Darius West

Well this is perfectly reasonable, bronze doesn't rust. I am wondering which marsh spirits the offerings are for. They had better be very useful if the Praxians are foregoing the use of metal weapons and effectively arming the chaos critters in the process of gifting them.

Do Gloranthan vocabularies even have a word for technology?

I think that depends on the tradition they belong to, but some clarification on the point would be good. Some would say that every dead person travels there on their way to be judged, hence the 7 day turnover for the resurrection spell, which works the same way regardless of tradition. Especially for Humakti hero questers. I won't use it. It is ridiculous. What I resent is the notion that an idea so foolish has entered the canon and is now considered somehow incontestable as a result. It is fun watching other people performing theological somersaults to justify it however.

So, if you are beneath the underworld you aren't dead? But surely you have to pass through the underworld to reach this place beneath the underworld where you suddenly aren't dead anymore?

If there are no absolutes, then why do 100% of Gloranthan cultures seem to think that everyone is "dead" if they set foot in the underworld. That sounds pretty absolute to me.

Actually on closer inspection I think you will find that the whole reason for Chalana Arroy to do the LBQ is to heal the wound she could not heal, which was death. Also, given that the world was dying without Yelm, his resurrection was essential to making life possible again and ending the Greater Darkness. Lhankor Mhy was questing for his dead love too. Humakt is not purely an Orlanthi deity. I suspect he is worshiped in Carmania and the Kingdom of War which are pretty western. I would be surprised if Vormain doesn't have a Humakt cult too, given the Samurai sword culture. Good. So, given your background in this area you must have a deep understanding of how important it is within a journey into the underworld to keep one's connection to the world of the living as an anchor if you are trying to draw them back from death. It is an idea which is central in the majority of shamanic cultures when dealing with the issue. There are exceptions, such as the Bardo, but even there you will find sutras to save the sick by drawing them back to the land of the living.

So what do the dead eat exactly? And as to the feasting in Orlanth's Hall, who says anyone there is dead? If immortality means what immortality means, then a dead god is merely very self indulgent and sulky.

Perhaps a little odd that the Giants send their children into the underworld... to die... when the kindly God Learners were quite happy to help them die in the Middle World, yet that upsets the Giants for some unfathomable reason

If what you say is true, then Chalana Arroy would not have had her impetus for the Lightbringer Quest, which was a wound she could not heal, being death. Prior to the Lesser Darkness death wasn't an issue.

And the trolls that the Lightbringers are apparently feeding Flesh Man to... alive or dead? And if dead, then why do they need to eat?

I don't think Humakt or any hero quester who is physically alive on entering underworld is actually dead. I think that is a poetic affectation that others have mistaken for a truth. If it were true, then no Humakti should ever leave the underworld once they enter it for any reason. My source is Cults of Prax. As resurrection is defined as all forms of coming back from the dead by any means, not just the spell, the above follows. Otherwise Humakt would probably be a cult that accepted undeath too. They are prepared to accept other people resurrecting, but don't think they like it.

So, as a quick question on this point. Did Humakt kill Issaries, Lhankor Mhy, Chalana Arroy, Eurmal and Flesh Man too ? How did they all wind up dead? Seems pretty dishonorable to kill poor CA. I thought Humakt liked her? Flesh man in particular is of interest I should think... Being a man of flesh in the underworld is a really interesting point if you think about it. After all, if he is flesh and dead in the underworld; isn't he a zombie if he keeps walking around ? Or perhaps he is still alive?

On the contrary, I see this notion of being "dead" in the underworld as a form of God Learner monomyth that has been superimposed on cults where it has no place. We are told that all spirits pass beyond the Gates of Dusk, are judged, and then go to their fate. You say you can take your body with you on these quests, but it attracts unwanted attention from unpleasant spirits. I have no problem with that notion; it should be problematic and terribly risky, but the body should not automatically be considered dead. Being alive in such a situation and taking those terrible existential risks is the very definition of heroism after all. As an aside, as you seem to like shamanic cultures, consider the Lightbringer Quest for a moment as a shamanic journey to rescue Yelm for a moment. If those partaking in the quest have lost their connection to the realm of the living, how are they any different to dead Yelm whom they are trying to save? How can they drag anyone into the land of the living if they themselves are dead?

If you are in a state that is defined as being "dead" then as a Humakti you are bound to remain that way. if a Humakti has the ability to resurrect themselves they will not do it unless they are prepared to accept being thrown out of their cult. And what is the difference between being dead because you are in the realm of the underworld and dead because you were killed in the Middle world? Nothing. A secret path back is just another form of resurrection... or maybe it is the knowledge that you aren't really dead in the underworld after all...

I would run a hundred miles rather than be part of any of those dogmatic institutions, The fact you are prepared to write this is an acknowledgment of the fact that there are irreconcilable contradictions in play on this point. I suspect we agree on that at least. Apparently this one is set in stone across all cultures in Glorantha despite the fact it makes no sense at all. Why can cultures vary on all points but the notion of being "dead" in the underworld? RW mythology varies on this point, but most of the cultures that mainstream Glorantha draws on like the Greeks, the Norse and the Celts accept the notion of heroes being alive in the underworld. It is bad anthropology to suggest that ALL cultures will think the same way on any point too. Next, Humakti heroquesters have potentially fatal and unlikely consequences from the idea, not to mention how doubtful trolls would feel about it. So we have a massive contradiction, but somehow, unlike in the case of the myriad other contradictions, ALL Gloranthan cultures apparently think you are dead if you are in the underworld, and not an Orlanthi definition of all being 85% apparently, but 100%, despite the fact it doesn't hold up under scrutiny. They might vary immensely on every other issue, but apparently not this one. Like I said, it's a group think echo chamber. No-one is even seriously prepared to consider the notion that this point is not somehow "fixed in stone". I find that absurd and I am surprised nobody else does. Of all the points for all the cults to agree on, this is the one? Why? Because nobody has really seriously questioned it until now. I mean, really, if this "dead in the underworld" rule applies, Humakti can't heroquest in the underworld, because dead is dead, and they can never come back. Now I think they can, because I think Humakti know the difference between being dead and being alive better than any other cult, and they know they are alive in the underworld.

I agree, not cool at all. Having someone say " I am more important than you because I am an editor, and I don't care if you are correct." is not cool. This is the problem with an inflexible notion of canon. When a logical inconsistency occurs, the dogmatics form a group think echo chamber and recite the error over and over again until they are convinced it is correct through repetition. When presented with a solid reason why they are wrong and they close ranks and minds. That is the very opposite of cool. Especially considering that they are deaf to all entreaties and alternatives. I find that intensely hard to respect as a response to anything.

So why isn't this salient point mentioned in the crucial King of Dragon Pass write-up of the Lightbringer Quest? I think that point is sufficiently huge that it sort of deserves a mention if indeed it is the real reason that orlanth goes on the Lightbringer Quest. This is the first time I have heard of this and it doesn't gel well with the other write-ups, but whatever. This is obviously something I have not been privy too, and I will concede the point On the other hand, Humakt is ALIVE in the underworld to perform this deed, which is a major point I have been making all along. My argument has always been with the absurdity of the notion of everyone in the underworld always being in some sense "dead". Apparently through this example you completely agree with me and I with you. I like this explanation a lot as it is a clear example of what I have been saying all along. Total God Learner stuff I am not saying that you are wrong in any way, I actually like this answer too. You are completely correct. You can say that you are the "Sword called Humakt" mentioned in the Arming of Orlanth stage of the Lightbringer Quest. The Jrusteli did that sort of thing all the time, and it is a good work around, in fact I like the way you think. On the other hand, this sort of trick won't work in a HQ where Humakt is the primary actor. On the other hand, seriously consider this for a moment... the notion of playing the sword is an ambiguous position for the Humakti. Swords are, after all, objects. Now a live Humakti is NOT an allied spirit bound to a sword, they are a flesh and blood person with a spirit. If they go into the underworld and are therefore "dead" then they cannot come out again. Now your argument of them being considered a "magical object" is yet another example of someone being in a state other than being "dead" while in the underworld. Given your first example, it does seem a bit odd for Orlanth to be armed with the sword that allegedly killed him... It almost suggests the Sacred Utuma ritual that the draconized Orlanthi mysteries would have adopted. (As an aside, I wonder if Dragonewts go to the underworld on their way back to their eggs? My instinct is "no", they just go back as spirits.) Heh, the Yanafal Ta'arnils ploy. I can resurrect because I am an illuminate, and cult strictures don't apply to me, as I am immune to spirits of retribution. Oh wait, my cult spirit of retribution is actually my god intervening in person. Well that's a relief, he didn't break my sword and every sword I pick up, he just bent it into a scimitar As to Arkat being the "prime example", I would like to agree, but on examination I can't. When Harmast Barefoot performs the Lightbringer Quest that brings Arkat back from the dead, Arkat is at the time a member of the Malkioni military caste, and not yet an Humakti. It is only after coming back with Harmast that Arkat initiates with the Humakti, taking the epithet Humaktsson after that. A good thing he was an illuminate, because otherwise when he converted to ZZ we would have found out exactly how unbreakable that sword of his really was. As to Humakti becoming illuminates, I am not going to contest that, in fact I remember reading the suggestion that Rashoran may have illuminated Humakt during God Time somewhere? Was it in Cults of Terror? Nysalori break the rules worse than tricksters, but on the other hand, if they do it too publicly there can be big repercussions. The notion that "you can't complete this hero quest without becoming an illuminate" would be a big drawback for a lot of Humakti I suspect.

Pulling rank like this is lame and dishonorable, you shame yourself by taking this path. You challenged me to prove to you that your interpretation of canon regarding being dead in the underworld was wrong. I have done that. Admit that my concerns are not selfish, they are not illogical, they are not against canon, and that I want to make Glorantha more internally consistent, then admit that you were wrong and fix the canon. I have done nothing wrong here, what I have done is the altogether apparently less forgivable behavior of actually being correct. Do the right thing and fix the problem of your misinterpretation of the information. Apparently you are not lacking in editorial authority, how about using that power constructively instead of trying to bully me with it?

But no, because ACCORDING TO YOU, everyone who enters the underworld is "dead", and a Humakti who is dead must stay dead or be turfed from the cult. Now if you admit that the Humakti are ALIVE in the underworld, suddenly there is no problem, and they can return to the middle land, but you must then admit you are wrong about being dead in the underworld You say that all people in the underworld are dead, and yet this completely fails in every respect in the case of Humakt, because Humakti cannot repeat the deeds of their god on a hero quest into the underworld unless your model of death and the underworld is wrong and they are in fact alive. At what point will you allow Chalana Arroy to heal the scar of certainty under YOUR tongue? This is not an isolated case, there are many examples of the fact that this whole notion of being "dead" in the underworld is at best a dubious idea that undermines the whole established notion of what death actually is. As for the "how many angels" statement, are you sure it isn't Aesop's fable about the Fox and the Sour Grapes? Now you have not exactly been slow in suggesting that my point was invalid and suggested I was trying to force "my version of Glorantha" onto "the canon", and that was pretty uncharitable really, because as you must now acknowledge, my case has more legs than yours, and while I can match you argument for argument, in this case you have no answer because either way you turn you are wrong, and Humakt is not a trivial cult, it is major and heavily invested in this issue and makes a mockery of your whole position BASED ON THE VERY CANON YOU CLAIM TO REVERE SO MUCH. So don't pretend there is some sort of cult work around, no self respecting Humakti would accept it, they knew they were dead the minute they entered the underworld and it is against their religion to return to the middle world thereafter UNLESS THEY AREN'T DEAD IN THE UNDERWORLD.

There is a "lovely" niche picked out for you in Than Ulbar. Treak is a cruel master, but if you don't annoy him he will probably not actually spiritually destroy you. The other rotting head ghosts are pretty bad for conversation, and you sort of get why they are all mad after trying to chat with them, but as your own brain decays in your skull you no longer even care. You spend the rest of your day flailing at people whose tattoos and silver skull with rams horns medallions utterly block your aggression. You are eventually spiritually annihilated by 5th Age Kralorelan Hero Questers.

Utter rubbish. Dead is dead is dead. There is no grim gospel for you. You have utterly contradicted the central tenets of the cult if you come back from this silly notion of being "dead" that you promulgate about the underworld. You don't get to go to the Einherjar. You get no DI. You get fed to the spirit of retribution, and then to the howling void of ignominy. You are merely another head claimed for Thanatar; gibber and go insane. You failed the hero quest. But I am polite, please allow me to return your posterior, don't eat it all at once, thanks for playing.

Here's another reason not to eat the yellow snow Nice item btw.

ORLY? You are only saying that because things turned out that way, the truth is that Trickster had already been to the underworld before, AND left, and had he wanted to he could have done so again. Now Orlanth was honorable, his position in the underworld was voluntary and ethical, because if he wanted to, at any time he could have said "Hey trickster, f**k this for a game of soldiers, lets go home and fight in the I fought we won battle instead". They had the means at their disposal to leave the underworld, so no, not dead, not even a bit dead. For your next trick, explain to me how Humakti hero questers who go to the underworld and are therefore "dead" don't break their cult precepts regarding coming back to life by returning from being "dead" in the underworld at the completion of their hero quest. Oh, and on your one way trip to the Einherjar, ask not for whom the Thanatari wait, they are waiting for you.

Obviously casting sever spirit on a spirit is pointless, because it is already "severed". As for someone's body reappearing in the ritual space, sure, failed hero quest, not my point of contention at all. My problem is how can you not see the absurdity of a person who is "dead" just because they are in the underworld and yet has their body and spirit joined, which is the very Gloranthan definition of being "alive". You seem to say "nope, they're dead" across all cultures of Glorantha, just because they are in the underworld, and I think in terms of game mechanics that is false, in terms of it being a trans-cultural definition that applies to all Gloranthan cultures it is wildly unlikely even post God Learner monomyth, and it doesn't fit with the activities we see taking place. Gloranthan cultures agree on very little, why is this point something they agree about? Justify it please? Nothing breaks narrative like internal and irreconcilable contradictions. Clearly there is a MASSIVE QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCE between the state of the Lightbringers in the underworld to that of Yelm and his court in the same place. If they are all equally "dead" how can that be accounted for? Are we back to some sort of Princess Bride business where they are only "mostly dead" or some equally comical notion ? Now if someone's spirit is still animating their body in the underworld, if sever spirit can work on them, they must be alive, because the whole point of sever spirit is that it emulates the death rune. Now if someone were as dead as you say they are in the underworld, then actually, if you were being honest, you would have to admit that death ceases to have much power over the dead. So why is sever spirit a threat in this instance? Simple... they're not dead if their body and spirit are still joined. Next example, trolls came from the underworld and were alive there, and nobody says they are somehow "dead" for being on the middle world which is not their natural habitat, so how come humans are somehow "dead" for merely being in the underworld, especially when they have their body and spirit joined? Or were trolls always dead when they were in the underworld? There are, after all, trolls who never left the underworld, so are they alive or dead? "Dead" according to what the fundamentalist interpretation of "scripture" says, and despite all evidence to the contrary. NOW IF NONE OF THAT HAS CONVINCED YOU, THIS WILL... If you are "dead" when you enter the underworld, then Humakti who heroquest in the underworld can never return, because that would be returning from death which is utterly against cult precepts. Oh, but perhaps the Humakti don't consider merely going into the underworld is being "dead". If not, it's off to the Einherjar with you, you one shot meat-sack. Now I am pretty sure that Humakti have some pretty important hero quests to perform in the underworld... RECONCILE THAT. Are you even remotely willing to consider that the whole thing about being "dead" in the underworld was some throw away poetic line from a Donandar minstrel that everyone was struck by the beauty of and adopted as true, but which was in fact nothing more than a lyrical affectation from the Second Age? Most importantly, why defend a point that is teleologically false in order to dogmatically support a point of "scripture" that in all likelihood doesn't mean what anyone thinks it means? Meaning is use; if a term is not useful it is not meaningful, and in this instance it introduces contradictions that undermine the logic of the whole established system of what life and death mean in the game world, as I have repeatedly outlined ad nauseum.

Fine, where is it SPECIFICALLY WRITTEN in the canon that heroquesters and deities are dead merely because they are in the underworld? Because if they aren't separated from their bodies, then death has not overtaken them. Greg has Gregged himself before btw, and that is just another reason why the whole notion of canon carries its dangers. Even Greg can't be right about all things in all parts of Glorantha at all times, and nor should he be made to be, it's kind of unfair on him to expect that. According to what you are saying you see, what happens when a heroquester in the underworld has sever spirit cast on him? Nothing, because according to "canon", they are already dead. In fact, if two negatives result in a positive, you might even be forced back into the land of the living.