Assorted trivia

From: James Frusetta (gerakkag@wam.umd.edu)
Date: Thu 29 May 1997 - 08:01:38 EEST


Various Authors noted they have no TotRM 15. I also seem to be in the
Non-Possession Club for Tales #15 (and now no #16, too), if the Reaching
Moon folks are making a list of it. If we're not going to be at cons
(which seem to be the first stop for distribution, for good reasons)
should we tell RMM in advance, or something?

Sandy Petersen wrote:
> The Praxian tribes are not modern nation-states.
I wouldn't expect them to be -- indeed, I wouldn't expect nation-states to
exist _anywhere_ in Glorantha. Much different conception of the "nation,"
I'd think. Bison khans raid other bison khans plenty, yup.

> They are ecologically, not politically, interactive. ... Neither do the
> Praxians compete. However, they do prey on one another.
Granted, some of the various animals will feed on different forage than
others. But -- and I admit to not knowing the biological details of
the animals involved -- does the presence of _some_ of the herd animals

deny that area to a clan from _another_ tribe? Is there a sheep vs.
cattle kind of battle over the prime grazing areas -- if the Morocanth
let their herd-men eat here, my bisons (or other suitable animal) can't?

I agree it doesn't mean you'd exterminate them -- you just force rival
clans that raid you/eat your grass/otherwise annoy you away from you, off
into the Wastes.

Sandy again, on other matters:
> A culture's magic only has to be superior in _one_ respect to
> remain a viable alternative to another's.
Ruh? I would have thought that the "superior" magical system is the one
that meets your needs. Trolls get what they need from the gods of
Darkness; switching to the Solar gods gets you a bunch of crappy light
spells no self-respecting troll _needs_. That doesn't mean that, all in
all, the Lunars (who have different needs) might not gain more advantages
than the Trolls (or whoever) from their respective magic.
     
I agree you sometimes have to settle for what you _do_ get (e.g., Joe
Broo in the Wastes), benefits or no. Still doesn't mean it's equal. For a
silly RW analogy, just 'coz the Yak-9 is the best/most suitable aircraft
Uncle Joe can build doesn't mean it's equal to an Me-262. It just means
it's the most suitable/best fighter _for Russia_. And of course,
comparing Vozduhoplovstvo Voino to Luftwaffe is a different matter again
- -- lots of cruddy Yak-9s can be better than a couple of Me-262s. And in
some cases the Yak-9 is better than a Me-262 anyway.

>>Is non-resuable resurrection (say, as Daka Fal or Kyger Litor get) equal
>>to Chalanna Arroy reusable resurrection? Bah.
> You bet it is.
Not. ;)
> It's JUST as good from the viewpoint of the resurrectee.
Okay. The tongue-in-cheek score so far:
CA temple: Lots of happy resurrectees.
KL temple: One happy resurrectee. A bunch of pissed-off uztagor who vote

           for CA. And a satiated priestess with plenty of leftovers. Urp.

The voting would seem to run lots to two in favor of reusable as better.
If you were dead, which would _you_ wish your KL priestess had? ;)

------------------------------


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:59:57 EEST