Joerg

I wonder about the coverage of the long form cults. If the Westerners, the Arkati sects, Doraddi, East Islanders, Vormaini, Teshnans and Kralori, and non-human gods like the Sea Pantheon for mermen (and not just sailors) and the dwarf castes are adequately covered in the Gods of Glorantha book, I have little qualms about naming the second book Gods of Chaos or Gods of Terror, but if enough of the above-mentioned folk have been put on the back-burner but were to be included here, I would prefer a different title for the second volume. Magic supplements tend to sell comparatively well to players, as opposed to bestiaries, setting descriptions or scenarios. (Or character sheets...) This is the only form of publication approaching chap-books for the RuneQuest line, and once you substract the rules-y bits also for HeroQuest.

Just quoting the cultural dress for impala riders. Riding Godiva-style hasn't been reported as especially chafing in the few videos I have seen on the topic (on German TV - due to US sensibilities, I doubt you can find those online except on porn sites), whether with saddle or without.

No intention to do that. What I tried to do was to explain to you the limitations that were blatant to me analyzing that depiction, which (apart from the impossible position of the horse legs - compare the stills from the video) I regard as an expert observation by an artist who knew how to perform that maneuver himself. So, with these basic observations, what I said was that I don't think that a rider with that draw technique and a seat that far from the rear end of his horse, shooting a horned rider bow, would be able to shoot back at an angle better than 150° from the horse-head to horse-tail line. Does this prevent a Parthian shot? Of course not. All you have to do is careen the horse by the missing 30° from directly away from the enemy for the shot, and you get the 180°. But you aren't riding directly away in that moment any more. And if you are riding in formation, either all horses have to careen in the same moment, or all have to run away at that angle from the beginning. And that is a deficit that the introduction of the stirrup removed. If the Parthians pulled this off using only the extreme end of the left broadside arch, they needed extra discipline to be able to shoot at the same part of the enemy line they were riding up to in the charge. More respect to them. But like I said, this is a problem that the stirrup reduces strongly, as the video shows nicely. No, in this case you seem unfamiliar with the mechanics of the bow. I do admit that I don't own a horsebow, but friends of mine do. If you draw one, the horns make an outward movement which increases the span at rest at one unavoidable stage of the process, and again when you release it. As you draw the bow above your head for this behind the head rest for the right hand, only the release part of the cycle matters. That still spells plenty of conflict for bow horns as long as depicted on the Hephtalite bowl. The low angle at which the rider's bow arm is depicted doesn't leave enough room for the release cycle above the horse back. It works fine if the bow is held out to the flank of the horse, however, but that's a difference of about 30° from the tail, or 150° from the head. You don't seem to have gotten my comment on the behind the head draw for the angles for forward and backward shots, so I will try again. Hopefully in easier terms. The archer in the video uses the European three-fingered draw on the right side of his head. For shots directly to the front this means a disadvantage because the horse head gets in the way of the lower bow horn. The behind-the-head draw solves this problem by moving the arrow axis to the left of the head-tail axis, basically allowing the rider to shoot past the head while still facing forward, and reduces the angle by which the upper body has to be twisted to the right by about 15° - maybe only 10° if drawing the bow overextends the left arm to its back. If you don't believe me, take a strong expander and try to imitate the behind-the-head position, and hold a torchlight or a laser along the draw line. If you have a pointing laser, try aiming it while pulling the force of the expander. That's why I think that behind the head draw makes eminent sense for a horse archer. Now twist the upper body to the back. All of a sudden, the advantage for the forward shot turns into even more of a disadvantage for the rearward shot. Rather than winning 15°, you lose those 15° for the rearward bend, so a 180° shot would require a 105° bend of the shoulder line from its normal position perpendicular to the horse-head horse-tail axis, rather than just 90°. Everything clear so far? If not, indicate by breaking your quotes of this text where you lost me. If everything is clear and accepted, no need to quote this. I am not the most flexible person, but forcing my knees facing forward I can pull my shoulder-to-shoulder axis back about 45° without any major discomfort. A trained contortionist might add another 15-20° without much discomfort. You will have to trust me that you need to feel somewhat comfortable with your posture when releasing an arrow. So, let's assume that our steppes horse-archer can bend his shoulders back to a line of 65° from perpendicular, or 155° from the horse-head to horse-tail line. If he anchors his shot on the right of the head, he can add another 5-10° to that, arriving at only 15° from directly rearward (165° from forward). However, our archer on the bowl uses the behind the head draw, substracting those 5-10° from this angle. This result is quite plausible, and it has the big advantage of the bow horns completely avoiding the horseback. Hence my well-considered assumption that 150° is somewhere near the extreme backward firing arch of the archer depicted on the bowl. Human anatomy, personal experience how such a horned bow folds back, and simple geometry. Whether the parting host rides away in a straight line or at a 30° angle doesn't seem to be much of a deal, right? Unless the opposing line has archers, too. At 30° inclination, the fleeing horses provide a target almost twice as big as if they were running away in a straight line. The riders provide their profile in any case, they are fine - until the horse is shot from beneath them, and they tumble at breakneck speed to a ground they cannot see because they are twisted backward. Quite a lethal fall, I would expect, discounting being trampled by friendly hooves. Sorry, but bollocks. The stirrup was invented by steppes horse-archers. In the still below you can clearly see the about 30° extra twist that the hips provide, for a shot that goes back at about 160° - which would be even in my personal mobility range if I was able to ride a horse freehand at such speeds. Without the stirrups, no twisted hips, and much reduced backward firing arch. Which is exactly what I said in the previous post, if you had bothered to read it, which I feel I have every right to doubt. So once more. I doubted the ability to do a rearward shot at 180° without stirrups, and claimed that 150° would be anatomically be the limit. Everything shown in this video helps supporting this assumption. A 150° limit eliminates any problem of hitting the horseback with the lower horn of the bow. Problem avoided. The maneuver of riding up to an enemy line, riddling it with arrows, than turning around as a unit and riddling it with arrows on the retreat is still possible, but the retreat cannot be directly away from the enemy, but has to offer quite a bit of horse flank. Getting the turn right for a huge body of riders is quite an equestrian feat, especially since each of the horses will have its individual rhythm of ground contact and in the air phases. Even more of a feat if done without any guidance from the hands. Getting the departure angle right is another difficulty, although less important - the horse archers would be fine with peppering the left neighbors of their previous frontal attack victims in the defensive line with arrows. And if they hit the end of the line, a 90° turn will be enough to lead the riders away from the enemies. However, the same maneuver with stirrups allows 180° turns, elevating the bow higher above the horse back, and avoiding any impact problems there. The direct rearward shot would remain reserved for stirrup-users like the Sarmatians, but unavailable for the stirrup-less Parthians. But even without that improvement, a unit that could deal severe damage while retreating was worth twice to thrice their numbers unable to do so on the battle-field. As proven against Crassus. So, what Gloranthan implications do I draw from the considerations above? For the Praxian mounted archers, the behind-the-head draw would help to avoid sable or impala horns when shooting forward, regardless of stirrup availability. A full forward coverage still appears unlikely to me, so the mounted archer charge would usually come at an inclination of at least 30°, and probably depart at a similar angle, making the charge-retreat pattern a letter v. Zebra rider mounted archers are better off with regard to beast horns interfering with forward shots, but will still profit from stirrups in their arch of fire, too. Horse or mule riders too, of course.

Drawing behind the head makes the angle worse, not better, when shooting back. I think it was designed to be able to shoot straight front without interfering with the horse's head. The traditional European three-fingered draw on the right side of the head would require a minimum angle of 30-50° to keep the bow from interfering with the horse head. Given the shape of the bow, the angle has to be about 130° from the horse head, or the lower arm of the bow would hit the back of the horse, resulting in quite a lot of pain to the horse and an embarrassing short shot and possibly breaking the bow. More or less what I called the left broad-side. That's one advantage of rising up in the stirrups - not only do you get a bit more rotation out of your hips, you also clear the back of the horse by a bit more. That depends on his release. If he uses the thumb release, the back of the hand against the neck will provide excellent stability in the draught length and an anchor keeping the release height constant. Catching an archery release in art is about as hard as catching a horse's foot positions in gallop (like in the depiction above, which is as unrealistic as it can get but has been the artistic depiction of gallop throughout history), as the naked eye isn't quite able to provide a good impression of the fast moving feet. You don't hold an arrow at maximum draught with a war bow, drawing and releasing is one smooth movement. I suppose the archer keeps his quiver on the right hip or on the horse's flank, as the left hip is occupied by the sword which looks shorter than his arrows, and a back quiver would be prone to interfere with this behind the head draw. The rear end of a notched arrow causes almost as much harm as the tip when encountered in a fast movement, not to mention skewered eyes when approaching a target along line of sight of the arrow.

So the Strait of Messina isn't identified with Scylla and Charybdis any more? Odysseus spent most of his epic homecoming in the epic arms of island goddesses. Not entirely his own idea, but that cost him way more time than the opening of the sack of winds within sight of Ithaka.

Outside of grid references, "you" is an acceptable shorthand for "that construction unit there." On the other hand, gainsaying gold caste edicts is apostasy. Report for recycling. In that case, to what purpose would a functional unit propose cloning and memory transfer in the first place?

You, construction unit 30, have fallen victim to the heresy of individualism. The greatness of the mostali allows any unit of the appropriate caste to step in for a unit that has become dysfunctional and continue its work with hardly any decrease in efficiency.

More or less disagreeing. There were vast regions of not so densely settled but flowering agricultural communities with very little difference in material culture over distances that span half of Genertela. But then our archaeological record might be just enough to tell that these folk were Hill Barbarians. Not that using the current (or basically post gold-rush) population of California bears comparison with a world based on muscle power. Both these places have been drowned out of vastly bigger former lands (in case of Teshnos) or at least some of their best rice-growing land. The culture of Kralorela is ancient, that of Teshnos saw some longer foreign domination, but maintains a continuity similar to the claim that Ptolemaic Egypt had. Even the Zaranistangi somehow acculturated before their magical leaders disappeared. Their (mixed?) offspring remained. True. Kralorela is large enough for the provinces to have significant local flavor. Teshnos consists of four regions which had some history as separate political and possibly cultural entities, but post-colonial Teshnos has only started splintering with Harstar seceding with Melib. Both offer sufficiently different input to the current whole that the analogies make sense as far as they go. I couldn't say whether Teshnos is an alternate India or rather an alternate Khmer empire. It would even make sense as an alternate Sri Lhanka only. Both are splinters of the former Vithelan empire, which still has political continuity in Vormain, never mind the fragmentation by the floodings. Those (mythical) empires (Vithela, Murharzarm's Dara Happa) beat anything a Bronze Age empire could have hoped to achieve. But then they never were anything like comparable to the Bronze Age, either, but mythic realms. The closest terrestrial analogies would be Atlantis or Shangri-la.

I am more curious about what keeps the impala riders on the backs of their steeds. "Glue" doesn't work on bare buttocks, and doesn't last long enough anyway... Without stirrups, I imagine that there will be no parting shots, only shots from the left broadside. While demonstrating a quite different reality check topic (showing both buttocks and boobies of a super-heroine), a contortion artist demonstrated her inabiity to twist her body that much. (She did manage to twist the shoulders almost 180 degrees to the hips.) But then I suspect Golden Bow and related steed-mounted archery deities to grant magic tthat corrects an arrow's flight path after release from the bow.

This "Bronze Age" is going to haunt us forever... I am perfectly happy to say "it is Iron Age technology level with bronze as the ubiquitious metal", because that's what we have. Coins, the occasional chainmail, stirrups, opus caementitium, glazed pottery, unnecessarily Athenian triremes... And it isn't even like muscle power is the only source of force used. People have put elementals as engines in multiple applications, and the dwarf manikin automatons of all sizes don't quite use muscles and skeletons either. Also, the effects @M Helsdon ascribed to the mongols on the Chinese and Baghdad is rather weak compared to what hit the Gloranthan civilizations repeatedly. I have no problem with a Second Age technologically more advanced than the Third Age, and some leak-overs, and likewise with "Atlantean" pre-Gods War technology for other populations than the Mostali. Those Feldichi of Dorastor, whatever the Gold Wheel Dancer cyborgs were up to, Kadeniti and possibly others that have forgotten they ever had such splendor, or won't touch it again (Doraddi).

I would advise against getting that clone. It might take Jeff away from his keyboard for too long. On the other hand, things may be delegated - Cults of Terror consists of submissions to Chaosium, and while these were heavily rewritten by house staff, a lot of the initial work was done by volunteers/freelancers.

Back when I ran local conventions, I experimented with several independent groups researching the same setting at the same time. We prepared a bunch of locations with encounters, information, etc, and if one party chose to go there, the GM would grab the location write-up and set off to run it for his party. If a second party approached the same locations, the GMs would exchange info, and the parties would become their mutual encounters. If I had to do this for Cthulhu, I guess I would undust my Mythos CCG and select locations, potential allies or at least sources of information from there, and apply it to investigative roleplaying rather than the CCG rules. And yes, this would bring the different parties of investigators into direct influence of cultists plotting against other cultists. It isn't "shoot any caped person wielding a grimoire" style of pulp. Investigators would be encouraged to dabble in Mythos magics, to learn from their semi-monstrous contacts. It might include sending one type of Mythos creature to combat another. Player characters might end up as full cultists, in which case they would step over to the cousins/nephews/etc. And not every cultist will want to end the world tomorrow, some may be in almost sane campaigns of consolidating power. But that's a somewhat different topic, playing CoC in Mythos CCG style. Anyway, the Mythos CCG offers plenty of locations and leads, and might prove as good GMing tools for a multi-party game.

I would like to remind people that Glorantha isn't all about fighting Chaos. The cosmic conflict goes on between the four guardians of the directions and the four or five major contestants for the center of the world, including Orlanth, the Red Goddess, and Kyger Litor. There is one Chaos contestant (who isn't the Red Goddess), but that plot remains shrouded in mystery for the time being. There are enough dangerous things to do, like fighting Sir Ethilrist or trying to reason with Harrek. A somewhat verbose Bestiary with a few sample spells/powers should be enough to introduce broos, vampires or scorpionmen to your game. I'm not entirely sure that I am looking forward to a book "Gods of Chaos". Compared to Gods of Glorantha, this appears to end up as a rather slim volume. I would like to get more Otherworld/Outer World entities and their deities/divine ancestors. We have seen quite a few underworlds mentioned, with denizens like the Diokos horse-like demons of Ethilrist, or the Shadzorings of Greater Darkness and Dawn Age Alkoth. There are Luatha, Altinelans and similar Outer World entities to encounter, whether on explorative journeys or on the hero planes.

Looking at central European Bronze Age, at least the differences in material culture weren't that great. The Unetice culture which produced the Nebra Disk spread over an area from central Germany into the Ukraine. Hallstatt culture and its successor La Tene covered the entire region around the Alps and then some, and Urnfield before sat somewhat further to the east but with a similarly large area. Those small scale differences between rivaling cities is found mainly in Greece and in Mesopotamia. Anatolia had fairly large units, with the Hittites taking the biggest chunks, but Lydia and Phrygia similar unison as far as material culture went. But then we have a hard time discerning the different rider tribes that entered ancient Persia or the Danubian plains from their material cultures. We know about there being different ones from cuneiform and later Greek texts. There are no such textual references for central Europe, and so we don't have the slightest idea who could have gathered warriors from the Rhineland to Moravia (from memory, details may vary) for the battle at the Tollense crossing. (We do know that those folk came from there, using isotope analysis of their teeth.) Peloria with its mainly Dara Happan ordered, Pelandan (re-) built cities among a huge variety of rural folk pursuing quite different forms of agriculture or horticulture. Between Glorious ReAscent and the Perfect Sky several varieties of "rice" and food grasses are mentioned, and likewise e.g. the grass seed tribute upgraded to barley by that offensive Kitori tax collector that resulted in Double Tribute. All this hodgepodge is the result of various migrations, especially up and down the Danube. WIthout different tribal kingdoms by Germanic tribes adopting the Latin culture and those infamous Frankish inheritance splits, the previous Roman culture would have assured a fairly continuous culture. Those tribes that lost their autonomy to any incarnation of Imperial Rome - like the Vandals after conquest by Belisar - were undistingishable from their Roman neighbors. The small states of the Holy Roman Empire did not provide separate cultures, only separate dynasties. In the Dara Happan river valley you have weeders (a culture with a material culture similar to the Basra reed swamp Arabs, or considerably less), rice farmers, upland dry farmers (still dependent on irrigation, though), Manimati swamp and hill dwellers with probably their own traditions of agriculture, Naverians, Jernotians, Spolites, Oronin/Poralistor folk, Sweet Sea Harangvats, and all manner of remnants of Orlanthi-like pastoral groups theyalanized in the Dawn Age. The Lodril/Turos worshippers have some things in common, but are divided by many other details to which they cling with tribal pride. Pelandan city states come across as a fairly homogeneous culture but divided by favourite deities, then overlaid with Dara Happan and later Carmanian overseers. The rivers used to have their own populations, too. It might be the fact that we have stories, local names and local myths, but the diversity in central Genertela beats everything I have seen in the Old World Bronze Age. Not to mention Elder Races... Gloranthan diversity is a good thing, but I don't see it as a Bronze Age feature, more as a consequence of the living myths just on the Other Side, with meaningful interaction by the various populations.

I think that the Solanthi folk or at least some of their ruling families are a branch of the Pendali refugees who settled Basim. But then a majority of the Pendali were absorbed in Serpent King Seshnela, their ancestral ties to the lion spirit possibly remaining strong in some of the lineages, so there is a possibiltiy that some noble family among those Trader Princes who flocked in after the destruction of Old Slontos had this inheritance. If both his paternal and his maternal lineages had lion ancestry, that might explain how Greymane manifested it much stronger than previous chiefs of the Solanthi. But all of this is speculation.

No need to, when reality writes the funny stories. And yes, I basically tried to be helpful.

Ok, let's speculate. Taking a look at Sylila might help here. I have no idea whether the concept of "pants and tunics" has been edited out of canon, but for me this still works. The bear/storm worshippers of Sylila have accepted the role of their deity as the (non-chaotic) steed of the Goddess, and their upper crust has taken most of the Heartlands styles, but retains a few barbarian peculiarities. I tend to think that the rest of the Provinces, except maybe Tarsh with its direct connections to Glamour, look no farther than Sylila to loan Imperial trappings. I expect helmets to be imitated. The Roman legionary helmet and the standard Gaul helmet both inherited from the Etruscan design, so there is some potential here. Only there are quite a few influences of helmet design in Peloria. The Stonewall phalanxes originating in Daxdarian Pelanda possibly have slight variations to their helmet styles, or at least ornamental patterns, making them easily identifyable. (This means that the Lunar Dragoons also share that design, as they donned the hoplite armor of vanquished Carmanian units and took to horses, never mind that those cuirasses were made for foot soldiers.) Fronelan designs came with Syranthir and his 10,000, and probably still dominate Carmanian cavalry helmet design. Given the warrior beast society totems, various beast features might be replicated in those helmets, but certainly lions and bulls. Given the origin of the Lunar Empire in Rinliddi, I can see raptor-beak-shaped helmets featuring in some units. Now, which of these designs would the Orlanthi wish to inherit? Carmanian bull designs will do nicely for Storm Bull worshippers. The Yanafali ram design might be popular in the hills, too. Sun Domers will quite likely borrow from the phalanxes. Not sure about avian trappings other than feathers, though. Footwear. Imperial sandals may be the mark of the person with status. Possibly plateaued ones (think Japanese Geta, rather than heels). Military sandals are quite the high-tech product - Roman sandals had iron studs through the lower soles, offering similar grip to soccer boots. Gloranthan studded sandals probably use some bronze. The Sun Dome Templars are likely to use something like this, possibly mass-fabricated in the Empire. Togas rather than cloaks probably should be reserved for the most Lunarized places, like the Tarshite court or Jillaro. Dara Happa has very strict rules who gets to wear togas. But that doesn't mean that Orlanthi chieftais don't don their cloaks in imitation of Toga style on certain occasions. Belt and cloak clasps: Looking at examples from the Visigoths, imperial workmanship style might be adapted to traditional designs, creating hybrid forms - possibly fabricated in Sylila or Jillaro. The Seven Mothers might provide promotional designs to a wider populace, sneaking Lunar depictions into the everyday dress. Fabrics: Native hill folk textiles are wool or linen. Contact with Dara Happa might provide cotton. Kralori silk hand-me-downs would be rather rare, as silk would be highly coveted by the Heartlanders, but the most affluent Provincials (again the Tarshite court) might get them just so they could show those snot-nosed Heartlanders that they aren't that elevated. A lot of exotic dyes might come across Dragon Pass, giving the Provincials an advantage over the Heartlanders. We know that Moirades and probably Phargentes before him paid good money for Heartland artists to help create Furthest as a modern Lunar city. Those styles will have spread to the wealthy in Tarsh, too, and possibly even aped by people like Kangharl of the Colymar. First of all Orlanthi long swords. IIRC, Orlanthi bronze working has a secret to make their blades almost as durable as iron blades. For those who dont like Lunar curved blades, at least. Runic tattoos, or at least face- and bodypaint or henna. Chariots are ancient traditions for both Dara Happans (though maintained by their Horse warlord oppressors), and of the Orlanthi. That image of Jar-eel and Beat-Pot in the Guide may be such a case. Gladiatorial gear and getup. Denim pants for rebellious youth...

Hmm. I never imagined the Praxians as doing their own pottery, either, but the oasis folk probably do. I don't recall seeing dried animal dung under the main imports to Pavis. The trope of the hamstrung smith plotting his revenge is alive and well in The Coming Storm. There are numerous cultures that never had their own metal production, but relied on trade, tribute or raiding to get their hands on the tools for their main activity. For Praxian purposes, a weak sorcerer able to form/set metal would be a bona fide metalworker.

May I notice that the krater would be the large communal wine mixing container from which the servants would scoop the drinks that would be poured in the skyphos (high cup) or skylix (flat bowl) at the drinker would be filled. The Krater would be refilled with wine and water (under the eyes of the drinkers, so that they knew what potency to expect). Somehow the Greeks managed to produce wine in "cask strength", possibly by adding dried fruit to the mash (or however that is called in wine making). But then I think that wine is rather the exception than the rule in Orlanthi beverage consumption, a sign of status (except in wine-making clans). "You think the beer is weaker these days, Horanth? Well, if your hens aren't laying, I don't have the eggs to give it more substance. I have to be careful with pig blood, overdo it and the entire cauldron will turn bitter." That's the kind of exchange I would expect between a Sartarite brewer providing his thane or chief with the beverage for his public hall and a somewhat disgruntled customer.

The Paps are part of the Praxian culture. Why would you find a metal worker there? Basically, because it is the center of their culture, and so service folk will go there to work for them. Possibly skilled slaves. The presence of a Third Eye Blue smith in Gringle's retinue who works on imported iron rather than smelting his own is a similar case. There were glass-workers at Hedeby, in an otherwise glass-less Viking culture. The merchant population of Hedeby apparently didn't move there entirely voluntarily, either, but were convinced to abandon their original Vik in Mecklenburg. While no The Block might be the place where the metal worker would find most of his customers, but then there he will find too many of his customers' customers, from the nearby marsh. But the likelihood of a metalworking slave or two at the Block is quite high, too.

"Not yet", as in "Do you know the name of this metropolis in Esrolia?" Along with Corflu one of the more fancy ways of naming in Glorantha.

So basically this tells us that wine and other liquids aren't (usually) stored in barrels. That doesn't mean that there are no barrels for other commodities. The taste of barrels (or of resin on skin) is an acquired taste in beverages. As we are unlikely to have cognac, rum or whisky, this doesn't really matter much. I am a bit torn about beer. It has been present since neolithic times and is one of three major ways to make grain comestible (the other two are porridge and bread). It can be prepared in ceramics, but those need to be suitable for cooking (not a great deal, since most cooking is going to be done in ceramic vessels, but then those may be usually a bit more porous, like the Roman clay pot that is still in use in modern kitchens. But then cauldrons are quite bronze-agey, too - the Gundestrup cauldron may have come to Denmark in the Roman Iron Age, but it draws on Hallstatt motives, and the exact date of its fabrication is unknown. Its purpose doesn't seem to have been connected to any fire, possibly as a mixing basin for wine (which would indicate Greek influence rather than Roman, since those Roman barbarians drank wine straight). Decorated items are a major theme. Sword hilts might look like animal mouths with the blade symbolizing a tusk or the tongue. Greaves won't be smooth but might for instance recall tree stems, providing the wearer with a stand rooted in the earth, or have winged designs to allow swift (forward) movement. Ceramics require quite a bit of firewood or charcoal, which needs to be imported to Pavis as well. This reminds me a bit of the teak-wood sugar chests which created a furniture industry in the colonial period, making the container just another ware in addition to the content. So, yes, Pavis will receive a lot of goods in wooden containers because those containers provide a secondary line of business, and quite a bit less in ceramic containers because those aren't that high in demand. This doesn't apply to the elevated society that comes with the occpation force, though. Although the Paps is one place where you would go to find a metalworker. There's also the possibility to combine baskets with bladders or sewn skins, creating a container that is lighter than either amphorae or barrels and as protected from impacts. The main drawbacks are less durability over time and an influence on the taste, but like with modern cask effects praised by connoisseurs of various brandies, this will be an acquired taste. (I suppose un-chlorinated tapwater will taste funny to people who don't have any other tapwater, too.) Or where transportation by waterway is limited. For overland transportation on wagons, amphorae will most likely be put into basket-like protectors or surrounded by lots of (valuable, to the farmers) straw (but as valuable to the recipients in say Pavis). Clay, water, and fuel (or some other source of fire). For Pavis, the water requirement can be a show-stopper, too. On the other hand, use of waste water with urea may improve the quality of the stuff in the kiln. Barrels are boats that go around all the way, instead of stopping halfway around. Any culture that builds boats with planks will produce tubs. The main difference from barrels to boat building are the hoops, but funnily those are inherited from an older boat-building technology, reed boats, or bound rafts. Basically an inheritance from basket-making. Creating the planks for a barrel or for a boat requires the same skills, the same tools and the same problems with water-tighting. Using metal (as nails, for hoops, or for surface protection) for boats or barrels may be a quite recent development - possibly one initiated by the Jrusteli Free Men of the Seas. The God Forgot tin tubs appear to be the extreme of this development. There will be dugout wooden vessels, too, in both senses of vessel. The Roman clay cooking pot can be upscaled as a container, and is like made for keeping meat. You don't transport sausages in flasks, either, but in glasses with a wide top and some form of non-glass lock (needn't be a screw-on metal lock, anything that takes a seal with some available sealant like wax will do). Wide-opening earthware with an earthware lid is common in kitchens, so why not on the road?

In that regard, the Orlanthi sacrifices are quite similar to the Norse blot - blood and certain other parts for the gods, the rest for the worshippers. In the Norse blot the blood would be used similar to holy water, sprinkling the attendants. The tithes are covering the communal service - the annual crop blessing, defense strengthening and weather correction magics. Those cover the days when the priest and godspeakers are too busy to cater for your selfish needs. But there are other days, and dependants never stop asking for food.

Congratulations, and isn't it delightfully ironic that the origin of the D&D magic system now resides within the BRP family?

There appear to be fixed demands for specific cattle (even up to the coloration) for certain rites, like "on the Dark Season holy day, sacrifice five black bullocks". Those are for communal sacrifices and blessings, however. There appears to be no direct connection between the sacrifice's POW and the POW value of the magic in mainstream cults' sacrifices. If there was such a practice, it would reek of evil sorcery or vampirism. There are other forms of symbolic sacrifice, like sacred items reusably sacrificed, which makes the process more like a dedication of the item to sustain this blessing than a destruction. In such a case, it would be interesting what happens if the item sacrificed this way was lost to the community (and entire scenarios or mini-campaigns could result from this if removing such a blessing would create a major weakness in an enemy organisation). But there is another point to this: such blessings through sacrifice often have a duration way beyond the up to three combat scenes duration of RQ divine magic, although with a much lower impact. There hasn't been anything like this in RuneQuest except for Bless Crops and Earthwarm.