Feedback

From: Nick Brooke (100270.337@CompuServe.COM)
Date: Wed 16 Jun 1993 - 10:29:52 EEST




Mark S. said:

> Although it may seem unusual, I've agree with most of what
> you've said lately about sorcery and the West. Just a few
> quibbles for old time's sake. I've seen the Rokari/Hrestoli
> split as a continuation of the first age Seshnelan conflict
> between the Linealists and Idealists, as opposed to the result
> of an early third age "heresy/reformation". By the by, is there
> any primary source reason to believe that an actual "Rokar"
> existed. After all, the names of movements (or cities, etc.) are
> not always based on those of Heroes, even in Glorantha.

Now there's a turn-up for the books! Thanks for those quibbles, though: I was starting to wonder whether you were going soft (or becoming sensible) in your old age! <g>

YES! The old Linealist/Idealist split is an almost exact parallel for the Rokari/Hrestoli schism. Thanks for publicising this idea. But I don't see any reason to chuck the existing explanation (found in Genertela Book p.78, middle col, 4th para.) -- your version helps by making the roots of the "Rokari Sect" deeper and more profound. Nice thinking, there!

You're against a Third Age "heresy/reformation"? Genertela Book says, "The terrible suffering of the end of the Second Age prompted a frenzy of *reformation* and searching for the original roots of Malkionism". Well, OK, they left out the asterisks. But you know what I mean...

NO! There is no "primary" reason to believe in Rokar. But:

	Malkioni --> Malkion
	Hrestoli --> Hrestol
	  Arkati --> Arkat
	  Talori --> Talor
	  Rokari --> ???
	             (why not "Rokar"?)

I'm not bothered by Galvosti or Boristi: too small to be worth the trouble.  Boristi are apparently geographical; Galvosti, nobody knows. Heresies and sects in our world usually have a single founder, and the name "Rokar" is useful in this context.

Now, to boggle you, I'll agree with two sets of your comments: on the difference between societies with access to sorcery-like effects (Kralori etc.) and sorcerous societies (Malkioni), and on Oliver's list of "non-Malkioni and very important" sorcery-using cultures encountered in Prax etc. My return quibble will be that there *are* occasional Kralori traders in Pavis, but they are in no way significant enough to make it worth including Kralori sorcery / mysticism in a RQ4 centred on Dragon Pass + Prax + Holy Country + Lunar Empire. We don't even know whether they're sorcerers or not. (Given the percentages, odds are none of them is!).

You know, Mark, one of the great things about these arguments is that Gloranthan debate always helps us learn more about the world. Let's keep going!



to Graeme Lindsell:

> ... the three main cultures of western Genertela are Orlanthi,
> Lunar and Malkionist. Once these three cultures and religions
> are described, everywhere west of Prax is covered.

Couldn't agree with you more! See further, below...



to MOB:

> I think that the sorcery rules should be completely dropped from
> the RQ4 book. Sorcery rules cannot be successfully presented
> without their social context, as the RQ3 experience shows, and
> to do the social context justice, more space than the RQ4 book
> could permit would be needed.

Couldn't agree with you more, either!

I posted a suggestion to Oliver Jovanovic a while back asking if, given that RQ4 is meant to focus on Dragon Pass + Prax + Holy Country + Lunar Empire (and apparently *NOT* the West, which the Gang of "X" seem to have taken against), it made any sense to have Sorcery in the rules. I suggested replacing it with an expanded and improved description of Lunar Magic -- covering the stuff they teach in the various sororities of the Lunar Colleges, plus bits on Illumination, Cycles, Glowlines, etc. And examples of that old Battlefield Magic that RQ players have been wanting since the year dot. That would undeniably be more interesting and useful than a soulless rehash of Sorcery, and the Lunars can be found in strength in all the areas beneath the RQ4 umbrella.

Oliver disagreed, saying that "The rules are meant to give you an idea of how to run an unaligned sorcerer". He thought nobody would be interested in a bunch of "small esoteric schools" until we had more detail about the Lunar Empire (scenario packs, etc.), and that the Carmanian sorcerers were more important in Dragon Pass & surrounds than Lunar Magicians.

Meanwhile, Carl seemed to think this was the most wrong-headed thing anyone could say, too rude even to allude to in print...



Oliver said:

> With respect to Malkioni - I exclude the Brithini and Vadeli,
> since they are atheists and at best seem to pay lip service to
> Malkion and the Invisible God, and also the Stygians and
> Carmanians...

I agree. So do I. Waertagi, too, I suppose.

*BUT* these cultures all have deep and true connections to Malkionism, and will use similar Sorcery rules. Surely you can't hope to deny that. So I'm not sure why you bring this up.



Joerg asked:

> Did you make this longevity piece up as well as the Pharaoh bit,
> or do you base it on written evidence?

Ho ho ho! Am I using sources that are too obscure for you, here <g>? Rokarism is the religion of Seshnela, so have a look in the Genertela Book / Seshnela / Religion section (p.76):

"The Rokari Malkioni believe that they have returned to the pre-Hrestol roots of their religion. They imitate Brithini concepts in a limited way; some wizards and lords have gained extended lives through their piety, but most mortals live and die within their born caste."

Not my idea at all!



Nick
--> Read some historical novels by John James!
--> "Votan", "Not For All The Gold In Ireland",
--> "Men Went To Catraeth" and "Bridge of Sand"
--> are all Jolly Good Stuff, well worth a look!

(Message rqd:35)
Return-Path: <news@glorantha>
Received: from Holland.Sun.COM (sunnl) by homeland.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)

        id AA04666; Wed, 16 Jun 93 17:17:51 +0200 Received: from glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM by Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1e)

        id AA03513; Wed, 16 Jun 93 17:17:20 +0200 Received: by glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)

        id AA05229; Wed, 16 Jun 93 17:15:57 +0200 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 93 17:15:57 +0200
Message-Id: <9306161515.AA05229@glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM> From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer) To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest) Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily) Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 16 Jun 1993, part 3 Precedence: junk
Status: OR

The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.

Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM", they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying.

Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest. If you want to submit articles to the Digest only, contact the editor at RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.

Send enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor:

RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:31:10 EEST