Re: Ompalam, Malia and other possibly chaotic dieties

From: simon_hibbs2 <simon.hibbs_at_XgF_40CX2S5htGfrnXcZAPKPGC6ROMOTsKdns-bBSv228IFaOwY1Fy9WBCpi4VSb>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:27:35 -0000

> The trouble with chaotic cannibalism is that Greg's populated glorantha
> with a large variety of cannibals, most of which are neither Ogres or
> chaotics.

We already know that cannibalism is killing someone of your own species for the purpose of eating them. This is why troll funerary rites don't count - they generally didn't do the killing and even if they did it wasn't for the purpose of consumption. Presumably on this basis a human eating a found corpse, while a cannibal in the common sense, doesn't risk chaos taint again because the intentional slaying isn't there.

So maybe that's the get-out clause used by other 'cannibals' such as the cannibal cult. If one cult member kills someone and others eat the body, maybe that's indirect enough to avoid the risk of a chaos taint. The killer committed murder, but didn't eat the body. The diners didn't perform the killing, so they get away with it too. Nasty, brutal, evil even, but not chaotic.

As for Trollkin, they don't breed true with other trolls, so are they really kin? Value trollkin are potentially a grey area, but they aren't usually killed for food anyway. Trolls may also use the "I kill, you eat" exception.

There may be other get-out clauses. Complicity of the victim for example. Killing using a trap might be indirect enough to not count as intentional slaying too.

> So where did the Orlanthi get the myth that cannibalism is chaotic? They
> weren't particularly plagued by cannibalism during the Great Darkness
> and one Vingkotling tribe was founded by a cannibal.

And others were head hunters. If they weren't very careful how they went about either practice, bad things happened. At least that is my theory on this. There's plenty of room for differences of opinion.

Simon Hibbs            

Powered by hypermail