Rodney Dangerduck

Slightly off-topic, but I fail to see any practical difference between the four being "sub-cults" of Orlanth and all of them just being the same cult, Orlanth.  Say I'm in Orlanth Adventurous and I want to learn Thunderbolt (a Thunderous spell)

1. (sub-cult)     I sacrifice one POW, and learn the spell.  Joining Thunderous.
2. (same-cult)  I sacrifice one POW, and learn the spell.

Yes, I guess there's a tiny bit of role-play effect, and a GM might restrict a PC from joining Orlanth Rex.  But, the practical effect is identical.  Am I missing something?

One of our group's co-GMs has commented on the lack of known lovers and little Argraths.  Perhaps he is not very fertile, not so interested, or just too busy, mystic,  or stoned to have time for such things.

5 hours ago, radmonger said:

Argrath is an interesting example of the kind of cultural blending between Dragon Pass and Prax this thread occasionally returns to.

Argrath is a once in an Age superhero anomaly and should not be an examplar for anything.

1 hour ago, Eff said:

So I think that the broader question here is "why play a Praxian/in Prax, then?"

Isn't the idea of replaying to play a character whose outlook is different than your own?

Don't play a sexist arsehole for sure.  @Nick Brooke is correct about that.

Do try a slightly chauvinist "traditional" guy who, over time, may adjust his views.  Or an Esrolian Ernaldan who perhaps expects the men to protect and coddle her.

7 minutes ago, Nick Brooke said:

You’ve read RQG, and The Six Paths, and you still think the Orlanthi are heavily into gender restrictions? Sorry, I can’t help you.

I think the "other side" somehow got into Praxians, specifically Waha / Eiritha.  Yes, I'm shocked, shocked that a discussion has gone off the original topic of Vinga 🙂.  And I agree with them.  Praxians, in general, are much more "traditional" about gender roles than Sartarites.  (I agree that Sartarites are very flexible)

Cults of Prax, (c) 1979, about Waha: "The cult is not open to women."

RQG, (c) 2018, about Waha initiates: "Must be a male tribal member"

I personally like some small limitations on PCs, but won't argue against Nick and Greg's desire for opening up options.  To each their own.  And, in this example, I'd be fine with Waha being open to women.

However, Chaosium had 40 years to "open up" opportunities for Praxians, and chose not to do so.

Like @Shiningbrow and @Agentorange, I dislike shoehorning Vinga into Orlanth.  Katherine Hepburn as Orlanth's Rib?

I especially dislike the unfortunate dual use of the term "vingan" as a gender and a cultist.  It implies that women warriors are somehow anomalies, not a "real woman".  As @mfbrandi notes (quoting Joanna Russ), this is a way to suppress women.

Let "fighty" women adventurers be just that - women adventurers with a spear or sword.  Anything else is up to the player.

(added later)  I realize that this is getting way off topic, but it is something I've wanted to say.

3 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

Orate is not enough.  Your players should have to demonstrate all of those skills

Agreed.  Single random crits happen all the time, and players vastly overrate their importance.  Let the PCs make more efforts, and use other skills.  Get them all involved.  You could add other skills to your list, such as Charm, as well as bribery and blackmail (should the party have an Issaries or a Eurmali).  I guess those are aspects of Intrigue and Insight.  🙂

The PCs can also go out of their way to prove their worth and raise their Reputation. 

• "That Dragon? - we took care of it". 
• "Ernalda's Mirror, missing for centuries?  Found it".
• "Hippogriffs?  Yeah, we got em..."

28 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Leika threw in her lot only after Sword Hill, and forgave the exile.

In our campaign, the mainly Colymar PCs took the Black Spear (thank you @Nick Brookefor the great adventure seed) to Pavis to meet "that Argrath Guy (TM)", and then took steps, mainly arranging for material support for his troops, to ensure that Leika would gain great credit and favor with the Future Prince.  Basically, raising her to first among equals of the tribal leaders.

32 minutes ago, FlamingCatOfDeath said:

Divorce is hard because of all the paperwork, legal implications, and the fights over property. Having the prenup is built into the marriage contract simplifies things. In the real world their have been societies where divorced was easy, take Ibn Battuta found a new wife every place he stopped and then divorced them when he continued his journeys.

This ignores human emotions like love, desire, jealousy, and hate.  Which, to me at least, are far more interesting than marrying some shepherd girl with wide hips from the Swabdish clan, so that your clan can have better access to their well.  One could argue that my approach is too "modern" or "romantic", and they'd probably be right.

This explains why my favorite Glorantha superhero is Jar-Eel.  She seems to be the only super-hero who loves anybody other than herself.

6 hours ago, radmonger said:

I don't think the concept of 'daughter' applies to gods as anything other than a loose metaphor

I've seen this take on the gods from @Andrew Logan Montgomery yourself, and others.  However, the Glorantha Sourcebook is chock full of references to gods having lovers, wives, and children.  For example, p83, Flamal "met Ernalda and begat Aldrya", then "he had known Triolina and fathered Murthdrya."  And Heortling Mythology, in places (page 72), explicitly calls Vinga the daughter of Orlanth and Ernalda.

The "loose metaphor" concept is interesting, and I could run with that, and, ultimately, I'm not sure how much it really matters in day to day Runequest of ordinary people and adventurers.  However, IMO, it's not well supported by the source material.

7 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Clans and kinship groups make alliances with other kinship groups

Thank Jeff, very helpful.  I was missing that fairly obvious point. 

Doh!

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

Remember that marriage is largely a matter of social responsibility.  The goal and focus of all marriages was intended to be reproduction and/or political alliances.

I'm having great difficulty understanding marriage in Orlanthi society.  Various things about Glorantha are hard to understand for various people, and this aspect is hard for me.  The Earthly concepts of "love", "fidelity", or "better to marry than to burn with passion" don't apply, leaving me somewhat lost.

There are a few bigwigs, but the overwhelming number of Gloranthans are not political.  So their marriages are not going to be political.  Not even to the point of passing down the farmstead to the children, as the land is largely owned by the clan through Ernalda.

And reproduction is easy, and common, outside of marriage.  The out of wedlock children are full members of, and cared for, by the clan.  There are no negative social connotations, no scarlet As.  It's a requirement for Ernaldan priestesses!

So I guess it's the "social responsibility?" (the first sentence of Jeff I quoted).  What is meant by that?

One of our PCs (the Thane) married Brightflower, (o.k., here's a case of a political marriage) and others are thinking about marriage, one seriously, so it would be nice to better understand this.

8 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

c) those just chosen by you and your partner, without any consequences except on your couple and your potential children and followers

On Earth, we usually have these types of marriages.  Would you describe Earth divorce as "straightforward and easy".  Now add the fact that the gods are definitely real and can do you significant and immediate harm if you cross them.

Good question.  Though I'm not sure that divorce among Orlanthi is "easy".  It is a sacred oath.  Interested in responses and "takes" from others.

2 hours ago, scott-martin said:

What I really like about this thread is how well it demonstrates the rich readings that emerge

An excellent point, really nice.

In our game, the PCs got involved (somewhat) in the politicking, and my PC, a Kallyr fan (though serving with Leika, the mixed loyalties were very interesting to play) gave an impassioned speech, with an interesting twist on why Kallyr had not returned.  Note, Thomas is a bad guy, specific to our campaign, enemy of the party, and definitely not an honorable man.

"Thomas is an honorable man, but Kallyr was my friend, faithful and just to me.  Unlike him, I was trusted by the Starbrow to take part in her great final quest. My respect for her is second to none.  The calls to return her to life are failing because she does not wish to live. She is spent, her children all dead, the kingdom's enemies defeated. The wounds she received from the Lunars could not be healed, leaving her in dire pain.  Let us take up her great cause.  Let us not force her to return to a life of pain and sadness.  Let her rest in the halls of the All Father, with her friends and kin, in whose great company she shall know neither shame nor defeat."

I've "converted" mainly from movies and TV shows.  A recent session was, very very loosely, based upon Die Hard.  The current one is loosely based upon a BBC Musketeers episode.  To me, the imagery, notable scenes and characters, and key lines, like "Yippee-ka-yay" or "I'll be back", are much more useful than stat blocks that need to be converted anyhow.

Ironically, the player whose PC was most involved in the "Die Hard" scenario had never seen the movie.

12 hours ago, scott-martin said:

I knew there was a reason I always liked her.  (Leika)

My character started off not liking Leika, mainly due to the way the GM was playing her.  I grew to appreciate her as a practical leader who protects her tribe and gets the job done.  As, did, eventually, my character, one of our few PCs whose  Loyalty Leika is comparable to Loyalty Argrath. 

It's a shame that "It is known" that Leika will fall by the wayside and Argrath will be the next great leader, because, frankly, none of our other PCs even pretends not to know, so they all ramped up their Loyalty Argrath and ignored Leika.  Disappointing, but to be expected, and, in the end, not that big a deal.

18 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Now that Vinga is canonically Orlanth as a woman (ptooohie! She'll always be a person in her own right in my mind!), is her worship outlawed in Pavis under the Lunar occupation, alongside that of Orlanth himself?

I wonder what % of the varying Gloranthas do treat Vinga as independent.  Ours does.  Her position as Orlanth's Daughter is pretty clearly laid out in Heortling Mythology, in a few places, (though there are contradictions).  e.g. Page 72:

"Vinga is a daughter of Orlanth and Ernalda and is the Fighting Daughter who fought in all the great battles
alongside her father and the other Thunder Brothers."
 

1 minute ago, Cassius said:

In terms of playability, I think it's a good decision. But from a more 'realistic' point of view (if that word has any meaning in this context), I don't think an awakened animal speaks any language at all, unless it is taught one. How could a barely awakened Alynx speak Sartarite, even at 25%?

We had our Alynx speak Stormspeech, which seemed more mythically reasonable.  Also gave the PCs an incentive to work on their Stormspeech. 

I agree that having them speak at all is a bit strange.

35 minutes ago, Cassius said:

Would this be enough to pass the tests for initiation into a cult? It's doubtful, in most cases.

A candidate who is familiar to the temple has only one requirement: be 50% or better in a relevant rune.  Surely a clever (or wealthy) PC could make sure that their awakened friend becomes familiar to the temple.

The ability to speak to the examiner is irrelevant.  If I, or another player, ever run a mute PC (this thread gave me that idea!) they would have no problem initiating into a cult.

(For the record, I think the super-minimal requirement is way too easy and open to munchkinnery, but them's the rules, and corrupt bribable priests are all too common in history)

A couple of our players kept some of Berevenenos' magic items (I recall the the super-javelin, possibly others), then, a year later, "compromised with" (actually, aided) a Dragon.  As GM I have them a stern talking to, and they returned all the items.

Since we knew that we would forget, or, even should we remember, the PCs would possibly be away on some world-saving mission at the wrong time, our PCs used their "pull" with Leika to have her (or one of her minions who can read and write down these things) remember to send the offerings.

Our player with an awakened Alynx made up the excellent back story that it was the subject of strange sorcerous experiments at the City of Wonders, and his PC freed it there.

I'm with @svensson: With a species max POW of 28, the alynx will quickly become the best spellcaster in the party.  Using them in combat is idiotic and criminal negligence.  Use them as buffers or befuddlers.

43 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

and the GM is well within their rights to say nay to a shadowcat.

Maybe this advice should be in the GM's Guide.  😞