RE: Re: Uroxi sense Chaos-tainted/marked ?

From: bernuetz.oliver_at_...
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:01:18 -0400


Simon Hibb said :

>> This I disagree with. Here's a hypothetical example. Say I'm a
>>member of a society that abhores killing no matter what the situation.
Here I
>>go and kill someone by accident. This act has absolutely no
>>cultural/social sanction and my society doesn't even have a way for me to
cleanse
>>myself or ask forgiveness. I automatically lose all my societal benefits
and
>>due to my beliefs I can't even forgive myself. I would have to leave my
>>community and I may never be able to forgive myself.
>
>To live and to die, kill or be killed is in the nature of the world.
>True, cats sometimes toy with live prey, but they do so to tech
>their kits how to hunt. There's no malice in it.

We're not talking about animals but people who are a lot more complex morally. (Not that animals even have a concept of morality). People do not have to kill or harm other people. It's a choice they make.

>> I might endA Char-Un can rape
>> but only within the acceptable patameters set out either
>emphatically or
>> unspoken by his culture. This helps to protect him from the act
>and gives
>> him a cultural context for it which my accidental killer didn't
>have.

>As to the 'only obeying orders' defence, IMHO it only goes so far.

I've already said it's no defense in an earlier e-mail. I don't think it forgives or excuses it.

>The occasional transgression that doesn't affect your normal self
>image and behaviour is one thing. You'll probably pay for it in the
>afterlife, but that's that. Corruption by chaos is linked to
>corruption of the soul. Take two average Char Un. They both commit
>rape during the destruction of a rebbel village. The first enjoys
>it, gets on his horse and never rapes again because he never realy
>gets the chance. The second enjoys it, and immediately looks for
>further opportunities to do it again. He applies to transfer to a
>front-line assault unit, so he's first over the wall in new towns
>and gets first crack at the women folk. He even extends his term
>o service with the army so he gets more chances. After he's
>demobbed he joins a voluntary millitia group that operates in
>bandit country so he can get more chances to excercise his
>lusts on enemy women, while killing their menfolk. One day, he
>wakes up and there are these two funny bumps on his forehead...

Of course he does I have no doubt about that.

>
>The first guy is still himself, whether you or I or his culture
>think he did right or wrong.

Your perception of the act certainly has some affect on how you feel/think about the act and what impacts that but your society's beliefs? The first guy has done nothing wrong by his society's mores. Is the act still wrong and chaotic though? Yes it is, but his society won't ostracize him and he doesn't have to feel too bad about it. I'll bet an Esrolian male who commited an act like that in battle would be in big trouble and wouldn't feel the same way about it.

>The second one changed his life so
>that he could satisfy his desire. I don't care how accepting of
>what he does his comrades, or even normal Char Un society is. He
>might even get an 'effing medal, but he's still IMHO clearly
>corrupt beyond redemption.

I see your point. He's operating within technically acceptable circumstances for the act among the Char-Un so he should have societal approval. Let's put it this way. The first guy has a black mark on his soul because of his act. Fortunately his neighbours and friends don't hold it against him so he'll only suffer in the afterlife. He can live with himself. That's what societal approval does for him. He won't turn into a broo (though he might) but he's still been evil. Now a Heortling at this point (one rape in battle) may already be headed down the route to Chaos (a self fulfilling prophesy as it were) because of his society's different perception about the act. He doesn't have the same mental defense for his act. But he probably has the exact same chance of turning into a broo as the Char-Un.

Now number two's whole soul is pitch black because of his evil acts. (Again he still may or may not turn into a broo). His society may not have even noticed his problem and keeps giving him approval for his behaviour. Let him cross the line and rape outside of the line of duty and he's busted though-by his society-it hasn't changed his evilness. There's no way to save yourself in Glorantha from such extreme activity and no normal human non-chaotic society would sanction such activity. But that still can't save him from turning into a broo. There's lots of examples of normal societies using such individuals or groups unfortunately but it doesn't equate to their approval of the group or act. e.g. The Praxians used broos against the Lunars at Moonbroth, but it didn't make them friendly to broos or even approving. I don't think a rape would automatically turn you into a broo in any culture, nor do I think societal approval would save you. It's more of a mechanism to protect yourself from the consequences of your acts, i.e. guilt. It can't save you from crossing that line.

What about the Char-Un who serves for 30 years in the military and commits dozens if not hundreds of rapes because it's in the job description not because he seeks it out? Does he turn into a broo? Society doesn't disapprove of his acts but the universe does. That's potentially hundreds of chaotic acts. Hard call. I think his intentions may save him but in the fashion of best Greek tragedies it may damn him anyway.

>However, even the moraly corrupt and depraved aren't guaranteed to
>turn into slithering monstrosities. Chaos is unpredictable and
>capricious, and even the righteous can fall into it's hideous
>clutches.

Definitely.

>There are no guarantees.

In Glorantha? The only guarantee that applies to Glorantha is that there are none.

Oliver

Powered by hypermail