Akhôrahil Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Oh, and Ralzakark was alive in the time of Nysalor, so if he's Arkat reborn, it can't be literally. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajagappa Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said: That's possible. But the one person we feel pretty certain about is extremely Arkati. Very much so. But does Arkat the Chaos Monster need to be Arkati? Or quite possibly an agent of Gbaji (which of course is tangled into the "dark side" of Arkat). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akhôrahil Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 Just now, AndreJarosch said: The difference in between the safelstran city states are bigger than the differences in between historical italian city states imho. Not sure... what are their language(s) like? If they share a language (more or less - they might still be barely understandable), then I would lean towards the Italian analogy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajagappa Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said: Oh, and Ralzakark was alive in the time of Nysalor, so if he's Arkat reborn, it can't be literally. Oh? You don't think he might not be Arkat the Deceiver/Chaos Monster from the Gbaji Wars? Consider the final part of his name... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akhôrahil Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 1 hour ago, jajagappa said: Oh? You don't think he might not be Arkat the Deceiver/Chaos Monster from the Gbaji Wars? Consider the final part of his name... I know that at least in that case, the ”Reborn” part isn’t literal. 🙂 Also, I’m not sure that we can trust Greg Stafford to have used systematic naming standards. If this had been Tolkien, I would naturally want to learn what “-ark” means, but here? I mean, the entire thing with Arkat/Argrath happened because he accidentally re-used a name, if I understand it correctly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joerg Posted February 7, 2020 Share Posted February 7, 2020 8 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said: I know that at least in that case, the ”Reborn” part isn’t literal. 🙂 Also, I’m not sure that we can trust Greg Stafford to have used systematic naming standards. If this had been Tolkien, I would naturally want to learn what “-ark” means, but here? I mean, the entire thing with Arkat/Argrath happened because he accidentally re-used a name, if I understand it correctly... Arkat was reborn, in seven uz bodies, ending his second and starting his third life-time, according to the Jonstown Compendium bit from Troll Gods. That can be read as six companions of Arkat being reborn as Arkat - a side effect of undergoing the Rebirth ritual. Ralzakark may well have been a side product of some rebirth - possibly changing back from the Chaotic Troll monster that defeated Gbaji to the autarch in human shape, (one aspect of) Ralzakark may have been shed from Arkat (and integrated by the broo hero). Argrath's saga basically started out as Arkat's saga retold (or rather played out rather than just told) in a later age, so the name Argrath was a conscious variant of Arkat. The Dragon Pass hero turned out to be somewhat different from the Brithini-born one. I am not entirely sure whether Arkatism was a unified movement in the days of the Autarchy, but it certainly hasn't been ever since Paslac was killed by Annmagk's forces. Basically, Arkatism was the Ways of Arkat, Arkat-do. And there were a lot of parts of the way available to put your focus on. A recent image in "Kill 10 Billion Demons" made me wonder whether whenever one Arkat(i) is active in the world, several aspects parked in the hero planes as guardians look over that individual's shoulder, or lend their strengths to whatever the primary in the mundane world undertakes. 1 Quote Telling how it is excessive verbis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius West Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 On 2/7/2020 at 3:20 AM, scott-martin said: What they can't agree on is what exactly that means and how to take it forward. The depth psychology is interesting but practically it means endless narcissism of what to us outsiders would be trivial differences. If they could ever agree to anything it would probably change the world. The term you were looking for, i believe, is the narcissism of small differences. It's an invaluable term that applies equally well to societies and siblings. For all those people who wonder why people who seem so alike can't stand each other, it explains plenty. I hope this proves useful. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g33k Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 To answer the OP: tl;dr -- Yes, it can be (at least by some). Caveats -- not by all; and even those who consider it "a culture" often note that it's not a uniform/monolithic culture. Quote C'es ne pas un .sig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.