Re: Ghouls

From: Bruce Mason <mason.bruce_at_KFkpZH5Sqc21KVNFEktVs2u6cZQGEDc-Tvaq2Kg-XQ-GzPh50gr_E-PZz5xkwJFK>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:47:13 +0100

2009/9/16 Greg Stafford <>

> This has brought up a point that I'd never considered, or rather, bothered
> with:
> ghouls being undead.
> IMG, they are not.

Would it be fair to say that there is 'normal' eating of the dead and 'abnormal' eating of the dead. i.e. for many species, cannibalism is either unremarkable or sanctioned in some ways and for others the act is abhorrent. However, even for those who routinely eat their dead there may be ways of doing it that are abhorrent. Thus I could envision troll ghouls in the abstract though not necessarily how they would become that way in any specific detail. The obvious possibility would be murdering to eat. I could also envision that unnatural eating of the dead is an addiction which feeds on itself (pun intended) and that you could conceptualise the relation of: sex - rape - broo
natural eating of your dead - unnatural eating of your dead - ghoul.

Perhaps the ultimate end point of being 'ghoulified' is to be unable to eat anything other than your dead. This could end up in many ways. You could have perfectly urbane ghouls who find their species perfectly nice in the same way we find lambs cute before we stick them in a pie. i.e. we're talking about good old RQ ogres. On the other hand we may get some ghouls that seem more like stereotypical fantasy scavengers, lurking around graveyards, warped and misshapen, severed from those who were once their kin.

Then again this not something I've thought much about nor am I a Glorantha expert by any means so this may well go badly against the grain. Interesting topic though.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]            

Powered by hypermail