Guys with big swords

From: martin (102541.3423@CompuServe.COM)
Date: Wed 01 May 1996 - 03:11:26 EEST

David Hall:
>The problem that I keep experiencing is the way he seems to remain a Humakti
>as if by immaculate conception. There's no sign of any links to the Humakti
>or any respect for the temple hierarchy and codes. Is his body his temple I

No, but I obviously play Humakt a lot differently to you. In my Glorantha
Humakti are mercs and their temples maintain an open door policy to all Humakti
who know the vows and display their faith. I play what appears to be a more
military Glorantha than many, my Dragon Pass looks rather like Bosnia at the
moment with ethnic cleansing etc. Onslaught is merely one of many wandering
Swords (maybe 200) in Dragon Pass and possibly not even the best. When I heard

the expression "Hero Wars" I thought there has to be more than just the ones in
Dragon Pass or Nomad Gods so in my campaign they are being drawn to the Pass
like filings to a lodestone.

>Or was joining Humakt just a means to an end, i.e. better death spells? Did it
>mean anything else? Did he not listen at all to the code and customs of his
>regiment? These are what should have defined his own moral and honour code,
>regardless of whether he is a Sartarite or not.

Yes and no. He was never in a pure Humakti regiment, in my Glorantha those are
pretty rare, Humakti making better warriors than tactians or even file leaders.
I usually specify Humakti companies in many civilised country regiments, rather
like Grenadier companies in Napoleonic periods. We have something suicidal to
do, send in the Humakti. I play Humakt a lot loser than you do in the
Regimental sense and only a small percentage of Humakti belong strongly to a big

>But if we look at his career in the Borderers (where he "joined" Humakt) then
>doesn't do particularly well. His record is one of insubordination,
>ill-discipline, and ultimately dismissal from the service. This ain't going
>endear you too much to Humakt!

Again you play it differently to me. In the RW military the cases of orders
being disobeyed to both good results and bad. (The Austrians in the Napoleonic
period even had a _medal_ for officers who disobeyed their superiors to win the
battle!!) and I play that. I play that particularily in guerilla campaigns in
which incompetant officers of tough mercs usually get a sword through their guts
sooner or later. Unless oath bound a Humakti will only take so much crap from a

>Of course, then he kills his ex-commanding officer, which in my book is a
>sword-breaking offense, particularly since he then runs away. His Humakti word,
>and the truth spells of Humakt, would have proven his case had he not been in
>the wrong. Worst of all, he then kills all of his pursuers! For those pursuing
>him would be men of his regiment, battle comrades and sworn swordbrothers.
>This too warrants excomunication from the cult.

You see, your assumptions are so different from mine, hence the disagreement.
Onslaughts officer (in my mind as I wrote his background) was an Esrolian idiot,
possibly a civil appointment. He first dismissed the insulted Onslaught and was
killed for it. Shit happens. If it had been a Humakt leader Onslaught would
have challenged him if he'd been insulting but then Humakti know their own
prickly honour better and wouldn't have been so stupid.

He wasn't pursued by his own but by Bounty Hunters whose covert tactics he would
equate with assassins.

>And now we hear that he's a "military consultant" for governments! I ask you,
>who would trust a guy who is insubordinate, kills his commanding officer and
>battle comrades, steals from his employers, changes sides at will, is a
>killer, and is know for his excessive love of killing for Death's sake alone?
>How do I know when this consultant turns up at my camp from day to day that >he
ain't going to suddenly honour me by biting me to death?

You are an astute leader and place him in a place he will do well. You place
him in command of a fortress that absolutely must not fall. He will kill any
man who breaks, he never sleeps, never dispairs and never, never gives in. You
place him in command of a forlorn hope unit assigned to break the enemy line at

a crucial point or at a strategic pass or in a fortress assault. Only when he
is commanded by idiots or placed in a position that doesn't suit him is there
trouble. You send him to destroy a vampire nest or a chaos infestation or a
ruthless bandit or a maruading dinosaur. The uses for someone of his
singlemindedness are huge and an able king would see that.

>This is no Humakti, this is a wandering monster!

Well he is a wandering monster but he's a wandering monster Humakti!

>C'mon... this is all a big joke isn't it?

Yes, you thought all along you were on the Glorantha digest but really you were
in the Village, we want INFORMATION Number 6!

Sorry I didn't respond well to your baiting, I'm punch drunk at the moment, I
shall reply suitably when I've healed from all the backstab wounds.....

Your fellows were PCs, Onslaught is an NPC. I've yet to see a PC rise above
180% weapon skill and I've never seen a PC with anything like Onslaughts power.
However I thought that if Greg can write about Harrek and Argrath and all the
rest why can I not write about a rather minor hero in my Glorantha? Wheres the
harm in that? I'm not trying to present it as _the_ view, just _a_ view.

Martin Laurie


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:31:01 EEST