From: Jonas Schiott (jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se)
Date: Fri 15 Apr 1994 - 20:17:12 EEST
From the Daily of 94-04-14:
> Chaosium has an unpublished Eurmal/Trickster write-up that
>gives the distributions of the various aspects.
What? Where? How? I hereby add my voice to the chorus clamoring for
publication of this crucial document.
Brian Dickinson 94-04-15:
>I'm also confused by the use of the name "trickster" for both
>Eurmal cultists and Nysalor Illuminates. Does this imply that
>Eurmal initiates are commonly thought of as illuminated!
>One of the lightbringers chaotic? surely not! - unless this is
>one of Eurmals more spectacular jokes!
I think you're referring to the Illuminates in CoT, who used their
tricksterhood as cover (Illuminates can join any cult they like, you know).
This particular combination is very effective, since both Illuminates and
tricksters are seen as more-or-less insane, but I don't think it's all that
common. Except in our (the Chaos Apes', to all you Swedes reading this - my
apologies for the incomprehensibility to everyone else) East Wilds campaign
(remember, the troupe in CoT is said to come from Ralios). I have some more
opinions about Illumination; if my Trickster propaganda doesn't spark any
debate, perhaps we could discuss Riddlers instead?
>Also what is Eurmals relationship to illusions. A recent TOTRM
>(not to hand unfortunately) had a Eurmal/trickster (again trickster?)
>hero with illusion magics. I had the feeling that illusions were from
>some other source - I first remember seeing them in Questworld (Lord
>Skydds(?) Manor).
Eurmal owns the Illusion rune (RQ3 Introduction to Glorantha Book).
Which brings me to an argument that I just realized could be used against
my last posting. If Eurmal is the owner (i.e. anthropomorphization) of
Illusion, and Bolongo of Disorder, this seems to contradict the theory of
them being the same entity.
To untangle this, I'll have to wheel out some heavy metaphysical artillery.
Now, according to one theory about the nature of Gloranthan reality (a God
Learner theory, admittedly, but all the really interesting ones are) the
Runes are the building blocks of the world. Or at least of the deities,
which is all that need concern us for the moment. Gods/Goddesses and the
Cults pertaining thereto are simply one way for humans to interact with
these strange and inhuman forces. On this theory, what happens when frex
Bolongo 'inherits' Disorder from Ratslaff, is really that the human
worshippers have aquired a need for a different type of personification.
Not that I think Ratslaff was ever actually worshipped in the 3rd Age sense
- it's the same phenomenon as when Umath (too primal for mere humans to
grasp) was replaced by Orlanth (much more sophisticated, a God you can
really feel comfortable with:-)). If this is all there is to it,
"Trickster" becomes nothing more than a label applied to a bunch of
different cults that mortals for some reason find similar.
This will not do. I once again bring your attention to the
interchangeability of worshippers and spells. The God Learners could only
pull this stunt with deities that had the same runes, and it cost them the
world (literally). Trickster cultists can switch between shrines dedicated
to entirely different concepts (runes), and do it without any effort at
all! Clearly there is some deeper secret hidden here...
Another version of mythology states that there are powers at work that
_preceed_ the Runes. Glorantha, for one. In the more abstract versions,
they are called things like Maker and Grower. Now, since these published
beings are also stated to be later associated with certain deities (Mostal
and Aldrya, I think - could be Mostal and Flamal), couldn't there also be a
primeval Trickster who has been simplified both through the idea of Runes
and the later development of Deities? The reason for there being two major
runes connected to Trickster is of course that it's such a complex and
confusing entity. I would appreciate any comments on this suggestion.
On a lighter note, if Illusion is temporary reality, isn't reality just a big illusion with lots of Extension? And wouldn't that make Trickster the Creator? Now I know this is not The Truth, because I suggested it to Greg a few years back and he was exceedingly sceptical (I think he's an ontological realist at heart). But I'm still willing to bet that it's what the Eurmal cultists believe...
Various other subjects:
>Finally I got round to looking in the RQ3 magic book and sure enough the
>casting chance for spirit magic is POW*5 - ENC; the magic bonus is not
>mentioned and the text implies that this is the complete formula.
Yep. The magic bonus addition is an addendum to the rules. I think it's
official, but I can't recall when, where or who said (wrote?) it.
>Note the reason why sorcerors must have at least +10% magic bonus is to
>allow apprentices to be able to cast one 1 pt. spell per day! Remember
>that a typical set of clothes is about 3 ENC and this is subtracted from
>a d6 roll!
Uhh, I don't think normal clothes count as ENC if you're wearing them, just
if you're carrying them in a pack or something. I'm pretty sure this is
stated in RQ2, not quite so sure about the 3rd ed. Though naked wizards
_is_ an amusing idea.
Anyway, who cares about rules?
>Another linguistic problem: the word "thane." In Pagan Shore, thane is
>essentially a clan chieftain. In the Orlanth writeup in Heroes I.4, anyone
>in the Orlanth Rex subcult (which includes tribal council members on
>council business) is called thane. But in King of Sartar, the rank is
>broadly defined to any sort of leadership role
>...
>Has anyone dealt with this in their Orlanthi campaigns?
In my group, we see this as linked to which stage of organization a
particular orlanthi society has acheived. In more 'primitive' clan- or
tribe-based cultures, the thane is The Man, the sole clan leader (and the
tribal leader is called a chieftain, to avoid confusing Kingdoms and the
Kings of tribes). But in a 'sophisticated' kingdom like Sartar (and
possibly some tribal lands as well, no clear-cut boundaries here), there
would be more thanes, as there is a wider dispersion of leadership roles.
Of course, there is the possibility of finding orlanthi so backward that
they have never learned about Orlanth Rex (which was 'invented' through
Heroquesting - in the Second Age, I believe), and they would never use the
term at all. Or "chieftain"(=chief thane), for that matter.
(The reason all my source references are so tentative is that I don't have access to my collection of RQ material here at the University.)
Btw, I hate admitting how new I am to the Daily, but what's a "GRoY"? Or a "GREY"? Same thing?
Jonas
---------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:33:42 EEST