Are Runes Foundational?

From: Nick the Nevermet <nick.the.nevermet_at_XMEJqFxcr6eIjPeuJkDioEumwUKtdt6YiyyLQQP_k0OvHj7uB8zzrwwKJL>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 01:34:30 -0000

While I'm sure that subject will make me an easy target for accusations of GL-ism, I'm confused and need some guidance.

In some places, the Runes are defined as central building blocks of Glorantha. The Glorantha wiki uses this phrase, and the "Mastering the Runes" article on seems to suggest this. At the same time, people on this list have said several times that the West isn't really that rune-oriented, and the recent Daxdarius discussion has at least one person suggesting that Dara Happa didn't have runes, and another person suggesting that the difference between Orlanthi and Dara Happan runes could be as different as Latin & Chinese characters. However, then the retort notes that feats, charms, and spells often have a rune associated with them in publications.

I'm currently assuming the answer is either no, or effectively no due to the multiplicity of runes and runic systems. Is there an official (or 'official') stance on this, and has this stance changed over time?


Powered by hypermail