Sir_Godspeed

But, like, some illusions are more illusionarier than other illusionisms. *cough*.

YGWV, but I like to think that the shape actual representational glyphs are largely irrelevant, the main issue is the magic embedded into them/connected to them/whatever. In other words, the "Storm Rune" (as in the fundamental building block) isn't literally a spiral, that's just the visual metaphor most people tend to portray it as. This is likely to be counter to canon and to most people's vision of Glorantha, but it's my personal vision, at least.

It's a fair question: does being aware of the (allegedly) "illusory" (this creates some weird connotation in Glorantha, but if someone else has a better word, feel free to suggest it) nature of the cosmos change someone's emotional register? The frustratingly answer is probably: sometimes yes, other times no. Clearly we have many examples of people's emotions changing with regard to culturally imposed taboos. However we also see people retain their ambitions*, most famously Arkat, of course. The example of the Nochet queen also shows this. (*which are, to be frank, also culturally imposed. As one of my professors would say, there is no way we can talk about human behavior and psyche that doesn't involve culture. But that's a discussion for another time) The easiest reconciliation here would probably be to say that 1) the effects of illumination are to some degree idiosyncratic, individual, and 2) while we talk a big game about people losing cultural norms due to illumination, form our examples it does seem that upbringing, socialization and acculturation does in fact play a role even after illumination. Arkat still hated Chaos, that Queen of Nochet still wanted to protect Esrolia and be queen, Lunar illuminates still want to worship Sedenya and aid the empire, Kralorelan sages still want to sustain the balance of the Dragon Emperor's social order, etc. I would argue that it's less about losing emotions, drives, etc., and more about being existentially able to put them into a greater context more easily - but I could be wrong. I doubt there's an easy answer here. For a real-world example, we have the Bodishattvas, enlightened beings who decide to remain in the world to guide others towards enlightenment. Clearly, even after enlightenment, they still retain empathy for other people.

Well, what can you expect from these boisterous, hairless monkeys gallavanting around. That's a very interesting take. Thank you.

Yeah, I don't want to come off as dismissive, but I *really* think it would be useful for people to read a bit up on Dharmic (Buddhist, Hindu) conception of enlightenment and awakening ("bodhi/buddhi"). It doesn't have to be super-indepth, just scratch a bit in some of the basics. Warning: the below might not represent 100% what rules present in source books, I don't know, but it's the very strong impression I get from Greg's writing on mysticism and illumination overall: Illumination is not about deductive reasoning and logics. While Buddhism contains lots of logical stuff in and of itself (it has some interesting material philosophy which is reminiscent of Aristotle's writings, iirc., and it quite brutally applies logic to the idea of a soul in the concept of "anatta", for example), mystic enlightenment in the dharmic tradition is at its heart alogical (not "illogical", as in anti-logical, but rather alogical in the sense that logic or illogic is entirely irrelevant, imho). It's not some kind of reasoned conclusion one makes after thinking about something for a bit. It's experiential, transformative, and quite often traumatic. Someone mentioned Plato's cave allegory earlier, and it's actually a pretty decent introduction to this whole thing; Plato's whole point is that if you tried to logically explain the outside of the cave to the people in there, they would think you were insane, because their minds literally cannot comprehend what you're talking about, and you also quite likely lack the means to communicate your observations. They have to leave the cave to understand this too. It must be experienced. As for the conclusion, I once again would like to mention anatta. I previously mentioned "anatta" as being a logical examination of the soul. This is only halfway true. Anatta postulates that there is actually no soul, no self, to "I", these are all affectations of the active mind-process, as we attempt to create a perceptional pattern around ourselves so as to not feel like we're treading water above an infinite abyss of endlessly complex and undifferentiated everything/nothing. This is something you can put into words: "Actually, the mind is just the self-referential emergent pattern of neural cells communicating. It doesn't exist as a thing in and of itself." Okay, great, what then? Logic only takes you so far. Now comes the mystic/enlightenment side in: imagine experiencing this and seeing for yourself that you don't actually exist and neither does anything else either. THAT'S transformative. THAT's illuminating. In the context of Glorantha, the "We Are All Us" is not only an expression of the Lunar Empire having an integrating policy and the Lunar religion accepting donvertees from anywhere, it's also about how everything in the Cosmos is existentially connected and at its most basic level they are just blips or winnows emerging from the primordial Chaotic origin of us all. We are all, quite literally, Us, because fundamentally, any distinctions are stripped away. Presumably other mystic traditions have similar, but different, takes on it all. Draconic mysticism and Rune-focused mystic traditions (like the Stormwalk renunciates or whoever), might arrive at slightly different conclusions, but the unifying point about them all is that while teaching, instruction and explanation might be useful tools to approach illumination, at the end of it all, it's something that has to be experienced for it to bloom fully. When explaining Illumination/enlightenment we are usually left with very inadequate metaphors, because by its nature, it eludes being captured. This is why Zen Buddhism, for example, employs "koans", which are logic-shattering aphorisms or stories meant to prepare the inductee for the seeming impossibilities and alogical experiences of illumination/enlightenment, and to teach them how fragile a worldview based on strict logical consistency is. The Gloranthan expy of koans is famously the Nysaloran riddles, although as with a lot of things, their effectiveness has been dialed up to 11. To circle back to Plato's cave analogy, the koan/riddle essentially serves to make people aware of the cracks in the cave, and might lead them towards trying to leave it. I assume the experiential necessity is partly the reason for why we see so many illuminated adventurers in Glorantha, proportionally, at least. Heroquesters and others who delve deep into the God Time and Heroplane are exposed to not only the cracks more often and more intensely than others, but may also inadvertently come into connection with the Absolute/All more as well. How this translates rules-wise is probably up to how people want to simulate, and it would be incorrect to say that most heroquesters, sorcerers, priests, or even mystics end up illuminated, but they're probably on the higher end statistically compared to most others. Also it's a nice excuse for your characters to end up illuminated without feeling like a Gary Stu. Anyway, that's the best I can do in putting it into words, which is somewhat ironic after spending so much time writing about how it cannot be put into words. (I am also not myself a practicioner of any trascendent techniques, just casually interested.)

Yeah, I'm getting some major 70s/80s anime vibes from her design (you know, back when they had noses and the eyes didn't cover 80% of the face). She looks great!

I'd argue that this "scientific" (or law-based, ie. "nomic") view is more akin to God Learner sorcery. It's not necessarily illuminated, just de-anthropomorphized, universalistic and uniform. You can make a case for explaining this rationally and might get across the point pretty well. Illumination, however, goes beyond that. Even the Runes and rules and Laws are just illusions. You yourself is an illusion too. Everything is everything, separated only by ephemeral perceptional bias. Structure is artifice of the mind, desperate to find footing in a ceaselessly dynamic existence. Dichotomies are crutches. It's not something that can be transferred or taught by explanation. It has to be experienced to be understood.

My only knowledge of Genert's descendants come through him begetting the land/grain goddesses of Genertela with Gata/Primal Earth. I was wondering if we have any examples of him pairing with non-Earth entities.

Oh, I just thought it was artwork of Charg Orlanthi or something.

The question on whether Humakt and some other gods are illuminated was raised earlier in this thread. Purely by coincidence, reading the Glorantha.com entry on Dog Fathers led me to finding this answer to that very question. https://www.glorantha.com/docs/humakti/

These are very cool. Colorful and inventive.

I think you make a fair point. Maybe not to convince a God Learner, but perhaps Praxians, which is ultimately the important thing here. I was myself considering a *Fralara(*Rowdrilla)-Genert pairing, but I realize that it would be such a hypothetical (based on a dead god and a hypothetical feminine) that it's basically pointless, narratively. I was also thinking about the relationship with Telmor, but this ties into the issue of the concept of "dog", which on the one hand refers to a specific sub-species of wolf, and on the other hand, refers to the entire canid family, which encompasses much more than Canis lupus. Ayway, I think your choice to keep it relatively local is the neatest and most satisfying one. It's good to keep in mind that these are stories that kids will learn by retelling from their elders, so using the same characters over and over again is good not only from a didactic sense, but also because it knits their worldview together in a more robust fashion, imho.

The totemic ancestor of carnivores is Fralar, who is also the father of Yinkin, Telmor and Basmol. I'd imagine that BRother Dog (or Rowdril, rather?) would be in there somewhere. However, this is God Learner/3rd Age Nochet Knowledge Temple genealogies, so their influence on Praxian myths would be limited/uneven. I tend to view Eirithia as the mother of, specifically, herbivorous herd mammals, although she's taken in several unrelated adoptive children through the Covenant (including, if I understand correctly, birds and lizards). I'm not sure if there is an intermediate step between this view of Eirithia and the undifferentiated Animal Rune (ie. Hykim/Mikyh). I'd assume so, but I don't know the name. Besides, again, this is pretty God Learnerish/Monomythic thinking which might be entirely irrelevant to the Animal Nomads. In the end I'm not sure who should be the mother: Eirithia, Ernalda (is she even a relevant narrative figure for the Praxians?), or a hypothetical *Fralara, "mother of carnivores". But this also leaves the fatherhood uncertain. Yinkin was the son of a totemic beast god (Fralar) and a land goddess (Kero Fin). Perhaps a similar ancestry is possible for dog-kind. Perhaps a different option is preferable. Throwing away the slavish adherence to the Monomyth of narrative clarity is perhaps the best option here. As long as the story makes sense to Praxians, that's the most important thing. I think the core of the story works very well. A disgraced brother (or other close companion), spared for the sake of familial ties and repentance, but always kept in servitude and at an arm's length. Gets some measure of recognition by excelling in a useful skill nonetheless. Both potential aide and potential pest.

In some ways I think it makes thematic sense. Umath did not originally have a domain or terrain of his own, he had to make it, counter to the Court's plans for the Cosmos. Orlanth did not originally have a kingdom or people of his own, but rather formed the Storm Tribe by accepting in many different outsiders in marriage-alliance with his wife. The Vingkotlings grew not just by conquest, but by allying and assimilating/integrating neighboring peoples. The story of the Storm Tribe is not the story of a self-sufficient, "pure" group procreating, it's very much a story of adoption, exploration and in many ways not really having a thing of their own, as it were, until they make or take something.

I haven't read Eleven Lights, so there might be some insights there that others are privy too, but which I guess are spoilerific. In terms of general background, however, the general gist of the Jrusteli and Tanian is that they essentially accurately predicted his existence by elemental deduction, and managed to summon him sorcerously, iirc. It's not so much that they worshipped him and had myths on him available, but more than they knew several other myths involving the seas invading the sky and mingling up there, and then worked out that there would be a god of fiery water. The exact details slip from me, but them managing to summon him was a major victory not only militarily, but also for Jrusteli theories and methodology. They had shown that they understood the building blocks and progression of the Cosmos (or so they thought, anyway). This is unfortunately a long-ish way for me to say "I'm not quite sure, really, he sorta just came out of the blue for most".

The Orlanthi consider the clouds, or at least certain types of clouds, to be living beings. Cloudhawks, cloudcats, cloudsheep and so on. They comprise Orlanth's flock, although they are also tied to Heler as both Orlanth's companion and (sometimes female) lover. There is a section on Orlanthi cloud lore in the Book of Heortling Mythology. The section can be understood literally (ie. clouds are literally living beings that would appear as animals when viewed from the Storm Realm), allegorically (ie. as a means to explain weather patterns, as cloudhawks are the wispiest clouds the highest up, while cloudsheep are the thickest clouds furthest down), or genealogically (explaining the creation of both natural phenomena, as well as sapient beings and even some clans that may claim descent from them). I believe also sandstorms are associated with Storm Bull in the same section. If we move beyond that, we have Heler's original people, who were the Helerings, a "Cloud People". Described as people in flying boats who raided the Vingkotlings in the God Time, they were originally sea beings who appear to have made the Middle Air their home - much like Lorion was a sea god who made the Sky his home and so on. The Helerings later "landed" on the ground and sea, and were absorbed into the Vingkotlings, but their ancestry sometimes shines through in blue-skinned Orlanthi - allegedly moreso in Maniria than other regions (but I'm not sure how canon this latter point is). There are also actual, flesh-and-bone hawks that are associated with Storm in Dragon Pass (although not in all of Glorantha). Then there are of course the Wind Children. Both of these make their home on the physical ground, but are intimately associated with the Air. The same probably goes for the Sky Bulls (who, despite the name, are not associated with Sky but with Storm, slip of the tongue I guess). There might be more. I haven't yet found evidence of any people living ON the clouds as if they were islands, but I think that would be cool as hell, so IMG it's likely that some kind of demigod race (or maybe just sufficiently "stormy"/"helerite" Wind Children) live like that.

I have heard this Eurmal-Elmal thing before (before I joined here I perused lots of image board threads about Glorantha, and one explained Elmal as being the front of the horse, and Eurmal being the rear), is there anything to this? No one has mentioned it here before.

That seems pretty realistic to me. Standing numbers probably vary wildly (not only from campaign to campaign, but also between campaigning and inactive periods), with "paper strength" being mostly a theoretical, administrative fiction, and organizational charts are probably drawn and redrawn for almost every muster and with every shift in command both to satisfy tactical and logistical needs and the egos of noble commanders. On the higher end the organizations might appear to follow certain military traditions of the Empire, both for legal and magical reasons, but on the ground things might get a lot more improvisational. I could be wrong though, not a military history expert.

EWF stufs.

Thanks! Speaking of which, how important is hunting to survival in Prax? I'd assume that hunting is mostly a side-activity to supplement the meat from the herd animals (and equally or more importantly, the milk), but I could be wrong.

I'm not sure if the scarcity of meat is the greatest bottleneck for keeping dogs, as nomadic pastoralists have a much higher meat-intake than, say, subsistence rice farmers, who may be almost entirely vegetarian themselves (At least if I remember my subjects well enough).

So deities ARE dependant on worship, given that this is the main mode of transferance for the magic/soul-power of mortals, right? It just doesn't have to be "earnest", in the sense of heartfelt devotion - it can just be someone going through the motions. I'm imagining your Glorantha's gods as essentially Goku firing up the spirit bomb and asking everyone to believe in him. (A view I more or less agree with, even if I'd put in a caveat of perhaps certain gods having a greater or lesser baseline, but now I'm getting off-topic), except it's less belief and more just nominal ritual support.

This might be an unpopular position, but I think I prefer to keep it vague and in a grey area. I fear nailing down the specifics of yield pre- and post- blessings per square meter per inch of rainfall or whatever might lead us down the path of making Glorantha less approachable and more of a hassle to write for.

Maybe some myth about the Morokanth resenting the dogs for being well-liked, when they're not even winners, while the Morokanths are seen as cheaters, perhaps?