From: Jonas Schiott (jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se)
Date: Thu 23 Jun 1994 - 23:42:45 EEST
Last calls for Growing Pains:
I'll be dropping out of the Daily come July (be back in August, though), and I probably won't be checking for other e-mail very often (I'm not even sure I can access a terminal), so if you want the Chaos Apes' amazing East Wilds scenario to read during your vacation (?) you've got one week left to ask for it.
Now for some smart-ass remarks to various other peoples' earnest efforts.
___
Eric in X-RQ-ID: 4739:
>Maybe this
>Lokamayadon guy is just misunderstood.
Definitely. In the Ralios history I posted some while ago there's a passage about what a stupid little reactionary twerp that Harmast guy was :-). I've since regretted including it in _that_ particular text, which we otherwise tried to keep free of value judgements, but it is certainly a viewpoint that would have existed. And been true in some sense for some people.
>Imagine a person's progression in a cult as a heroquest of sorts.
Other have suggested (or even ranted about) similar conceptions, but to me it devalues the whole idea of HQing. What you're saying does remind me a good deal of the introduction to the RQ2 rulebook. The kind of 'mundane HeroQuest' you want is what the term "RuneQuest" should cover.
>I like the idea that these are an
>aspect of the internal guilt of the offender.
Why, thank you. :-)
>My thought is that the
>person, having been raised and acculturated (physicists shouldn't use words
>like that...) into a certain religon would have some hidden guilt no matter
>how hard they deny it.
Yes, that's pretty much what we had in mind...
___
Barron in X-RQ-ID: 4755:
>I think a lot of the
>discussion of the H/R have been too influenced by our worlds
>reilgious/social history.
Hear, hear!
If you want a _romantic_ view of medieval Europe, go play Pendragon (or perhaps Ars Magica).
If you want a _realistic_ view of medieval Europe, what are you into FRP for?
___
In X-RQ-ID: 4749, Devin sums up the debate on history rather well, with the
best arguments I've seen so far (in this forum, that is). But I still get
this urge to point out that whatever he or Cullen or Nick (I think those
were the principal flame-breathers, my apologies if I've forgotten someone)
thinks, there is no such thing as a 'state of the historical art' or
consensus among historians (or among philosophers, but _that_ shouldn't
surprise anyone) on the question "Where ancient people like us or not?".
Now, if you want _my_ answer (if you don't, cover your eyes) it would be
something like this:
We don't know.
There's no way for us to find out.
All we can do is take the assumptions we like best and see where they lead us. Then we can ponder whether or not we like the results.
Of course, a lot of this only applies to real, Earth history. At least for me, one of the main attractions of writing fictional history like that of Glorantha (BTW, I regard even writings about the 'present day' of Glorantha as history, since our perspective on it is anything but contemporary) is that I can have a certain omniscience.
Hmm, guess I'm sticking my neck out slightly here. If you want to flame me for it, please remember the deadline I mentioned at the start of this posting.
( Jonas Schiott ) ( Institutionen for Ide- och lardomshistoria ) ( Goteborgs Universitet ) ---------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:35:23 EEST