From: Alex Ferguson (abf@interzone.ucc.ie)
Date: Tue 08 Jul 1997 - 20:05:33 EEST
David Cake and I are largely back to our normal, and doubtless tedious for
third parties, level of agreement; except that:
> >If [...] the beast rune is connected with bestial anger
> I think the whole idea will fall down when you actually try to create a
> system that associates traits with runes (in a non-culturally specific way).
Which is all very agreeable, but: Who (and what) on earth is being replied
> I'm currently inclined to believe that contrary to almost everyone
Well, the obvious question is, compared to what? Compared to doing the
to here? Nameless quoting is a pet peeve of mine (not that I don't have
a whole menagerie, mind you), and here the trail is no obscured that not
even grep'ing through the Digest reveals the identity of Mystery
Contributer.
> elses theories, a well trodden heropath (Hill of Gold, say) is
> intrinsically absolutely no easier (or at least, not much).
same thing, had there been no Yelmalio cult, ever? Or if there had been
no "spark gods" of any kind, at any point? It's hard to say, but I feel
that "ease", and come to that having any possibility of the desired
outcome in the first place has something fundamentally to do with its
mythic significance. This gets back into Myth:Quest :: Chicken:Egg
situations fairly rapidly, though.
> Some quests are
> still harder than others, but its not directly correlated to ease.
Well, perhaps some are "harder" because they have Big Goodies at the
end (the full HoG quest), or because familiar quests have "hidden
depths" to them, implying difficulties that an unknowing quester would
not be aware of, unless he accidentally fell in one.
Cheers,
Alex.
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 18:56:27 EEST