Jump to content

Babeester Gor and celibacy


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here's what will be appearing in the Cults Book: REQUIREMENTS TO BELONG Initiates of Babeester Gor聽have all normal requirements and restrictions and receive all the usual benefits. Initiates

And here's her Prosopaedia entry: BABEESTER GOR EARTH DEATH (BAH-bees-ter GORE) Elf and Orlanth pantheons 鈥 颅the avenging daughter and sacred guardian聽 When the Gods War perverted

There are too many good points to quote. For me, Babeester Gor represents the difference between a normal worshipper and a fanatic. Most Babeester Gor cultists are happy to work as Temple Gu

Posted Images

3 hours ago, Kloster said:

Not in mine. As sex is, or at least seems to be, completely disjointed from marriage, we always played prohibition on marriage strictly this. Same thing for marriage restrictions (for Aeolian sorcerors, or LM, for instance).

sure it depends on "personal" representation of marriage, what it implies, etc...

Sex and marriage seems to me extremly joined in solar pantheon (don't know for lunar) excepted the uleria worship and any religious activity I don't know. You may have concubine

Some license in earth/storm pantheon is clear to me. However I remember in one book (HQ maybe) that an ernaldan wife obtained divorce because she was tired to see her orlanth adventurous husband acting a little bit * too much as his god.

So I would say marriage , sex, love, duty are not fitting 100% but they are linked. In each couple you can find an agreement, or one impose on the other his/her view. And the leaders could add their touch in some hard cults

so my view is :

if you are in a sustainable relationship which is not only friendship then you seem (for the god, for the cult,...) to have a marriage relationship without the official "issue" (like never build the roof of your house you are living in because the tax starts when there is a roof in some countries). The key word is sustainable here. If sex is allowed, they don't care what you do, they care with who

a little bit * :french joke in this context ;) may LM help you in this quest to find the truth (or maybe not... )

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, French Desperate WindChild said:

a little bit * :french joke in this context ;) may LM help you in this quest to find the truth (or maybe not... )

I got it, but I'm hesitating to translate/explain this one! 馃榿 Wouldn't like to see a Bab knocking at my door covered with ritual paintings... 馃槰

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Monty Lovering said:

It's good in the upcoming cults book the requirement is simply no marriage. The ones in Storm Tribe would be unhealthy, to say the very least.

7 hours ago, Akh么rahil said:

I believe that was the point - it鈥檚 not something healthy, well-adjusted people would get themselves into.

BG in HW/HQ was extreme and scary.

I'm probably not a "well-adjusted" person, and I would better see a shrink, but sorry, I totally disagree. What is "healthy"? Being born from the entrails of her own dying mother? Becoming a goddess of vengeance and terror? Drinking the blood beer from her ennemies? Well, very healthy, indeed... Especially in a world infested by broos... Or maybe Glorantha is an "unhealthy" universe for (and by????) non "well-adjusted" people? 馃榿

Of course, it's up to each GM, as I said, to adapt whatever he wants in the way he decides. But I'm sorry, I wouldn't say HW Babeester Gor cult's requirements are "unhealthy", and I would never suspect of "unhealthyness" any player who would play such a character. It's just a character, a catharsis tool and an entertainment support. And a piece of sheet, of course.
I have a player who chose a Babeester Gor initiate, and I gave him my Storm Tribe book so he could make up his mind. He read and confirmed his choice. He's not just a member of my gaming club, he's also a friend of mine, and I know him personnally. He seems to be "healthy" and "well-adjusted", but I'm certainly wrong... Maybe I should judge my players on accurate criteria? "Adjusted" sounds very strong like "alignment", and maybe my Bab is an evil-chaotic person???

Well, I'm running HQ the day after tomorrow. I'll hide some holy water behind my screen. You never know... 馃榿

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lo茂c said:

But I'm sorry, I wouldn't say HW Babeester Gor cult's requirements are "unhealthy", and I would never suspect of "unhealthyness" any player who would play such a character.

Have you read the Storm Tribe BG? It鈥檚 all but unplayable (just as with its Eurmal), and lots of people didn鈥檛 like that.

RQ BG is nowhere near as extreme.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

In my glorantha, if a cult has a mariage restriction in RAW, I consider that any attempt to create a sustainable "love/sex/..." relationship (even non exclusive, in some way) is a cheating (of the character, not the player)

So there are consequences when discovered (by the cult if I consider it is a cult restriction, by the god if I consider this obligation is decided by the god itself)

consequences may be weak (-10 penalty for any worship roll until the pc changes, -10 in devotion when the pc understant he/she is wrong but decide to continue the relationship , ....), or strong (ban, reprisal, ...)

Focusing on Babs,

A )聽 it seems to me the worshipper is like humakti, so imbued (*) by the death rune, the severing rune, that it is really difficult to have a "love individual" passion.

聽聽 => a "love individual" passion test every death rune increase, if failure, the passion get -10

B ) rare are people who are able to love for a long time someone wearing more and more bones, skulls, morbid scarifications and want to kill anyone who is not enough good for the Earth.

聽聽 => a passion test every year for both lovers, if one fails, both lose 10 to their passion

C) remember the "baby gift" to the earth : what ?! you gave my boy to maran gor ? but what will he become ? (I let you imagine... )

聽聽 => if the lover has no reason to accept it with joy, -20, no test

Of course, it is my view of religion in glorantha : When you follow some strong god, you have to assume the consequences. The price of weapon trance is not only a rune point and magic points.You have big social / fealings issues (but normaly, you don't care, because Humakt / Babs don't care)

imbued * :聽 not sure the word

All of that makes sense: there's a difference between prohibition on marriage and a celibacy requirement, but they could be seen as two steps on the same "scale" of requiring initiates to forgo some worldly "entanglements", and celibacy would make plenty of sense for Babs, to be fair. I don't think her requirements would be as stringent as Humakt's, but a strong death rune and similar oaths probably make it difficult or even undesirable to maintain close relationships while carrying out one's obligations. I imagine Babeester Gori might still maintain significant kinship ties though, seeing as unlike Humakt severing all ties, Babeester Gor defends and avenges her mother the Earth (albeit Babeester worship obviously takes this way beyond the scale of literal blood kinship).

I do think it opens up some interesting avenues that Babs doesn't require celibacy, since her entire thing doesn't rest as much as Humakt on cutting all ties and worldly passions (in fact, there's a very worldly passion in the kind of avenging rage associated with her, even though it's one probably incompatible with most pleasant human interaction), but that doesn't mean her initiates aren't usually celibate anyway for many reasons.

I'm also not sure if we got word on Axe Maidens; I imagine those are celibate. Or at least ritually so, something like that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

Your friend could be healthy and his character not.

That's what I mean...

Just now, Akh么rahil said:

Have you read the Storm Tribe BG? It鈥檚 all but unplayable (just as with its Eurmal), and lots of people didn鈥檛 like that.

RQ BG is nowhere near as extreme.

Yes, I did. And I saw some playing Babs and Eurmali at my table (I was a player then). But if lots of people don't like that, it doesn't necessarly mean the others aren't "well-adjusted". That's all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the deal with the write-up in Storm Tribe is that it takes something very extreme, that sounds like the type of taboo that a hermit shaman, or maybe a secluded high priestess, would have, and applies it to a wider cult. If something like those restrictions were exceptional cases (then again, Babeester Gori are not a large cult and are thus somewhat exceptional... but not that much, seeing as every Earth Temple in several cultures is supposed to have at least one and ideally a few) that derive exceptional power from such stringent requirements, then that wouldn't really raise an eyebrow, but I guess many people just don't have that vision of the BG cult.

The Storm Tribe writeup is playable, but playable as a cult even more ascetic and marginal than most people imagine BG cultists being, I suppose.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rykemasters said:

I think the deal with the write-up in Storm Tribe is that it takes something very extreme, that sounds like the type of taboo that a hermit shaman, or maybe a secluded high priestess, would have, and applies it to a wider cult.

HW had no problems with making stuff unplayable - take Mystics for instance, who could be really powerful as long as they never actually used their powers...

I think RQ is trying to work against that kind of thing, like with the new bits about Eurmal that seem聽to be aiming at increased playability.聽

Edited by Akh么rahil
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jeff said:

And here's her Prosopaedia entry:

BABEESTER GOR

EARTH DEATH

(BAH-bees-ter GORE) Elf and Orlanth pantheons 鈥 颅the avenging daughter and sacred guardian

When the Gods War perverted the world, Earnalda brought forth her own grim defender. Babeester Gor was born from Ernalda's corpse, axes in hand, body ritually scarred to carry deadly magic. She destroyed all kin-slayers, all oath-breakers who swore by her mother, and everything which desecrated the sacred places of the earth.

She was merciless and cruel. Once she slew so many defenseless residents of Healing Valley that she waded breast-deep in the gore, drinking the blood of victory and slaughter. Eurmal saved some of the healers when he turned the blood to beer, which Babeester Gor drank to blissful oblivion.

Every important temple to the Earth deities is guarded by Babeester Gor's initiates and includes a shrine to her.

Babeester Gor is depicted as a ferocious woman whose eyes are red with intoxication and rage. Her hair is disheveled and her blood-red tongue lolls drunkenly. Her skin is black, but her hands and feet are painted red with blood. She is naked except for her garlands of grisly trophies 鈥 scalps, hands, and male genitals. She carries a double-headed copper axe that is also decorated with her grisly trophies.

sp - "Earnalda" ?

More substantively --聽 Can we get some of the "other side" of B.Gor, too?聽 As-written, it seems like it'll only encourage the wholly bloodthirsty & "crazed" style of play...聽possibly just looking, to some, like "storm bull for girls."聽 馃槥

Where's the stern-but-calm, steadfast temple-defender?聽 Yeah, sure, there's mention of the role... but no supporting imagery in the text!

Where's the merciless-but-cold tracker, calmly chasing down a runaway kinslayer, a hidden oathbreaker?聽 Unless the B.Gori are getting a new special "Sense:<X>" akin to Humakti's ...Assassin & Uroxi's ...Chaos, which they can Sense while in the midst of bloodthirsty berzerkergang...

===

Also -- "slew so many defenseless residents of Healing Valley" is hardly an Earth-Defender act!聽 This wants some sort of context to not look like she's more about ANY bloodshed than she is about "avenging daughter" & "sacred guardian."

BTW -- is聽explicit mention of B.Gor hating & punishing rape being purged from RQG?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Arcadiagt5 said:

I've already had to do that so no big deal. RAW allows Humakt initiates to pick 鈥淥ther Weapon (pick type) + 10%鈥, and a character in one game used that for Composite Bow but then picked up a 鈥渘o non-cult weapons鈥 geas. Since she learned it as part of Initiation I ruled that Composite Bow is a cult weapon for her home Humakt Temple in Alone. It probably isn鈥檛 recognised as such anywhere else, but it is there. YGWV indeed.聽馃榾

I know this got three likes, and YGMV, but this is, IMO, way overly lenient.聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons that the player never planed to ever use anyway".聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons except useful ones the player is skilled with".

As modified, the net effect of the geas is near zero.聽 Has it ever significantly affected the character in your games?

If you don't want to pick up a nasty geas, limit the number of those awesome gifts you choose to take.

Edited by Rodney Dangerduck
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

As modified, the net effect of the geas is near zero.聽 Has it ever significantly affected the character in your games?

It tends to completely screw-over your ranged combat capacity, which matters. But no-one cares one whit about not being allowed to use clubs.

Edited by Akh么rahil
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I know this got three likes, and YGMV, but this is, IMO, way overly lenient.聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons that the player never planed to ever use anyway".聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons except useful ones the player is skilled with".

As modified, the net effect of the geas is near zero.聽 Has it ever significantly affected the character in your games?

If you don't want to pick up a nasty geas, limit the number of those awesome gifts you choose to take.

I agree this seems very lenient if this is a geas acquired during the game (getting a geas that prevents you from doing things you used to do regularly is literally the point), but I got the impression it was during character creation, which seems not quite as bad. Even in that case it seems fiddly to me compared to either letting the player pick a different weapon bonus, or rerolling the geas. I don't think the different steps of character creation happen chronologically to the character in the order you run through them, so it makes sense to let the player choose skills that are mostly consistent with their geas, although I wouldn't let a player completely run away with it. But I agree that effectively neutering the effect of the geas for that character is a strange solution.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Could be Babs Gor too, true.聽 But also save some聽roles for Orlanth / Vinga, or the hunter cults.

I think any of them could work.
Note however that the "hunter" cults will mostly be about literal hunting -- tracking wild game.

Finding kinslayers and oathbreakers are different, and rather more human/social... you need to follow gossip & rumor, ask questions of people, etc.聽 It's much more police-ish / investigator sort of action.聽 I'd see B.Gor using more intimidation tactics than persuasion:聽

"I wouldn't want to think you're lying to me; not even a lie-of-omission, which is still a lie.聽 I get angry when people lie about this sort of thing.聽 You don't want to see me when I'm angry..."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kloster said:

With RQG, you don't choose the geas anymore. They are rolled on a table (a reason for me not to play an Humakti anymore).

Agreed.聽 Take your one gift at initiation.聽 Don't voluntarily choose an extra gift, like that PC did, so you don't have to roll on that table.聽 I guess you could even refuse to become Rune Level, though that is going too far.聽 馃檪

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rykemasters said:

All of that makes sense: there's a difference between prohibition on marriage and a celibacy requirement, but they could be seen as two steps on the same "scale" of requiring initiates to forgo some worldly "entanglements", and celibacy would make plenty of sense for Babs, to be fair.

If there were any requirement on celibacy, there would be no rule for children.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I know this got three likes, and YGMV, but this is, IMO, way overly lenient.聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons that the player never planed to ever use anyway".聽

The geas isn't "no non-cult weapons except useful ones the player is skilled with".

As modified, the net effect of the geas is near zero.聽 Has it ever significantly affected the character in your games?

If you don't want to pick up a nasty geas, limit the number of those awesome gifts you choose to take.

Yes and no. The character is light cavalry and lost the use of Lance (which had received a substantial boost during the Occupation step).聽

I still don鈥檛 see an issue with this specific weapon (as opposed to all missile weapons) being adopted by a local variant of the cult. The counter issue聽is that the RQG RAW says 鈥淥ther Weapon (pick type),聽not聽鈥淥ther聽Cult聽Weapon (pick type)鈥 in the Humakt section of character creation.

That鈥檚 a skill being taught to initiates. If it鈥檚 supposed to be restricted, RAW should say so.

I am perhaps being overly sensitive on this aspect but I've had issues with relying on wider Gloranthan lore that not all players have access to, and that some see as 鈥渇lavour text鈥 rather than rules per se, when making in game rulings.

To bring this back on topic with Babeester Gor: as per RAW her initiates are protectors of Earth temples everywhere, and seekers of vengeance (or justice, depending on how you look at it) for kinslayers and oathbreakers. And there鈥檚 no mention of celibacy or marriage bans (where Maran Gor DOES).

So, and acknowledging that this will change somewhat with the cults book, that puts Babeester Gor initiates firmly within the social order, not outside it. They're an active part of maintaining it in fact.聽

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ian Absentia said:

Enh, you don't have to roll randomly on the Family History events tables, so, really, don't let the geas tables stop you.

!i!

For family history, it explicitly written 'roll or choose'. Not for the geas table. My last GM was quite strict on the matter (and even if more lenient, I also tend to be). Nevertheless, I find some other cults more interesting now.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kloster said:

If there were any requirement on celibacy, there would be no rule for children.

I would be very surprised if BG initiates were聽fertile. The combination of Dark Earth,聽Death and and the need to stay on mission at all times聽seems like it would put a stop to that.

Edited by Akh么rahil
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Akh么rahil said:

I would be very surprised if BG initiates were聽fertile. The combination of Dark Earth and Death seems like it would put a stop to that.

According to Jeff: 'Initiates may not marry and must give any offspring to their local Earth Temple.' They are thus fertile, and can have children, although outside of marriage. They are also permitted to have sex, and to have children, because otherwise, the ruling about children given to temples would be useless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...