[Glorantha] WoG - list, my take

On 7/4/07, Mikko Rintasaari <rintasaa_at_mail.student.oulu.fi> wrote:
>
>
> Personally I'm happy of the existence of the WoG list. Having a list that
> Greg reads and comments on has been a great boon, and only intensified my
> love affair with Glorantha.
>
> As a GM and avid roleplayer I have to agree with Greg. Glorantha is his
> baby, and ultimately is his to do with as he wants. We are all free to do
> whatever we want with _our_ own interpretations of it, but it's still his
> baby. If Glorantha was my creation, I'd do the same.
>
> The people who get jealous and possessive about their own contributions
> should, I think, re-think the issue a bit. If you must have control,
> create your own fantasy epic. If you with to work with offiscial
> Glorantha, accept that it you are basically fans and helpers instead of
> co-authors with equal rights.
>
> I wonder what it is with Glorantha that creates this problem? I don't
> think fans of 'A Song of Ice and Fire' get hissy with George R.R. Martin
> when his books don't turn out like they would prefer, nor does anybody (I
> know) try to tell Rowling how to write the next Harry Potter book.

Well, fans of both have been known to scream about things they don't like. But the fundamental difference, I think, is that Glorantha is in large part a roleplaying setting - at least to many of us. Our contact with it isn't just in reading about it, but in interacting with it. It's more personal.

If I don't enjoy a novel by an author, I shrug and walk away from the author. Maybe with complaints to others, maybe not. An RPG is different - I can love Glorantha, dislike the latest change, and hope that I have misunderstood it or that it will be changed back in the next publication. It matters more, because my game is still set in Glorantha - I can ignore new things but that means that all later source material will need to be considered in a different light, etc.

Also, much of the problem people (including myself) seem to have is with changes, rather than the story going in directions we don't like. I certainly don't want to be treated as a fellow creator just because I play the game, but I would like my campaign to stay consistent with the published product as much as possible, except where I choose to change my Glorantha. Suddenly finding that a couple of the PCs in my game are now extremely unusual rather than fairly standard in their religious beliefs stings a little. New things I don't like are much more easily dismissed from my game, but I'd prefer it if old work was retconned as little as possible, and reasons were given straight up for any such changes.

Lastly, I'm far more interested in the continuing evolution of Glorantha than in fantasy novel settings, and thus more likely to get annoyed by stuff I don't like - I don't think that's unusual around here, so peoples passion for Glorantha leads to more passionate disagreement with what they feel to be mistakes.

I love to tinker with Glorantha, but I don't think it's my place to demand
> anything from mr. Stafford.

I also don't want to demand anything from him, and appreciate him letting us play in his sandbox - but I think Glorantha as an RPG setting would be better for being more inclusive and consistent. Personal opinion, of course.

Just thought I'd put out my own take on things.

        -Adept
>
> Thinker, dreamer and adventurer
> --
>

-- 
Jakob Pape

"Sometimes subtlety comes in the form of large explosions and jammed open
airlock doors."