Without going into long GodLearner history lessons, which are useless anyway...
The runes are eternal, changeless, transcendent and numinous, patterns in the pre-existent vacuum, noetic templates indued with Lovecraftian adjectives and adverbs mutli-syllabaic. They are far beyond the grasp of mere four-dimensional mortal minds, or indeed mere seven dimensional minds of deities and Californians. (In this they resemble the mysticism rules).
Any attempt to render the runes into a two dimensional matrix is doomed to be incomplete, and able to channel only a tiny portion of the runes' energy. Yet even these flawed attempts are powerful enough to channel incredible energies and to explode the head of the occassional shaman or scribe who loses concentration.
Are there 'true forms' of the runes? Yes, but not on the mortal plane.
Is there Gloranthan agreement on their best approximation? No. *This* form of the beast rune works better in fertility rituals, *That* form of the beast rune works better in shapechanging.
Are the old runes correct? Yes, but there's just the one font.
Are the new runes correct? Yes, and there's a lot more of them, even if you can never find the one you're after. :)
John
nysalor_at_... John HughesQuestlines: http://home.iprimus.com.au/pipnjim/questlines/
The halberd has fallen! The fewmets have hit the windmill! Sorhed's Nozdrul have gotten wind of our little dodge and are beating the bush for "four boggies, one with a pink tail." Doesn't take any abacus to figure out somebody's spilled the gruel. Get out of wherever you are fast, and don't lose the you-know-what. I'll try to meet you at Wingtip, if not, look me up in Riv'n'dell. in any case, don't take any oaken thrupences. And don't mind Stomper, he's a good egg, ut-bay ot-nay oo-tay ight-bray, if you know what I mean. Must close, left something on the Bunsen,
Goodgulf
Powered by hypermail