Jump to content

Chaos Pantheon - Guide to Glorantha Page 153


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, FungusColombicus said:

are the second rune (mastery) of Ompalam incorrect should it be inverse from what is in the book ?image.png.6dafd0b783f88b116286bf0bbc593b3a.png 

Are you asking about the order or sequence of the Runes?  If so, then I don't believe it particularly matters as those are just his Runes.

But maybe you are asking something else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tarot has different meanings for "reversed" or "upside-down" cards.

I *think* that I recall that at one point in Glorantha -- that some Runes that have a top/bottom could be "reversed" for another meaning.  My recollection of that was that it was a HR or other "I'm not paying any real attention to that" detail...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, that’s my fault. I made a joke about organisation charts and Slavery Runes (inverted Mastery Runes) on a RQCon panel back in the mid-nineties, and it’s still doing the rounds. There is no canonical basis for inverting Ompalam’s Mastery Rune.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, there's no reason why runes can't be at any angle. In books It's a limitation of fonts (unless you want to get fiddly). It's convention that we keep them the "right" way up.    and some are symmetrical so it doesn't matter. It's been long established that there are no alternative meanings for inverted runes. We now have lots of art with runes at all angles. There is a font that has along with the usual mastery run has one on its side, but it looks like an E.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nick Brooke said:

Sorry, that’s my fault. I made a joke about organisation charts and Slavery Runes (inverted Mastery Runes) on a RQCon panel back in the mid-nineties, and it’s still doing the rounds. There is no canonical basis for inverting Ompalam’s Mastery Rune.

Exactly my point of my question... wow... 90s... that non canon rumor surely carries some heavy weight.

Thanks for the clarification.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, FungusColombicus said:

Exactly my point of my question... wow... 90s... that non canon rumor surely carries some heavy weight.

"It's always the '90s somewhere in Glorantha fandom. It's just unevenly distributed."

Your original question was very helpful to me personally in terms of figuring out how Orlanth works in the southern corner, so far from Dara Happan chauvinism and the suns northerners know. When they think of an Evil Emperor, they think of someone different. Thanks.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, David Scott said:

Overall, there's no reason why runes can't be at any angle. In books It's a limitation of fonts (unless you want to get fiddly). It's convention that we keep them the "right" way up.    and some are symmetrical so it doesn't matter. It's been long established that there are no alternative meanings for inverted runes. We now have lots of art with runes at all angles. There is a font that has along with the usual mastery run has one on its side, but it looks like an E.

I understand your point and you are correct... as with most of writing methods you can write in almost any geometric arrangement. YET, in some cases particularly with non alphabetical writing (scripts) that is not the case. Take the futhark runes as example, depending if the rune is pointing right or upside down it could mean something different.

To be perfectly honest my question was a mix of curiosity and the old rumor read somewhere.

My questions was perfectly explained by @Nick Brooke about the "non canon rumor" perfectly.
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nick Brooke said:

Sorry, that’s my fault. I made a joke about organisation charts and Slavery Runes (inverted Mastery Runes) on a RQCon panel back in the mid-nineties, and it’s still doing the rounds. There is no canonical basis for inverting Ompalam’s Mastery Rune.

Once you say something, it is canon.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Nick Brooke said:

A what now?

A serial panelist, I think he said.
It's like a serial killer, but not /quite/ as antisocial.

Edited by g33k
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, g33k said:

A serial panelist, I think he said.
It's like a serial killer, but not /quite/ as antisocial.

serial panelist is such that in his lifetime participated in earnest in more than 3 panels. Depending on the contain of the panel it may be consider antisocial.

Quite different from what I meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FungusColombicus said:

serial panelist is such that in his lifetime participated in earnest in more than 3 panels.

I seem to remember him doing so! 😉  (And I suspect we can find the documentation to prove it - just another turn on Eonistaran's Wheel!)

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FungusColombicus said:

Exactly what I meant...
image.png.63b4f271a6ee389c28fae7292f0af82d.png

 

1 hour ago, FungusColombicus said:

serial panelist is such that in his lifetime participated in earnest in more than 3 panels. Depending on the contain of the panel it may be consider antisocial.

Quite different from what I meant.

I can't tell if these are jokes as well, but the "serial" misinterpretation was made in jest.

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...