simonh

I think the point of the restriction is to avoid rejoining that which has been severed - the link between the body and the soul. After all, Humakt is The Severer. Simon Hibbs

Completely with Ian on context. I loo think it's likely to be something that different Humakti can disagree on. Some temples might apply different interpretations. So for example on Ancestor Day one Humakti might take part, another might prefer to leave for the duration, while a real a-hole might actively try to spoil everything. Simon Hibbs

The whole point of my suggestion is that this form of resurrection may not be sacrilege for Humakti, and there are some reasons to believe that this is so. If it's sacrilege of course they will have a problem with it. But equally if they don't have a problem with it, presumably it is not considered sacrilege. Does that seem reasonable? So that's what I'm suggesting - the actual distinction between the cases they seem ok with and may even participate in and those they are explicitly not ok with. Most of the details of the Sword Bridge Quest aren't relevant except for that it's a Humakti hero quest and that at leas part of it takes place in Hell. So to perform the quest a Humakti would have to travel to Hell and come back again. >I didn't mean people who were killed by Humakti but people who went to the Underworld willfully I'm saying that while such people are dead in some sense, they are not severed and have not actually been touched by Humakt, so their returning to the lands of the living might not be considered sacrilege by Humakti. Simon Hibbs

How about heroquesters that travel to the underworld? In particular Humakti heroquesters such as those performing the Sword Bridge Quest? This is the issue that triggered this discussion. We know that Humakti don't have a problem with people that bodily travel to Hell and back and actually do this themselves. Simon Hibbs

I think it's unlikely someone killed by a Humakti would end up in Hell with their body and soul not separated. Simon Hibbs

I've switched my home game from RQ to HQG and I'm very pleased with the change. Starting the game using RQ was important in hindsight though because it established how the world works at the ground level. If I were to run a Bourne Movies game using HQ, the action and fell I'd be trying for I emulate would be the action in the films. In HQG the action and feel I'm trying to emulate us the emergent narrative you get from RQ. I just find RQ too mechanically time consuming and fiddly for play at home. this doesn't mean I try to recreate specific spirit magic spells or impales or such directly into HQ terms, any more than every kick and manoeuvre that would be shown in a Bourne movie fight scene has to be specifically called out and represented mechanically in a game. Simon Hibbs

I think you only get a PDF slipcase if you ordered a PDF D20. Simon Hibbs

It seems to me we are talking about two different things, death by being in the underworld on the one hand and the severing of body and soul on the other. When heroquesters (and giant babies?) travel to Hell they cross the Styx they are dead, but their bodies and souls are not necessarily separated. When someone is killed in the Middle World their bodies and souls are separated, but the soul does not immediately travel to the Underworld. Once the soul does go to Hell after 7 days, resurrection by the spell is no longer possible. Note that Humakti have a huge problem with people getting resurrected by having their separated body and soul rejoined, but don't have any problem with people who bodily travelled to the underworld returning. So these are clearly completely different states, they are not just two different ways to reach a single identical state. But equally beings in Hell are clearly operating under the rules that apply in Hell, they are in a different state from beings in the Middle World. So to me this disagreement is due to perhaps the single most common cause of all disagreements ever - using the same words as each other but meaning or understanding them to mean different things. I'm sure this sort of disagreement happens in Glorantha as well. The great mystical truths of Gloranthan religion are not learnable by memorising dogma (shh, don't tell the Lankor Mhy), but must be experienced because language and even logic is incapable of expressing them. Is there some better terminology we can use to distinguish these different forms of death though? Maybe, but we're always going to have to deal with the fact that sources are going to use ambiguous language. With mythology as with many forms of literature, you need to look past the literal terminology and be prepared to interpret it flexibly. So when Jeff says that the official position is that because beings in Hell are by definition dead, I like to think that what that state - dead - means needs to be interpreted flexibly and might not always to all beings in all cases mean the same thing. As a footnote, bear in mind that even separation of body and soul can mean different things. Someone killed by Sever Spirit is dead, their body is lifeless and decays, but a Shaman who's spirit has discorporated is not in the same state. It's not even that mortals are just binary beings of body and soul, I think Orlanthi believe there are many parts to a mortal being, only one of which is the physical body. So which parts are severed from which? The two types of 'death' might consist of different parts being separated. The whole terms of this discussion are hopelessly simplistic. There's an awful lot of talking past each other going on. Simon Hibbs

Hi Darius, I think being 'stuck' discorporateclong term is a horrible state to be in. The body is a useless, volitionless lump of meat; the spirit is lost, vulnerable and separated from its family, culture and religious community. Both are largely ineffectual. Also bodies and spirits aren't freely interchangeable and I'm not sure that all spirits are capable of possessing bodies that are not their own. That feat may not have even existed or been possible, at least for most. In the wrong body you have the wrong family, the wrong physical urges and needs, you're in the wrong place, speak the wrong language, etc. It's a desperately unhappy state of affairs. It might be a useful trick in certain circumstances (adventuring) but a very crappy way of life for most people. Simon Hibbs

I got to play this with MOB, Dan Barker and a Gwen. Attractive cards, engaging theme, fun game play. You always have choices to make and they can clearly affect the outcome. Each tribe has a different special ability, which gives it replay value as you try each of them out a figure out how to take advantage of each ability. There's not a lot of strategic depth, but that can slow games down as people agonizecover their turn, so I think the game play design is very well judged. Can't wait to pick it up. Simon Hibbs

I'll chip in on the pro-podcast side. I listen to them on the way to/from work, mostly while walking which otherwise would be dead time, so they're fantastically convenient. Also sometimes while cooking. Simon Hibbs

I think that would detract too much support from the full game. I believe there has been talk of this and Cthulhu Wars eventually coming out in a more conventional format and price point, but if it does happen I expect that would be several years down the line and development of further full-bore games would take priority. Simon Hibbs

The RQ2 rules aren't really all that complex, but they do offer a huge variety of options to player characters compared to D&D. Being proficient at using the game system effectively takes a lot more time and thought. In D&D you can play a fighter or thief or really any of the non spell casting classes without really knowing much about the rules. But to run a character in combat in RQ2 you really do need to know the game system in and out. Simon Hibs

I agree with Dave Cake. You can look at it from different perspectives. From a mystical perspective they're 'failed mysticism'. From a theist perspective they're tests of commitment. Both can be true.

> Greg likely thought it would be cool to include geases into the cult system somewhere. I'm sure that's the real world reason, but we can still have fun figuring out the Gloranthan reason. Simon Hibbs

I played a shaman extensively in RQ3. It's a lot of fun, but time consuming. A important issue is that searching for spirits and managing your bound spirits often took GM time which meant taking away play time from the rest of the group. I don't think involving the rest of the group in these activities e.g. By introducing mechanisms for the group to go with the shaman on the sprit plane helps because now they're just shaman sidekicks, and the extra nteraction means it will take even more time. This is one of the issues RQ4 shamanism needs to address. Simon Hibbs

That's fair enough, it's true RQ2 didn't make runes game mechanically significant. It looks like you will be able to play the new edition of RQ and just ignore runes and run magic more like it was in RQ2 as well. Ive always found runes fascinating, just as I've always been interested in all kinds of religious and magical symbols. I like the way they evoke an underlying reality to myth and the universality of magical symbolism both in terms of physical symbols and symbolic meanings. so I'll take my Glorantha with a nice big side order of parochial crap every time . Simon Hibbs

Joerg has nailed it. Failed mysticism. Spot on. Of course that wouldn't work for Lhankor Mhy because his is a materialist religion teaching sorcery. Thanks. Simon Hibbs

I'm pretty sure I've heard Greg talk about this at a con, but can't remember the details. Why do Yelmalio and Humakt have Geases and Gifts but other cults don't, or just have general taboos and required behaviour without the formalism of Geases and gifts. I think it has to do with them both being Truth Rune cults, but in which case why doesn't Lhankor Mhy have them? Simon Hibbs

I love combat in Elric!, I used it as my core system for Gloranthan role playing for over a decade. So fluid and flexible compared to the straight-up slog of RQ2 combat. But perhaps a bit cinematic for some tastes. I don't think it matters as much with RQ4 though. Asking how well it works without any magic is like asking what a chicken sandwich is like without the chicken. I still might swap out the combat mechanics for Elric! though. That's the lovely thing about the BRP family of games, they're super-modular and very easy to tune to your own liking. Simon Hibbs

From RQ2: "The Runes are symbols which have power inherent in them. They serve as aids in manipulating the universe. However, merely looking at a Rune is not suf cient to use its power. A character must know how to use it as a symbol to gain any bene t from it. " "To the practical minded character, interested mostly in the uses of power, it doesn’t matter. The Runes are there, and they work. " Runes have been clearly described as fundamental to how ordinary Glorathans view the world and work their magic from day one. The God Learners didn't invent the runes, they systematised magical symbols already endemic to every culture in Glorantha. That's one of the first things we knew about them. Dragon Pass the game was plastered with runes. We have a Rune Priests of Rune Cults casting Rune Magic. It's purely a historical accident that RuneQuest the game system pretty much already existed before it was mated to Glorantha and Greg didn't know much about RPG design back then. At last we have game systems that match the way the setting has been described all along. Simon Hibbs

I don't think the godtime is some ancient era long ago in history at all. There is no 'Before Time' because it's a meaningless statement. In Glorantha the god time is happening right now. It always is and always was. That's what it means to be outside time. It means to be always there, always accessible at any time through the moments and cycles of the natural world in Glorantha. Yelm wasn't slain long ago in some ancient time, he's being slain right there every day and falls to the underworld every sunset. That immediacy and immanence is why hero questing is possible and why it can change the world. Simon Hibbs

Page 18 box on the alternate editions "second a first and second printing". Simon Hibbs

The Fabled Lands books are good because they run in 'endless play' mode. They're not linear, so you can go back to the same locations many times. They use a system of code words and tick boxes at locations to trigger unique events and track changes. if you do a Google search for it, there's an authorised Java version of the books that is excellent and free. It's a full game that tracks progress, includes the art and is part way between a game book and a computer game, similar to some of the mobile phone app versions of the Fighting Fantasy books. You can 'cheat' by saving the game before fights and the-loading if you lose, but since we do that in computer games all the time she might not mind that as much. Simon Hibbs

I've not played many T&T solos so I don't know. Jay a bit of Arena of Khazan. I was thinking of using it as a regular RPG. I did play through most of the first two Fabled Lands solo ganebooks. Those are great. They created a character each, and I 'ran' the books. Simon Hibbs