>Me> some degree of relativisim is necessary. How else
> >would one resolve the question of whether Lunars are good or
> >bad?
>I don't see why relativism is necessary to decide this question. To one
>side the lunars are obviously chaotic corrupters of all that is decent; to
>the other, to the other the heortlings are obviously slavering primitive
>barbarian fanatics. Think the USA and the Taliban.
The analogy is flawed in glorantha and in the RW. Not every Orlanthi thinks the Lunars are chaotic corrupters and they are not evil in doing so. Likewise for the Lunars. Hence some degree of relativism is necessary.
Secondly you've blurred the boundary between what a gloranthan thinks and what the narrator will view the gloranthan. It is one thing to have Orlanthi heroes reckon the Lunars are the foulest of slime etc., it is yet another for the narrator to play them as such. The Lunars act according to their own philosophy and to play them as chaotic corrupters would be to cheapen the Lunars.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail