> At 7:27 PM +1100 30/1/08, John Hughes wrote:
> >
> >Glorantha has much more of a narrativist flavour,
> though campaigns can
> >take on a variety of different hues.
>
> Glorantha really is traditionally
> simulationist.
Hear! Hear! Indeed mythic simulationist. One can certainly engage in narrativist play in Glorantha, but it will (almost) inevitably constrained by the pre-existing simulationist background, setting and history. (Unless one takes a YGWV to such an extreme that it is barely recognised as Glorantha).
> >These limitations are worth stating explictly.
> Among them are
> >Glorantha's simplistic and unreflexive view of
> religion (albeit, one
> >shared by many western roleplaying games), its
> over-reliance on an
> >universalistic and discredited model of mythology
> (Campbell) that denies
> >much of what is interesting about real mythological
> processes, its
> >creeping essentialism, gender bias, and deeply
> conservative 'boys own'
> >seventies masculism.
I must say I reject this paragraph in toto. Glorantha hardly has a "simplistic and unreflexive" view of religion, Campbell's model of mythology is hardly discredited, it doesn't have a 'creeping essentialism', and in comparison to other games and settings the accusations of gender bias, conservatism and "'boys own' seventies masculism" are quite asinine.
And we know where onus of proof lies as well...
Regards,
Lev
Powered by hypermail