Sir_Godspeed

I think you misunderstood my point - there are times when tools like this aren't necessary, sure, but there might be times when they are very useful and help people avoid unnecessary friction. And there might be times when even having these tools won't help a group that has worse problems. In any case, it's not necessary to present these as some kind of stand-in for the wider American Culture Wars or whatever. They're as useful as the people using them want them to be.

Personally, I'm not sure if an official, unilinear be-all-end-all timeline will necessary make things easier for people. Either you slavishly choose to follow it which seems a tad boring, or you end up deviating from it at some point, rendering everything that comes afterwards on it significantly less useful. At least KoS has the whole "unreliable narrator" thing going on, which places a kind of hazy mist over everything and leaves the details up for personal interpretation. Not the least of which is who or what exactly Argrath was, or rather were.

I just find it a bit odd that someone is claiming that X-Cards and the like allow allegedly overly sensitive players to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, and in the process are making a mountain of the mole-hill that X-Cards and the like are, imho. Could it hypothetically be annoying if Jerry puts up his X-Card and goes "hey, no cheese platter scenarios, please", and the GM has to hurriedly scribble around his pre-written scenario for cheese-tasting? Yeah, sure... but, like... we'll deal. And crazy notion: if the group considers Jerry's interruptions to be too invasive and counter to the rest of the group's interests, someone might have to have a chat and maybe Jerry wasn't the right fit for the group. As I mentioned above - social friction is awkward and sucks, but it happens, and is not the end of the world. And if Jery hadn't had those X-Cards or Veils or whatever, does anyone honestly think this imaginary scenario would have played out better? I dunno, this all seems like a storm in a teacup.

Timinits and Mostali were native to there. Not sure if there were any other humans there from before. EDIT: Oh, the Olodo, from Slontos/Maniria. I'm unclear on whether they were already Malkioni when they arrived, or whether they were Theyalans or some other kind of people.

Rune magic is different from Spirit magic, isn't it? I'm not good on the actual rules, I've just noticed that discussing spirits versus deities is a topic that pops up with some regularity.

Well, we're veering a bit far from the original topic, but considering that Alakoring came from Surkorion, it seems reasonable to think that the Orlanth Rex cult has a longer story here. Personally I think the antagonism between Storm & Sun / Orlanth & Yelm is less pronounced. Partly because of the Solar origin of some of the Ralians, but also because of the more important antagonism from the Westerners/Malkioni.

Getting a bit heated here, but it's probably worth keeping in mind that this is a game, and its purpose is to make the people playing it have a good time. Inventing convoluted scenarios for how something can hypothetically go awry seems counter to this goal. If keeping it simple and working with people one already know well is preferable, by all means. If using tools to make a group of strangers or loose acquaintances get into things more easily, why not? Back when playing WoW, when interpersonal friction got too bad in a Guild, I left it and found a new one. Shit happens. Not every gaming group is meant to be. Who knows.

"Until" is a difficult term in the God Time. There are some myths that cannot easily be placed anywhere, and a lot which do not necessarily follow any specific sequence.

This is all true, but not really the point. The point was to relativize the terms and categories we're presented with, so as to avoid presupposing the universal importance of these categories. I am under no circumstance saying that the categories as they currently are are 'wrong' or 'bad' or that we should switch to some other viewpoint - just that they are what they are.

It's quite addictive, yeah! Never was one for chemical stimulants myself, but I spent a good deal of my teens in charismatic Christian circles, and I got to know religious ecstacy personally. I always found the sound-metaphor of cosmic influence to be a very apt one. And when I first read the "the Aurbis is a product of sensory deprivation of the Godhead" from Kirkbride (because of course it was Kirkbride, lol) it kinda blew my mind. Absolutely. Malinowski wrote extensively on the importance of considering myths less as "flawed history" and more as "blueprints for being-in-the-world" (my terms, not his) already back in the 1910s. Well, less blueprints and more guidelines or ideals, but you get the jist. And it is fun to just roleplay as an absolute fanatic or a salt-of-the-earth type of person sometimes. Keepin' it simple.

Pretty much agree with everything you said - and I'd like to add that the stark/systemic distinction between God and Spirit seems to me to be at least in part a product of the Theyelan culture complex (ie. the cultural basis that both Dragon Pass/Keathelan Orlanthi, Praxians and arguably trolls and others draw from). At least when reading Revealed Mythologies, alternate schemae are presented when reading from the point of view of Vithelans, Pamaltelans and Westerners. We are somewhat familiar with Western/Malkioni schemae due to them sort-of bleeding over into the greater Dragon Pass region somewhat (Burtae, etc.), but it is undeniably a system with some fundamental differences in viewing different entities. This goes moreso for Pamaltelans (or at least the Doraddi). It can be argued that these are just different names for the spirit-god-other categories, but that's not the sense I got when reading it at least. So basically, these aren't just objective, "in-itself" differences, but differences in views and approaches and so forth. I won't derail this mostly rules-based discussion further with esoterica, but the logical conclusion of the above points is basically that RQG rules are influenced by the fact that they are mostly based on Theyelan cultural ideas. If RQG had been based on a wealth of lore on the Doraddi in Pamaltela, I can only think that some mechanics would just have been different. Whether the designers agree with this or not, I don't know, and perhaps I have just been bedazzled by fancy writing and poetic formulation and there is actually an objective classification underlying everything - but if there is, I don't quite see it, nor do I generally think Gloranthans do, and I'm not sure having it would make the world a more interesting one. Not sure what the moral here is. Don't be afraid to go off the beaten path if it's interesting to you, I guess.

That was another suspicion of mine (although Ragnaglar was already corrupted by this time). While he is normally associated with goats, the antlers (and removal thereof in Six Ages) does speak to something about him - especially considering that he appears to have some kind of an antler-goathorn hybrid thing in the Gods War board game. @Qizilbashwoman - he looks kinda Wendigo-esque, doesn't he?

Some of these examples are a bit jumbled, since for examples a shop's advertisement happens in public spaces, where other rules apply and most people generally accept that they don't necessarily having any control over what goes up (to a point). Some of the other examples, like the GM not being aware of a player's issues seems to not take into account that this entire thing is indeed about charting what people are and aren't okay with before playing. I don't know how it is in the US, but back home here, the news tends to simply say "We would like to make viewers aware that the following report contains graphical images of a strong nature." So clearly there is a precedent for this sort of information to viewers and players. At the end of the day, all of this is just meant to achieve informed consent on the part of every party involved, so that they DO know what they're going into. If someone DOES put on Tarantula after being warned, yes, it's their own fault, but then again maybe they could just be allowed to leave the room and come back once it's over? I did this when my friends decided to watch the Saw movies when we were teens (I'm not a fan of graphical gore), and it was never a problem. Yes, there might be awkwardness, there might be personal friction, there might be understandings. Shit happens. Ideally, the group should have the tools to work through that.

This seems like a particular Anglophone issue.

I saw the trailer for this a little while ago, and while I generally steer well away of Cage's stuff nowadays, this actually looks interesting.

My approach is generally that a spirit is negotiated with, while a god is worshipped. It's a matter of approach. This also entails that the same entity may appear to be either spirit or deity depending on how they are approached - although since such approaches usually happen within established cultural norms and within mythological and belief-system contexts, generally speaking, people are unlikely to realize this, or perhaps even accept it as possible. That's just my take on it though.

Arguably by design, however short-sighted.

Ah, so one of my hunches seem to have been on the right track. I wonder if this story cited is different from the more commonly cited story of how Eurmal killed Grandfather Mortal. I wonder if he achieved Death through Earth Sacrifice (possibly one gone awry - ie. not resulting in resurrection or rebirth as it otherwise would have) in this version.

On the maps in the Book of Heortling Mythology, the Uncolings are shown living in what is left of Peloria under Chaos occupation, essentially. They are described as having made deals with "monsters and demons" to continue their survival. I can't quite tell whether this is a reference to Chaos demons, or just trolls and other underworld beings, like the Shadzorings or something similar. We also know from tGtG that a number of standing stones around Peloria were put up by some pre-Dawn culture, although I forget whether they're supposed to be a Green Age or Greater Darkness construction. If they're from the Greater Darkness, it seems to fit with the Uncolings putting them up for whatever reason, which I believe is referenced in tBoHM. Lastly, we also have Six Ages, where - to avoid spoilers - proto-Uncolings/Reindeer people - live in the north, with some comments about no longer being able to utilize antlers in their sacred rituals due to some kind of evil entity interfering. There is also an emerging shamanistic society of antler-worshippers in your clan lands, who - eh - seem to have a connection to antlers and some really iffy weirdness going on, if you get what I mean. In short - what's going on here? Is there some terrible secret between Chaos and the Uncolings? Some kind of alliance? Some fall from grance - or some pact they made to survive, or did they just quietly live under the radar as best they could as the world went to tatters? EDIT: I'm using "Uncoling" quite indiscriminately here for the general category of reindeer-herders. I can't realistically know whether all the mentions are for the same people, or wether some are what we would call Hsunchen and others are just pastoralists or something.

In the Book of Heortling Mythology, under the entry of Sorana Tor (described there as the physical manifestation of Ana Gor, who is described as the goddess of human sacrifice, though elsewhere she is also described as a name for Maran Gor - these aren't mutually exclusive, I take it) - we find a comment by Sorana Tor referring to how the blood of someone named Haran Vor falling in the ground at her temple. I haven't been able to find any references to this Haran Vor elsewhere (and neither for "Haranvor", which I thought might be a name). My initial instinct was that it was some mythical Orlanthi king, or maybe an enemy of the Earth Goddesses, but then I considered whether it could be another name for Grandfather Mortal - increasing the significance of the death/sacrifice there. Anyone know?

First off - I'm glad to see another Elder Scrolls fan on the forum, as it was also the reason why I looked up Glorantha (being cited by one of the ES creators as a major influence). Secondly, I agree to a great extent with what you write - in the abstract. However, when we have discussions on these matters, we often approach the issues of divine identity and character from very different points of view. Some, particularly those who are in it more for the gaming aspect I suspect, prefer a straightforward literal view. Others, who are more into textual and meta-textual interpretation, treat the gods and their different names and identities as a sort of puzzle, game or rebus to solve, where one can find the truer identities that emerge from more completed images (much like the Monomyth of the God Learners), then we have those who have a more metaphysical approach, where identifying the overarching Runic archetypes, ideals and mechanisms by which the Gloranthan Cosmos turns and ticks is the goal, as it were. Your points falls, imho, comes from a different perspective, the more anthropological one, where deities and their identity is an expression of cultural self-reflection and self-validation ("Celebrations of the divine are celebrations of the community" as Durkheim might've said), and discussions on deities becomes necessarily particularistic and varies between rigid and malleable depending on whether believers are rigid or malleable (if that makes sense). Hell, I've even seen another perspective: the euhemeristic one, where people have posited that that Glorantha is no more or less magical than our real world, it's just that it's written from the point of view of its inhabitants, and so incorporates their beliefs. Instead of user "perspectives", feel free to think of them as modes of interpretation or exegesis or whatever. Same thing in the end. We view and consider Glorantha differently. I practice - as I'm sure you've noticed - most of us actually tend to shift between these perspectives depending on the discussion, premise, mood of the day, last text read, input from other posters, and so on. I certainly know I can't (and don't want to) stick to any of these perspectives completely. It's fun to feel out the terrain, as it were, with different senses. However, it does mean that we can, and perhaps tend to, talk a bit past each other, and perhaps misunderstand our respective premises and presuppositions - although I'd say people here are very good at incorporating and considering different perspectives in general, certainly moreso than most other fan communities I've been in. Basically, long story short, people come to this forum with different backgrounds, needs and intents, and that shapes the conversations. In such an environment, any attempt to establish a kind of consensus on how the underlying, fundamental "truth" of Glorantha works is neither really possible, nor, frankly, desireable. YGWV, after all. It also means that we will continue to debate, for example, Elmal-Yelmalio until the (RW) Sun becomes a red giant and the oceans boil because every iteration has the potential to bring new perspective, even if a lot of it is repetition. It's also worth mentioning that our different perspectives are shared by the in-universe sources we use. Some do indeed see the gods as literal people, others as metaphors, others as cultically-produced gestalt beings, and so forth - something that is a testament to just how cleverly Glorantha was designed, because Greg and his compatriots clearly knew their stuff, and also evolved as people over time. So yeah, at a very abstracted level I agree that there probably is no "true" nature of the gods, but also, on the other hand, it's also fun to try to solve textual puzzles to find secret connections, and it's fun to just talk about that time Pamalt straight up dropped the sky on top of some Chaos fools because he's a badass like that. After such a measured and deep-cutting post, I hope you stick around to participate. And don't be intimidated. Depending on how long you've been lurking, you probably know that I'm pretty new here too, only really having been immersed in Glorantha since 2015 or so. Now - let's talk about Tonal Architecture and how it relates to the Amaranth...

Oh, don't worry, I was just taking the piss out of us forum regulars here.

Others here will know more about this, but I believe the most significant changes on the cultural side is a shift away from pseudo-Germanic/Gaelic feel of the Orlanthi and towards a mix of Bronze/Early Iron Age and Classic Antiquity terminology and aesthetics.

I think the point Qizil was making was about "holes" in the sense of natural bodily openings. Yes, they can and will make their own if need be.

It was also done to promote fruit- and berry-bearing plants, and when the Europeans landed, they wrote letters back on how God had blessed the land, and how the natives were just living in idyll - not realizing that this was the result of careful land management. But I get the impression you already know this.