> Glorantha's greatest strength is that it has a huge amount of
> information written about it, both officially and unofficially.
> Some people see that as its greatest curse, too.
>
> Hope that helps,
> Rick
Yes it does, and I agree it is a strength but (there's always a but) it makes it very easy to slip into need less argument. Because there are muliplte views and viewpoints it makes it possible for people to have conflicting, but equally valid, opinions on something. Nothing wrong what that per se, it's a strength as you say. But people slip up (very easy in text only forum) and interpret contrary positions as atacks on their own. We exacerabte that by saying "There are at least three Argraths" rather then "In my Glorantha there are three Argraths" or "In my opinion the reading of KoS with the least contradication is that there are three Argraths". So we need to be more careful how we present our interprations and what we are basing thme on. There are somethings that are definitive. You can start with big facts, like "Orlanth is a god" and go down to little ones, like the map of third bridge latifundia. Because we don;t know where the defintive stops and the variation and speculation starts, it's easy for people to misinterpret both their own position and what others say. Now I'm not saying set anything in stone (If Greg wants to say - eg - sorry, Orlanth is really *not* a god - the Malkioni had it right about these so called gods) then that's his prerogative. But I think we need to accept that the *current* state of the published material is "definitive" *today* (the quotes meaning contradications and view point of the text have to be accepted) unless and until subsequent publication or errata supersedes it. Then that becomes defintive at that time. Moving target.
Michael
Powered by hypermail