There is no Gloranthan Canon

[Eff]

2 hours ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

how can they, we all know the Red Emperor is a woman in drag

I mean, the pompadour has been a women's style for much longer than it's been a men's. There might be room for a grand concordance here. An Argentean Trilogy, perhaps.
 

 

[Thoror]

7 hours ago, Nick Brooke said:

It's pretty goddamn clear to me that nobody is saying it's canon. Which makes Thoror look a tad deceptive.

You know, I don't have any time for this guy. Our book is the best-selling, best-rated title on the JC, but someone on the intertubes preferred ILH? Cool, man. You can keep it. YGWV. Don't let the door hit you in the arse when you storm out.

Quite honestly, I don't know why are you being so aggressive. It kind of baffles me. Even more so when:

1) I haven't said that the Rough Guide is canon. Not once. Not ever. There is not a single canon book focused in the Lunar Empire, as much as I would love it; just two non-canon ones. I'm just saying that the person in charge of the canon recommends the Rough Guide as one of the best sources on the Empire, one that even fits his vision for it. Which means that, since there is no canon Lunar Empire book, the Rough Guide would be the closest thing to it. Is that wrong? Is that deceptive? Because I know that "the closest thing to a canon book" doesn't mean "a canon book", and I have never claimed otherwise.

2) There are only two reasons why I prefer the handbook, OK? Just two: it's the only one with a fully developed Lunar mythology, and it's serious. That's it. That's just it. I like the serious stuff in the Rough Guide. I like most of the Glamour gazzeteer. I like the Red Emperor cult write-up. I like plenty of things in it. The problem is that the humorous/plain crazy stuff is neither what I wanted nor what I expected in a Lunar Empire book. I don't even think it's bad; just not what I was looking for.

I don't know where this prima donna "I don't need this, haters gonna hate but my fans love me so much more" shit comes from. Like, I haven't the slightest clue. Honestly.

 

 

[scott-martin]

3 hours ago, Eff said:

the pompadour has been a women's style

Madame has a lot to answer for, including all the bois I've known who rocked a d.a. Elvis TakenEgi as ultimate lesbian icon.

Suddenly I realize the flamenco dancer so prominent in Derek Jarman's work for the Pet Shop Boys (and stolen/contaminated in COIL fan cuts) is probably someone in the lunar nomenklatura, one of the flaming creatures. Great thread!

 
EDIT: Red Dancer of Power, obv

Edited May 3, 2021 by scott-martin

[Nick Brooke]

Quote

I don't know where this prima donna "I don't need this, haters gonna hate but my fans love me so much more" shit comes from. Like, I haven't the slightest clue. Honestly.

Mate, you called our book "preposterous." Face it, that was a lame opener. Then this thread of yours is apparently about canon; our book is clearly, loudly, proudly, overtly non-canonical; and yet you're using it to prove something about canon? Fuctifino, the story keeps changing. I'm glad you liked the good preposterous bits, anyway. That's probably the same 95% that Jeff liked.

The 'canon Lunar Empire book' you're after will likely be split between the Guide to Glorantha (geography, overview) plus the Glorantha Sourcebook (cosmology, history) plus the forthcoming Cults of Glorantha (loads of Lunar cult writeups). None of them will feel much like the ILH version, as the management thinks that was a wrong turn. And our stuff won't feel much like them, because we aren't constrained by canon.

[soltakss]

55 minutes ago, Thoror said:

1) I haven't said that the Rough Guide is canon. Not once. Not ever. There is not a single canon book focused in the Lunar Empire, as much as I would love it; just two non-canon ones. I'm just saying that the person in charge of the canon recommends the Rough Guide as one of the best sources on the Empire, one that even fits his vision for it. Which means that, since there is no canon Lunar Empire book, the Rough Guide would be the closest thing to it. Is that wrong? Is that deceptive? Because I know that "the closest thing to a canon book" doesn't mean "a canon book", and I have never claimed otherwise.

There are a lot of Lunar books, all non-canonical: ILH1, ILH2, Under the Red Moon, Rough Guide to Glamour, Life of Moonson I & II and Citizens of the Lunar Empire, to name but a few.

We can take what we like from them and discard the rest. For example, I liked ILH1, as it was a very RuneQuesty HQ supplement, but I found a lot of ILH2 turgid and unreadable. 

Jeff probably liked rough Guide to Glamour for its freedom, irreverence and humour. saying it is close to what he thought Glamour was like is not saying that it is canon, just that it has the right approach.

1 hour ago, Thoror said:

2) There are only two reasons why I prefer the handbook, OK? Just two: it's the only one with a fully developed Lunar mythology, and it's serious. That's it. That's just it. I like the serious stuff in the Rough Guide. I like most of the Glamour gazzeteer. I like the Red Emperor cult write-up. I like plenty of things in it. The problem is that the humorous/plain crazy stuff is neither what I wanted nor what I expected in a Lunar Empire book. I don't even think it's bad; just not what I was looking for.

Some people like serious supplements, some like non-serious ones. I am lucky, as I like both.

What I normally do is assume that half of everything that I buy is something that I cannot use, so if I can use more than half then I am happy.

I almost never use scenarios as written and almost always adapt them to my campaign, often ripping them apart or using bits from several scenarios to make a new scenario. Does that mean that I dislike the scenarios that I don't use? No, it means that I accept that I will have to change them.

It is the same with background. Do I like the humorous elements in Rough Guide to Glamour? Honestly, I don't know as I have only flipped through it. I don't have a Gloranthan campaign at the moment, so have no need to read it in detail.

 

Saying that "A Rough Guide to Glamour must be like canon because Jeff said he liked it, whereas ILH1 is not canon because Jeff said he doesn't like it, therefore all of canon is useless" is being a bit over the top, in my opinion. Which is fine, because most of the stuff I do RQ/Gloranthawise is over the top. But don't expect everyone to agree with you, especially not Nick.

[Thoror]

1 hour ago, Nick Brooke said:

Mate, you called our book "preposterous." Face it, that was a lame opener.

Preposterous as in "it would be preposterous to consider this madness part of the usual/canon Glorantha", not as in "this is garbage". Just a big ol' misunderstanding.

It's a nice product in its own way, it's just that I wish so badly that there was a serious, canonical Lunar Empire/Lunar mythology book. Those three books won't be enough for me, I just want a "Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes" for the Lunars. Cults of Glorantha won't even have the Red Emperor cult, although your version is pretty good and valid.

Peace, man.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Thoror

[Thoror]

25 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Citizens of the Lunar Empire

Oh right, forgot that one. I was considering Imperial Lunar Handbook I and II essentially the same book in two parts, and Life of Moonson is a prolongation of the Rough Guide. There is also Champions of the Reaching Moon, but that one has a very narrow focus, thus why I also forgot it.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Thoror

[Scotty]

A reminder to all:

Please make sure you read the Glorantha Canon doc:

https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com/home/gloranthan-canon/

• Canon doesn't matter unless you are writing for an official publication.
• You are free to pick and choose whatever material you wish into your Gloranthan games.

 

 

[ffilz]

Canon, is that all that stuff that came after the holy bible of Glorantha, AKA RuneQuest 1st ed.? 🙂

Well, I do use a heck of a lot more official (and some non-official) stuff than that, though MOSTLY from the RQ2 era.

[Ian Absentia]

"Canon" is consistency, touchpoints that allow a common cause.  Lowest common denominators.  Foundations, if you will.  The higher you build above base elevation, the more variation from canon you encounter.  And if at high elevation you need to connect two disparate points, you either tie them back to the original base or establish a new one higher up.

Can you tell the sort of trade I work in?  Can you tell my love for tortured metaphor?

Point being, canon does exist, and it's a building tool for construction and aesthetics.  It's also a tool for academics to appreciate construction and design at a conceptual level.  But at a daily, functional level, canon is just something the average user "feels" and that gives them the confidence that it won't fall apart under their feet in use.

Generally, I really don't give a damn about canon.  I appreciate what it does to help hold my games together, but I redecorate often and at will, as long as it can be recognised and appreciated by other players familiar with the source.  No painting all the walls, floors, and ceiling black.

Finally, I'll give kudos to The Rough Guide as a spiritual call-back to the '70s Californian stoner humor that is at the very roots of, at the very least, RQ1 Glorantha (word up, @ffilz!).  Don't be surprised that it stands out to comment.

!i!

[Pentallion]

Alright, signups!  Signups for the Canon Cult!  Get your Canon Cult signups right here?

Please fill out in triplicate.  This copy is for you.  This copy is for the Quartermaster and this copy we keep in the Dwarf Administration Offices.

[GMKen]

This kind of drama is generally why I’ve avoided things Lunar.  Messing with them leads to nothing but trouble. Sure they make a good boogeyman for Orlanthi, but I’m perfectly okay with Chaos being the baddie everyone gets to gang up on and kill at will.  Sort of like wild hogs here in Texas.  You’re basically free to hunt as many as you can bag.  Please.  They’re tearing things up down here, and at least for the moment there are no moral qualms about killing them.  Like chaos beasts.

Lunars?  Buncha drama queens...

[g33k]

On 5/3/2021 at 8:13 AM, Thoror said:

... The problem is that the humorous/plain crazy stuff is neither what I wanted nor what I expected in a Lunar Empire book ...

The thing is ...  I think a weird/wacky vibe is *essential* to portray the Lunar capitol correctly.  It is a strange, strange place.

Now, maybe RGtG overplays that hand; or ignores some or the more serious, tragic, and horrific elements of the place (for the record, I think those TOO are essential).  But, as noted, we have the Sourcebook for that stuff, and the Guide, and soon the Cults book.

I don't believe a SKoH-serious work would actually serve as well.

Remember the foundations of the City are a bargain with Glamour, the (demi?)goddess...  She ain't so much for Sartarite-style seriousity.

===

THAT SAID...

fwiw, Nick:  I seriously think you should adjust the DTRPG blurb to make it explicitly clear to all buyers that there is a LOT of levity / jokes / etc in RGtG, that the overall tone is less-serious than other area-guides to Glorantha.  This isn't the first time I've seen this sort of remark from someone who didn't understand what they were buying.  And if there are one or two speaking up, there's a lot more who are just quietly unhappy about it (because that's how these things work).
 

[davecake]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

  I seriously think you should adjust the DTRPG blurb to make it explicitly clear to all buyers that there is a LOT of levity / jokes / etc in RGtG, that the overall tone is less-serious than other area-guides to Glorantha. 

WARNING this product contains humour? 

[Nevermet]

8 minutes ago, davecake said:

WARNING this product contains humour? 

Humour?  In your RPG?  It's more likely than you think!

[Bill the barbarian]

8 minutes ago, davecake said:

WARNING this product contains humour? 

and nuts, too!

[Joerg]

7 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

and nuts, too!

I checked, and ... not really. Best fit I got was "minutes" (twice) and "diminution".

Edited May 5, 2021 by Joerg

[Sir_Godspeed]

9 hours ago, g33k said:

The thing is ...  I think a weird/wacky vibe is *essential* to portray the Lunar capitol correctly.  It is a strange, strange place.

Now, maybe RGtG overplays that hand; or ignores some or the more serious, tragic, and horrific elements of the place (for the record, I think those TOO are essential).  But, as noted, we have the Sourcebook for that stuff, and the Guide, and soon the Cults book.

I don't believe a SKoH-serious work would actually serve as well.

Remember the foundations of the City are a bargain with Glamour, the (demi?)goddess...  She ain't so much for Sartarite-style seriousity.

===

THAT SAID...

fwiw, Nick:  I seriously think you should adjust the DTRPG blurb to make it explicitly clear to all buyers that there is a LOT of levity / jokes / etc in RGtG, that the overall tone is less-serious than other area-guides to Glorantha.  This isn't the first time I've seen this sort of remark from someone who didn't understand what they were buying.  And if there are one or two speaking up, there's a lot more who are just quietly unhappy about it (because that's how these things work).
 

Doesn't pretty much every review note that it's tongue in cheek in tone?

[Ali the Helering]

9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

and nuts, too!

The product, or the gaming community?

[Bill the barbarian]

Way to go, man! I deliberating left that blank!  😡

 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Bill the barbarian

[Thoror]

12 hours ago, g33k said:

The thing is ...  I think a weird/wacky vibe is *essential* to portray the Lunar capitol correctly.  It is a strange, strange place.

Remember the foundations of the City are a bargain with Glamour, the (demi?)goddess...  She ain't so much for Sartarite-style seriousity.

Yeah, but the thing is... I think that too. Just not like that.

When I read that Moonson's design was based on bad-shape Elvis (I hadn't made that connection myself)... I didn't have any problem with that whatsoever. Just a fun cosmetic touch. And I know that canon-Argenteus is pretty much a Nero-like ruler, a decadent figure whom Lunar propaganda is trying (badly) to paint in a positive light, and of course a product like this has to reflect that...

... But that's one thing, and a lovingly explicit and detailed depiction of his potty problems is another thing, you know?

Moonson having seven lovers born as daughters of a former Mask, which makes it symbolic incest, is one thing; five of them being based on the friggin' Spice Girls is another thing.

The goddess Glamour being a fickle, deceptive yet stylish and altogether... well, glamorous bitch is one thing; her having Saturday nights (I don't think I need to explain that there are no Saturdays in Glorantha) as her holy days is another.

There is something here beneath the gross-out comedy, beneath the over-the-top absurdity, beneath the pop-culture references that I very much like. There is a real Lunar Empire behind the funhouse mirror reflection, and yeah, maybe that is what Jeff was talking about (and I apologize to Nick for not saying the good part before). I just wish that a canon book took that and ran with it. It's one of the most fascinating parts of Glorantha; I think it could run its own show.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Thoror

[scott-martin]

37 minutes ago, Thoror said:

There is a real Lunar Empire behind the funhouse mirror reflection

I love all this stuff and your points are well taken. There's room for multiple interpretations of the City because every experience will be very different. I think of how Fellini Satyricon is a kind of "science fiction of the past" whereas Fellini Roma forces the motorcycles to negotiate ancient streets.

But I think Glamour would flicker out entirely if you dropped the funhouse glow. Only way to find out is to create similar books for Raibanth, Elz Ast, even historical Torang and see what sticks and what vanishes.

[Ali the Helering]

33 minutes ago, scott-martin said:

I love all this stuff and your points are well taken. There's room for multiple interpretations of the City because every experience will be very different. I think of how Fellini Satyricon is a kind of "science fiction of the past" whereas Fellini Roma forces the motorcycles to negotiate ancient streets.

But I think Glamour would flicker out entirely if you dropped the funhouse glow. Only way to find out is to create similar books for Raibanth, Elz Ast, even historical Torang and see what sticks and what vanishes.

Damnit!  Now I can't get rid of the image of a motorcycle being dubiously incorporated into the Satyricon...

Either way, I think it would hurt.😣

[scott-martin]

4 minutes ago, Ali the Helering said:

Damnit!  Now I can't get rid of the image of a motorcycle being dubiously incorporated into the Satyricon...

I seem to recall one showing up in Sebastiane so there's the creative anachronism and the pain all in one package! Unless I'm stuck on the Western Hero Wars and seeing knightriders everywhere.

But I do think Glamour is a special test of the "reality" behind the lunar mystique so this book might always be a little frustrating. There's just no historical "there" there to establish any kind of canon around. Only thing to do is stick to other imperial scenes (Jillaro is beautiful and mostly real) or surrender . . . in dreaming we're free.



 

[Nick Brooke]

"Reality" can fade away and radiate. That's what the Goddess desires.