Bullshit bashing

From: peter metcalfe (metcalph@voyager.co.nz)
Date: Sat 20 Dec 1997 - 14:10:11 EET


Tal Meta:

>I think it was just yesterday that someone on <ahem> another mailing
>list suggested something to the effect that one of the reasons that
>TSR's most popular game-world has the volume of material available for
>it is that the writers of the material don't have to worry about being
>"Gregged". So long as the material they submit meets the published
>submissions criteria, and doesn't kill off any major NPCs, it's likely
>to see print.

IMHO the suggestion is utterly wrong. You don't have to worry
about being gregged so long as it's _good_. Greg is more
likely to adopt somebody else's idea in such a case. The real
reason for the lack of material was due to a number of other
factors. Foremost was during the first _eight_ years of RQIII, AH
didn't even take the trouble to encourage glorantha fans to submit
material for publication and expected chaosium to do all the work.

>For Glorantha to survive as a setting or a rules system, I believe Mr.
>Stafford is going to have to give up at least SOME of his editorial
>control. How many supplements for RQ3 got crushed because he later
>changed his mind on certain points after giving authors the go-ahead

>based on their original synopsis?

None, I believe. Certainly hasn't happened to any fan material
that I've seen. If you going to speculate, perhaps you could
take the trouble of finding out the FACTS behind the dearth
of RQIII gloranthan material instead of perpetuating unadulterated
horseshit.

>Even if it means (oh, the horror) extending the lozenge a bit to perhaps
>insert some new lands where Greg's history is NOT already cast in stone,
>where new writers could have a bit more freedom?

Oh please! There are quite a lot of lands in which the history is not
cast in stone. Look in the Genertela supplement and try and compose
a time line out of the lands mentioned therein. You end up with
_huge_ gaps in certain regions, namely Slontos, Fronela, Ralios, Pent
and Teshnos. To compound it, there are even places and names are
literally just that. Even Greg doesn't know the story behind them.

Klyfix:

> Perhaps part of our problem is that the current view of Glorantha
>seems to invalidate almost everything published up to RQ III; the Monomyth
>record is wrong, the gods have no objective reality, all the stuff of about
>the God's Age and Time is only the Orlanthi view, all that was written
about >Yelmalio was wrong, and the Dara Happen stuff (The Fortunate
Succession and
>so on) are more valid anything that's been published before. Sometimes
>that's been expressed with a certain amount of arrogance.

I don't recall saying that the gods have no objective reality and that
the Dara Happan stuff is more valid than anything published before. What
has been said over and OVER again is that 'almost everything published up
to RQIII' represents the viewpoint of the Orlanthi about the Cosmos as
they see it whereas other (non-Orlanthi) people would have _different_
viewpoints. Now I thought this was shouted from the mountaintops
during the goddamned sobjectivity debate and I get quite sick and tired
when I see the same misrepresentations as if the debate had never existed.

>There's no real core of "truth" anymore; everything's
>subjective as a thousand different views of every little detail of Gloranthan
>life get put forth in the digest and the only published overview of the world
>has been declared invalid. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Since when did this happen? Put up or shut up.

>While there's certainly something to everybody
>having their own way of looking at the world, it would be nice to have some
>common truth that we can depart from if we choose. I'd like an "Encyclopedia
>Glorantha" myself.

http://www.sirius.com/~chaosium/glorantha-main.html is a good place
to start looking. Don't blame me if you haven't look there before.

- --Peter 'with a certain amount of arrogance' Metcalfe

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


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 22:23:27 EEST