> Well my view is that rape and cannibalism lead to transformation into
> chaotic
> creatures only if they are performed for that purpose, not if simply an
>
> atrocity. For me, it would be a gameworld construct and not at all
> 'realistic' if soliders or warriors committed no atrocities for fear of
>
> turning into broo. In everything I've read on war, atrocity happens,
> including cannibalism at times but rape is very common.
I guess the question is "when is enough enough?" At what point does the regular level of violence in Orlanthi culture or even the extreme level of violence among the Uroxi become so terrible that it is, in essence, a sacrifice to Urain? (Or is Urain, in Mr. Stafford's terms.) Some things may trigger this effect more easily than others, I'd think -- cannibalism seems pretty bad (although one of Vingkot's daughters married a cannibal according to an issue of Enclosure and nothing bad seems to have come of that), headhunting may have declined because Thanatar tainted it, rape (as you point out) is depressingly common and Broo aren't that common. There's a quality of "habit" that I think is necessary -- is the act done for some other reason or for the act itself? A desperate traveller may eat a dead companion or a soldier rape an enemy but that doesn't mean they relish the act for its own sake. If that traveller gets a taste for flesh and kills to satisfy it, I'd suspect transformation is much more likely. The film Ravenous (besides having gorgeous settings, nice camerawork, and a sprightly performance by the always delightful Jeffery Jones) is a clever treatment of the theme. There's a difference in kind between the raping soldier and the serial rapist, although both may be present in the same person.
War, I suspect, raises the "background noise" -- an atrocity would have to really stand out to attract the appropriate chaotic forces. On the other hand, the end of "Apocalypse Now" would make a fine climax to a campaign where a group of Lunar agents went into darkest Sartar to find that the Lunar military governer has gotten, perhaps, too enthusiastic.... Perhaps war is a chaotic action in some sense; the catastrophies of the Hero Wars could be attributed to the large scale collapse of order -- physical, cultural, moral, and so on.
> In my PargAddi campaign, the Imperial terror troops actually have names
> for
> the different levels of atrocity they commit, because for them, it is
> relatively routine. It is an instrument of policy, as it was for the
> Assyrians and as it was and _is_ for many peoples around the world now.
I'm not sure your average Heortling would make any substantive distinction between your PargAddi and Broo. Certainly, they'd advise the same solution to the problem, although they'd probably keep the trooper's equipment not burn it.
Peter Larsen
PS. I'd like to say that I'm examining this all dispassionately and from a Gloranthan perspective. My comments have no real bearing on the RW. I don't condone or apologize for rape, cannibalism, or extreme violence. (And I'd rather not see a lot of argument about them on the lists.) While I think they are excellent dramatic hooks for stories (especially those with a strong horror component), I would be dismayed to be involved in a game where these actions became "matters of course" for the players and GM (if for no other reason than it become increasingly difficult to move or horrify jaded players). I find the PargAddi Campaign interesting reading and a good source of ideas. I don't think I'd like to play in it. (No offense meant to those involved; everyone is welcome to the Glorantha they envision.)
Powered by hypermail