Re: Humakti tatos

From: Stephen Tempest <glorantha_at_...>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:22:35 +0100

Zachary Kline <zkline_at_...> writes:

>One of my players is playing a Humakti, and just asked me about her clan and tribal tattoos. I was thinking that they wouldn't actually be removed, since the relationship between Humakt and the Orlanthi pantheon is a bit complicated. She is still, technically, a member of the clan.
>Does anyone have any thoughts on this? My player personally disagrees, since they are supposed to sever all kinship ties. I realize I'm probably treading into YGWV territory.

I'd say she isn't a member of the clan anymore, but she is a member of the tribe, and thus the wider community. What happens to her tattoos would vary, I think:

A lax Humakti might simply leave them. They're part of her established identity that she doesn't want to reject.

A mystical Humakti might simply leave them, because they're merely marks on flesh and thus are meaningless.

A conventional Humakti might carefully amend the tattoos by adding Death or Truth runes, so the symbol is no longer the clan tattoo, but recognisably derives from it.

A fanatical Humakti might carve away their own flesh to remove the tattoo physically.

A devout Humakti's tattoos might fade away magically at the moment of initiation to be replaced by Death runes.

Powered by hypermail