[Glorantha] Re: (in)humanity of ogres and Sin

On April 18, 2006 12:00 am, glorantha-request_at_rpglist.org wrote:

> From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20@yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Glorantha] Re: (in)humanity of ogres

> Maybe it's just me, but I'd say that there's a
> difference between a being who:
>
> 1) does an evil act because they can't survive without
> it
> 2) does an evil act because they have an
> uncontrollable urge to do so, they genuinely can't
> help it
> 3) does an evil act because it will benefit them
> somewhat

Nope. It's not just you. I think those are different cases. (In which the least reprehensible is the 2nd, followed by the 1st. The 3rd is just bad. *grin*)

> Not to mention those who do evil things in order to
> benefit others.

Now THERE is an interesting case.

> Subject: Re: [Glorantha] Sin
> While I agree with this, I would like Gloranthan
> characters, both PC and NPC, to be able to argue both
> ways. Both that X are inherently evil and should be
> killed, and that not all X are inherently evil, and
> one should try to "save" them, allow for the non-evil
> possibility, and so on, whether X is ogres, vampires,
> near-vampires, sorcerors, chaos, trolls, Lunars, broo,
> whatever.
>
> Which side of the argument is correct is almost
> irrelevant, I just want that moral doubt to be there.

As do I. Which is why, as I said, I am more and more thinking that the "moral" forms of Chaos are not an issue. Hell, in some cultures, Cosmos vs Chaos isn't even the grand divider. If you make Chaos just... alien, then you can use it as big nasty beasties that do big nasty things. Which is occasionally fun, but boring from a story point of view. But then all the other things that get described as "chaos", the ones that do have thought and morality and such involved, become far more ambiguous.

In some ways, I am thinking from an meta-game view here. To each given culture that has Chaos as a serious part of their mythology, all the moral aspects of chaos are important, and allows you all that wonderful ambiguity, because no one actually agrees on what chaos is or how it arises. (They sort of do, in broad strokes, but details trip them up.)

Basically, Chaos and Evil are separate, and despite many cultures insisting that one causes the other (or the other the one), that's not the case.

> From: donald@grove.demon.co.uk (Donald R. Oddy)
> Subject: Re: [Glorantha] Re: Maran Gor, Ogres, and Chaos

> I wouldn't go that far, I think there is a fundamental conflict
> between Glorantha (the world) and Chaos.

As I mentioned above. I think it is more "alien" than "evil". Although it is inherently inimical to human life, and therefore incompatible with humanity. (Although the Lunars insist it can be controlled and compartmentalized.)

> Cultural I'll agree with. What we're seeing there is actions which
> cause chaos within a society and that's going to be different for
> different societies. I'm not sure how strong the link is between
> something like kinstrife and actual chaotic creatures.

Even thought it is canon, (i.e. the Skullpoint adventure) I don't think there really is a link. Or rather, I think that what most people call "chaos taint" really isn't in some way. The heortlings think kinstrife causes Chaos, so they are susceptible to manifesting chaos taints if they cause kinstrife. However, IMG, I am fairly certain that kinstrife might get you divine retribution, but it won't produce "Chaos" (capital C, magic transformation form). Hell, the so-called Chaos taint could BE divine retribution (since the Orlanthi gods think kinstrife causes Chaos).

LC Received on Tue 18 Apr 2006 - 15:34:01 EEST