm all ears. Hope you can help.
Mike Dickison
adzebill@matai.vuw.ac.nz
---------------------
From: erisie@utu.fi (Sven *Erik Sievrin)
Subject: Re: Wizards v. Sorcerers
Message-ID:
Date: 6 Oct 94 01:30:37 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6487
Nick Brooke wrote:
> > ... most sensible Wizards know that Evil Sorcerors can cast exactly the
> > same spells as they do.
>
> Yeah, if we're taking "spells" from RQ3's limited list. But certainly not
> if we're talking about the harmonious societal kingdom-enhancing "divine"
> Wizardry that is the Malkioni speciality. Evil Sorcerers could, of course,
> embrace Malkion's Law, and through God's Grace come to possess the same
> powers of blessing and so on that sensible Wizards have. But surely there
> must be a ethical/moral/religious dimension to what GoG presents simply as
> "the Worship Invisible God sorcery spell"?
IMO, the Wizards of the Invisible God considers their wizardry "Divine"
in that it was originally developed under the influence of the Invisible
God. It is just like a tool, and differs from other forms of magic in
that it requires no unclean contact with spirits or gods (which for
non-henotheist Malkioni are only evil or unthrustworthy demons or
sorcerers who made themselves immortal when they lost Solace due to their
wicked ways - remember Humct, Yilm and Worlath?). Still, it is magic, and
all magic is dangerous to your soul, which is the reason only those who
have proved themselves to be pious men learned in the ways of God, either
by birth (Rokari) or proving their merits (Hrestoli), should be allowed
to handle it a great deal. That is, wizards. The ethical dimension comes
in on the subject: Should I use this spell at all? Same thing as a knight
who has to decide how he is to use his sword, a lord how he is to use his
authority, or a peasant how he is to use his working skills. They are all
gifts to mankind from Our Lord The Creator, and they may all be misused.
Just as sinners and heathens and heretics can use swords and rule
unfairly and create things unseemly in the ways of God, they can work
magic - in fact, they do all the time.
(This is probably reheated air, my being new to the Digest, but you never
now)
Cheers,
Erik
---------------------
From: joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner)
Subject: Resurrection debate, again
Message-ID:
Date: 5 Oct 94 23:45:05 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 6489
I want to add my voice into the chorus that both shamans and sorcerers
have access to Resurrection rituals. We know this for sure from
Brithini sorcerers (Genertela Book p.82: "Resurrection is possible
after ddeath, and even the lowliest peasants expect their sorcerers to
tr it each time one of them dies.").
Shamans are known to travel into the border zone between life and death
to guide spirits back to their bodies. They do so in case of diseases
or curses which cause a soul to leave the body, and probably an
untimely death by violence or accidents will send the unprepared spirit
into this region, too. If the body left by the spirit still (or again)
is inhabitable, I think the shaman ought to be able to guide the spirit
back and force it into the mundane plane again. While I think that some
permanent POW loss ought to be involved, I don't feel there should be a
binding matrix enchantment as a component. Maybe this POW is used to
seal the leak through which the spirit escaped into the Otherworld.
In fact, the Shamanic Resurrection ought to resemble Eiritha's (or
rather the Good Shepherd's) Seal Spirit, once the shaman has found the
spirit of the deceased.
(BTW, is there a RQ3 write-up for the Praxian Eiritha? and for her
Pentian and civilized equivalents? I can't recall any. How shall a RQ3
user without CoP play Praxians?)
--
-- Joerg Baumgartner joe@sartar.toppoint.de