"Let's talk a little bit about Your Glorantha Will Vary (YGWV)" by Ian Cooper

[Jeff]

10 minutes ago, JonL said:

In addition to retaining a proper Elmal, my Gloranthas have more chariots, because the Tain is rad..

There are chariots in RQG - rules and pics. I agree with you on that (although mine are more Hittite or Assyrian in my head).

[Jeff]

7 hours ago, Jeff said:

There are chariots in RQG - rules and pics. I agree with you on that (although mine are more Hittite or Assyrian in my head).

Like these:

[MOB]

6 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Like these:

Speaking of chariots, this is one of my favourite pics in RQG:

[Jeff]

Just now, MOB said:

Speaking of chariots, this is one of my favourite pics in RQG:

I love that one!

[Akhôrahil]

I love how one gets the impression that the chariots aren't actually very militarily useful, but goddammit they're tradition and besides you look fabulous riding them! 

[Jeff]

2 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

I love how one gets the impression that the chariots aren't actually very militarily useful, but goddammit they're tradition and besides you look fabulous riding them! 

And what they are really useful for is as a spell-casting platform. It is a lot easier casting an active spell while riding on a chariot than on a horse. Not to mention that it is easier to augment while atop a chariot than on a horse!

[Joerg]

How good are the suspensions of the passenger baskets? I imagine a pot-hole riddled ground in a chariot to be more distracting than the gait of a (led) riding animal (or a riding animal steered by another rider on the same beast).

A howda would probably be even better, or a palanquin suspended between pairs of animals, assuming the same kind of suspension for the passenger platform as in a chariot.

Can Warding be attached to chariot platforms? That would make a difference.

[Ian Cooper]

14 hours ago, Shawn Carpenter said:

I think this thread's last couple of pages support Ian's comments admirably.

Indeed.

[Akhôrahil]

36 minutes ago, Joerg said:

A howda would probably be even better, or a palanquin suspended between pairs of animals, assuming the same kind of suspension for the passenger platform as in a chariot.

In RQ at least, priests slinging spells from en elephant-howdah while the elephant gores you while being buffed and healed from above - that sounds very nicely optimized!

[Ian Cooper]

I'd like to clarify a couple of points. First, it is clear that we already have a divergent Glorantha. If I want to play stories in Glorantha **now** I can pick KoDP or Six Ages. I can pick 13th Age Glorantha. I can pick HQG. I can pick RQG. Or I could pick up an older presentation such as HW or RQ2. Over the years different creative voices have had their moment 'in the sun' and revised the setting to their liking. Add in fan publications that 'fill in the gaps' and there is a **lot** of versions of Glorantha. We have some touchstones, such as The Guide to Glorantha, but even from such a base, some drift is occurring.

Even canon has become a loaded term. What is canon for 13th Age is not canon for HQG is not canon for RQG is not canon for Six Ages.

All draw inspiration from the same well, yet all differ.

And so what to do? If a 13G book adventure is consistent with the Glorantha presented in a the 13G book, but not the one presented in RQG is that 'canon'. Is it even wrong? Should that 13G volume choose consistency with the core book, or a later RQG book that none of its players may have?

This is a very real question for the HQG line. Sartar Kingdom of Heroes and Sartar Companion are foundational works for the line, appearing even before HQG did. Should an HQG product conform to their description of the Orlanthi and Sartar? Of should they conform to the one described in an RQG book that players of that game do not have?

The alternative is that we try to move beyond 'canon' and look to stories instead. What story did KoDP want to tell? It wanted to tell the story of the resettlement of Dragon Pass by the Orlanthi? Was it going to be Sartar's story ever? No. It drew from that wellspring, but it was not that story.

Now I'm obviously not arguing for stupid inconsistencies that are born of laziness. But I am arguing for divergence being inevitable, ad judged on its own merits, provided what comes forth obviously originates from the well-spring.

Given we must accept YGWV at the table, why not go further and accept it on the door

[soltakss]

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

In RQ at least, priests slinging spells from en elephant-howdah while the elephant gores you while being buffed and healed from above - that sounds very nicely optimized!

You can give the elephant a mace as well, it swings it using its trunk. Its tusks can be tipped with a metal casing, meaning they do extra damage and have armour. I've seen pictures of elephants wearing chain headdresses and over the body, but not over the legs, however, I assume they can have plate armour tied to their legs. War elephants used to be fed bucketfuls of strong beer, to get them drunk, so they go into combat enraged, although these wouldn't have had a howdah on their backs, probably.

[Joerg]

1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said:

In RQ at least, priests slinging spells from en elephant-howdah while the elephant gores you while being buffed and healed from above - that sounds very nicely optimized!

I was thinking of various Earth Shakers, and possibly rhinos, too. Few elephants west of the Wastes (the Dawn Age Ralian ones presumed extinct), and few proboscids south of the Janube and Poralistor.

Some Darkness creatures might qualify, too.

[soltakss]

2 minutes ago, Ian Cooper said:

Even canon has become a loaded term. What is canon for 13th Age is not canon for HQG is not canon for RQG is not canon for Six Ages.

Hmmm ...

2 minutes ago, Ian Cooper said:

Given we must accept YGWV at the table, why not go further and accept it on the door

Great! Perhaps we can avoid sniffy little comments from writers about back material not being considered canon.

I assume that everything published is canon and then resolve differences myself. It's a lot easier.

[Ian Cooper]

On 9/11/2019 at 6:10 PM, lordabdul said:

I think Ian's diatribe really comes from his place as a writer

I don't think it was a diatribe, more a vision of a different world. YMMV.

[Qizilbashwoman]

6 minutes ago, Ian Cooper said:

Six Ages

I'd love to play a game in Six Ages, I've even extracted the setting from the wiki into a document in case anyone is interested in a Grey Age campaign... as a Hyalorong!

4 minutes ago, Joerg said:

the Dawn Age Ralian ones presumed extinct

Oof weren't they just hsunchen, or was that Dorastor?

Ralian Orlanthi have a pretty funky pantheon.

[Ian Cooper]

8 minutes ago, soltakss said:

I assume that everything published is canon and then resolve differences myself. It's a lot easier.

I think you should use whatever you find valuable in the works that draw from Greg's well.

We will all be happier.

[Joerg]

Ralian elephants:

2 hours ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

Oof weren't they just hsunchen, or was that Dorastor?

I'd like to think that the Praxian Basmoli are pretty unique among the Hsunchen to lack their totemic beast.

[M Helsdon]

5 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I love how one gets the impression that the chariots aren't actually very militarily useful, but goddammit they're tradition and besides you look fabulous riding them! 

Chariots were historically used in two ways: massed chariots (prior to the ascension of cavalry), and as battle taxis. I imagine that it is in the latter role Sartarite chariots are used: to convey war leaders and priests, stopping to let them do their mundane or magical fighting, and then used either in a pursuit, to move to another part of the battlefield, or make a quick exit. Near Eastern chariots (and so I assume Gloranthan ones) used leather webbing to provide some suspension for the crew.

Here's my version of a Sartarite chariot (heavily influenced by Mycenean and Hittite chariots, and some elements from Assyrian chariots). Note the image of of Elmal and his charioteer woven into the protective covering.

Edited September 15, 2019 by M Helsdon

[Prinz Slasar]

Just my 2 Lunars as a bystander: I find it involuntarily funny that an intense debate about YGWV and Jeff's RQG-approach is starting, just in time with the coming soon Jonstown Compendium, where everyone is able to write her own Glorantha stuff. Either canonical or non-canonical.
Seems like a storm in a teacup.

[Qizilbashwoman]

1 hour ago, prinz.slasar said:

Just my 2 Lunars as a bystander: I find it involuntarily funny that an intense debate about YGWV and Jeff's RQG-approach is starting, just in time with the coming soon Jonstown Compendium, where everyone is able to write her own Glorantha stuff. Either canonical or non-canonical.
Seems like a storm in a teacup.

probably, though, telling people that their concerns are a "storm in a teacup" is kinda rude?

[Bill the barbarian]

1 hour ago, prinz.slasar said:

Just my 2 Lunars as a bystander: I find it involuntarily funny that an intense debate about YGWV and Jeff's RQG-approach is starting, just in time with the coming soon Jonstown Compendium, where everyone is able to write her own Glorantha stuff. Either canonical or non-canonical.

Tempest in a teapot*. I suppose we are guilty of bringing our 1st world problems to the 'net. Perspective is a good thing.  But, thankfully the tempest is not as bloody as it could be... Now, @Qizilbashwoman, be nice, so it does not become worse. He is only giving an opinion. While it does seem a bit of a slap, really, it’s not so bad in all. 

Cheers

* allright grognards, how much does this expression owe to Shakespeare's wonderful play?

Edited September 15, 2019 by Bill the barbarian

[MOB]

1 hour ago, prinz.slasar said:

Just my 2 Lunars as a bystander: I find it involuntarily funny that an intense debate about YGWV and Jeff's RQG-approach is starting, just in time with the coming soon Jonstown Compendium, where everyone is able to write her own Glorantha stuff. Either canonical or non-canonical.
Seems like a storm in a teacup.

Here is what we say about this matter in the Jonstown Compendium Guidelines:

Quote

 

YGWV (“Your Glorantha Will Vary”) and how this applies to the Jonstown Compendium

 “Your Glorantha Will Vary” is long-established principle in Gloranthan fandom. First espoused by the creator of the setting himself, Greg Stafford, in a nutshell what it means is you are free and welcome to take what you want from the incredibly rich tapestry of myth, magic, history and wonder of Glorantha for use in your own creations. 

The “official” canon for the world is found in material published by Chaosium/Moon Design Publications, with what is presented in The Guide to Glorantha and The Glorantha Sourcebook as definitive. However, canon only matters for official publications – for that which is published by Chaosium Inc and its licensees. For your Jonstown Compendium creations, Your Glorantha Will Vary. We strive to ensure that official publications stick to canon: however, that is a restriction on our interpretations of Glorantha, not yours. Your Glorantha can vary as much or as little as you want for what you create for the Jonstown Compendium.

 

 

Edited September 16, 2019 by MOB

[Bill the barbarian]

8 minutes ago, MOB said:

The “official” canon for the world is found in material published by Chaosium/Moon Design Publications, with what is presented in The Guide to Glorantha and The Glorantha Sourcebook as definitive. However, canon only matters for official publications –

Hark, and hear the canons roar!

[Lordabdul]

13 hours ago, Ian Cooper said:

I don't think it was a diatribe, more a vision of a different world. YMMV.

Ah sorry -- in French we abusively use the word "diatribe" to mean "a lengthy argumentation", but it looks like the English word has a rather pronounced bias for a negative/bitter rant. I didn't mean it that way.

13 hours ago, soltakss said:

I assume that everything published is canon and then resolve differences myself.

If people are not comfortable with the word "canon", we can use the expression "Chaosium's Glorantha". By that, I mean that, sure, YGWV, so my Glorantha ("lordabdul's Glorantha") is going to be different from "soltakss's Glorantha", or from "bill's Glorantha" or "ian's Glorantha". We might all steal bits from each other as we see fit. But each Glorantha, taken individually, is, I assume, consistent. Now it seems to me Chaosium is not in the business of writing a "Glorantha toolkit" where you get a bunch of elements from which to build a Glorantha, but the sum of which doesn't make a consistent Glorantha itself -- nor is it in the business of publishing multiple Gloranthas ("jeff's Glorantha" and "jason's Glorantha" and such in various books). I think we should be able to assume it's a consistent "Chaosim's Glorantha", which we can take wholesale, or partially. The Jonstown Compendium is where we can upload bits of our own Gloranthas for sharing, and in that regard, that's the "Glorantha toolkit" (we might even see stuff written by Chaosium staff on there). From what MOB says, it sounds like that's the current editorial line, which sounds good to me.

Edited September 16, 2019 by lordabdul

[Bill the barbarian]

7 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

We might all steal bits from each other as we see fit.

Alright lordabdul, hands off my bits!