Re: Yanafal Tarnils & Humakt

From: donald_at_PIJ3ydCyTgMqnTLh6fho0332jIF18jDMM8DYB5-eN_ckpGaOviValiTwpV911NtIwscHK
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 02:23:04 GMT


In message <3245E678-C717-40CB-A40B-7923F17DE56C_at_wW73fGM37_VtbFajRtlW-12TrDfExTLSKBaU5t7f7_sTyIQaHbKueh3EqRkrXOwkYuei-EQqIT1wJZWCEQG2hWbTKpmsoLQUrJ31oravdSKLr2M4v-MotmiPbgl9.yahoo.invalid> Paul King writes:

>Humakt doesn't hate Chaos as such. Humakti would tend to be hostile
>on the grounds that Yanafal Tarnils was an apostate follower of
>Humakt. Resheathed Humakti in anti-Lunar clans might also regard all
>Lunars as enemies.

I don't think the clans of Sartar have that level of group think. All clans have the full range of views from enthusastic converts to diehard traditionalists. The division between Free Tribes and Enslaved Tribes in BA is a political view and reflects the relationships between the Lunar Administration and the Tribal Rings at the time (circa 1618). Clans may not agree with the tribe and individuals may not agree with their clan.

As far as resheathed Humakti are concerned I'd suggest they generally take a neutral view of the Lunars although individuals will be heavily influenced by their experiences and those of their relatives.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/

           

Powered by hypermail