The contents of these two threads are crossing over and have long since ceased to have anything to do with the subject. I for one am hoping all the discussions continue but can the interested parties start new threads with appropriate subject before a moderator comes along and enforces it?
Suggestion: reply to this and the "So now that you have your copies of Sartar" thread with the new title(s) (subjects) and then post your continuances in those new threads.
Cheers
M
p.s. I would agree, should anyone point it out, that the 3 worlds thread has merely grown (instead of deviated) but I do think it's out-grown it's subject. Now it's "mystic player characters", imo
p.p.s. I think it may only be important to certain people that they define/portray mysticism properly. The person who suggested that the definition would be included in the agreed genre has my agreement. Imagine for a moment that it was Pulp? You can probably do Pulp in Glorantha :)
I don't care, personally whether Li Mu Bai, Caine, Tripitaka or Bolat Asoz are according-to-Hoyle/Metcalf/Stafford/Richard-proper mystics. All I care about is having access to playing something like the kind of character expressed. Actually, I'd much rather have one that fell from grace (Asoz), laid aside the path to transcendence for moral/practical reasons, was drawn into a conflict against their own choice. To examine the choices the character has to make in order to follow _the path_ and see how a very human person deals with dichotomy as part of a story featuring a group of other carefully chosen characters.
I'm not saying I want to dig too deeply into this kind of mysticism in order to play. I'm satisfied that it would have the look and feel - the things I enjoy when reading the material that got me interested in the first place.
p.p.p.s Ha! Looked up Tripitaka on dictionary.com: http://tinyurl.com/yathawv
Powered by hypermail