Religion, Satire, and MGF

[DrGoth]

22 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

RQ3 finally introduced the idea that if the PC's parents were Initiates, then the PC could automatically join. But, it also says for Initiates, "the commitment usually involves substantial investment of time, effort, Power, money , and emotion". Taken at face value, that too would indicate low levels of initiation into any cults, and again because of the lack of obvious benefits.

I disagree, although we're arguing about a three versions back take on initiates so....

I read that part of RQ3 differently.  I started from the assumption that everybody in theist societies was an initiate, so obviously their children were and on it went, preserving everyone being an initiate. The time commitment I read as being the "well being a member of a Gloranthan religion does take time". Sacred time rites, holy days, etc.  To take a real world analogy, do you know how often medieval Europeans went to church? It wasn't just Sundays....

"The lives of the people of the Middle Ages revolved around the Church. People, especially women, were known to attend church three to five times daily for prayer and at least once a week for services, confession, and acts of contrition for repentance."

https://www.worldhistory.org/Medieval_Church/

Now, I know Medieval Christianity is not Gloranthan theism, but the precedent is there.  So I read that RQ3 line as simply describing how part of how Theists in Glorantha live.   For me, at least, everyone in a theist society gets initiated (except for whacked out wierdoes who you really shouldn't talk to).

[Shiningbrow]

22 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

Are you sure? See for example the Orlanth write-up in RQ2 (p. 73 in the Classic Edition PDF; p. 68 in 1970s’ paper copy).

Apologies - I was wrong! I'll correct myself - not in the the Core Rule Book under the Rune Cults section for the descriptions of levels didn't have them! (ie, pp 54-59). They are, however, listed in various cults' descriptions.

Yes, I was wrong, both with my checking and my memory.

20 hours ago, soltakss said:

I am not sure about RQ1, but RQ2 definitely had Lay Members in Cults of Prax.

 

Apologies - I'll correct myself again... the Core Rule Book under Rune Cults ranks didn't have them (except as above) ! (I didn't check CoP as I was writing)

[Shiningbrow]

40 minutes ago, DrGoth said:

I disagree, although we're arguing about a three versions back take on initiates so....

I read that part of RQ3 differently.  I started from the assumption that everybody in theist societies was an initiate, so obviously their children were and on it went, preserving everyone being an initiate. The time commitment I read as being the "well being a member of a Gloranthan religion does take time". Sacred time rites, holy days, etc.  To take a real world analogy, do you know how often medieval Europeans went to church? It wasn't just Sundays....

"The lives of the people of the Middle Ages revolved around the Church. People, especially women, were known to attend church three to five times daily for prayer and at least once a week for services, confession, and acts of contrition for repentance."

https://www.worldhistory.org/Medieval_Church/

Now, I know Medieval Christianity is not Gloranthan theism, but the precedent is there.  So I read that RQ3 line as simply describing how part of how Theists in Glorantha live.   For me, at least, everyone in a theist society gets initiated (except for whacked out wierdoes who you really shouldn't talk to).

Interesting that your example is actually of Lay Members going to church (granted, this is using a 'real world' use of the term, and I'm not quite sure how we'd equate Initiate status here... I'm guessing the lower 'acolytes' who are training to be priests? Or the altar boys??) (Since women couldn't become priests back then, I think it's safe to assume that they can't qualify for the RQ equivalent of acolyte/Godtalker, and definitely not priest... initiate??? hmmmmm... I personally wouldn't say yes (definitively)).

Although, I think that's only part of your reasoning. The other part is time. Those who are at 'church' (ie, not a shrine at or near home) are clearly not on the farm doing the hard yards! You're most likely referencing those who lived in "urban" areas (however that's being defined - does a village count? Shouldn't, but I'm not sure with the churches).

Also, you're describing a very patriarchal society (especially in urban areas) - the men do the work, the women do the house stuff. So, they have more time. So, might be descriptive of a solar pantheon, but certainly not Sartar, Prax or Esrolia. And other cultures on an individual level which I won't go into.

 

The "once a week for..." - well, Ernalda and Orlanth have weekly minor holy days, so I suppose that's possible. But, will depend on where the nearest temple is (not that it's relevant, given an initiate only needs to attend the more important ones).

 

" although we're arguing about a three versions back take on initiates so...."

Yearrrhhhh...... And, as the forums here show, even only a couple of years ago, the meaning of the word was in dispute because of the different ways it was used. And, there's the occasional mix-up still. (and, it's still not certain that every culture will have 'adult initiation' to also be the 'cult initiation' at the very same time. Yelm seems to have this distinction - but we don't know when one is allowed to join it - maybe as a child?? But then, why the reference to tithing income? Ok - maybe kids earn money in Yelmic societies...(NB: I'm only referencing the RQG core book - and not looking at older versions))

Oh, you're also so right in that I completely forgot to look at Mongoose RQ!!! Just quickly checking a couple of books, and it doesn't help us a lot, as they basically mirror all previous versions. No hints at all that the majority of adults are initiates (but, as I said, it was a quick look!)

[mfbrandi]

1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

Apologies - I was wrong! I'll correct myself

That is OK. No apology required, IMHO.

[Jeff]

36 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

 

Oh, you're also so right in that I completely forgot to look at Mongoose RQ!!! Just quickly checking a couple of books, and it doesn't help us a lot, as they basically mirror all previous versions. No hints at all that the majority of adults are initiates (but, as I said, it was a quick look!)

Given that neither Greg nor I had anything to do with the Mongoose material - when we finally saw it, we were both shocked and horrified at how bad the art was in MRQ2 - I wouldn't consider the Mongoose material as indicative of anything about how we view Glorantha.

[Martin]

2 hours ago, Jeff said:

Given that neither Greg nor I had anything to do with the Mongoose material - when we finally saw it, we were both shocked and horrified at how bad the art was in MRQ2 - I wouldn't consider the Mongoose material as indicative of anything about how we view Glorantha.

I vividly recall at Continnum after hearing that Mongoose were going to do Glorantha material of being a doomster (and saying so  to  anyone who asked me) on them ever making anything Glorantha related...in the end i was proven right.

[SDLeary]

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

Given that neither Greg nor I had anything to do with the Mongoose material - when we finally saw it, we were both shocked and horrified at how bad the art was in MRQ2 - I wouldn't consider the Mongoose material as indicative of anything about how we view Glorantha.

 

30 minutes ago, Martin said:

I vividly recall at Continnum after hearing that Mongoose were going to do Glorantha material of being a doomster (and saying so  to  anyone who asked me) on them ever making anything Glorantha related...in the end i was proven right.

And yet, mRQ and mRQ2 IS part of Runequest history, as much as many would like to excise it. mRQ rules were atrocious, but seriously cleaned up by Loz and Pete for mRQ2 into something playable. Even though I didn't agree with all the rules systems, the further refined RQ6 would have been a fine engine to game on in Glorantha. And I'm sorry that The Change™ occurred before they could get out AiG, so that we could see their take more fully.

Mongoose's treatment of the Second Age may not have been what Gloranthan purists wanted, but Third Age was off limits, and Greg said they could use Second Age. Now, Mongoose's treatment is much more along the lines of Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance in tone, but oddly enough this was able to draw players of those other properties into Glorantha for the first time.

As far as art is concerned It wasn't all that bad for games of that day. Certainly not up to Chaosium's currently high standards, but certainly much higher than the low point (*cough* AH before the First Renaissance *cough*).

SDLeary

Edited May 9, 2023 by SDLeary
clarification

[mfbrandi]

2 hours ago, SDLeary said:

the low point (*cough* AH before the First Renaissance *cough*)

Well, the original RQ3 Deluxe set looked OK, didn’t it? It didn’t have Lisa Free’s pretty dragonewts on the box front, but you can’t have everything.

Spoiler

See how considerately I hide my grumpier comments in spoiler boxes to spare the feelings of sensitive souls everywhere.

Spoiler

At least it was before the days of background graphics covering every page — not so the one Mongoose thing I have (The Second Age) where the pages are printed to look like they are disintegrating and the box-outs have drop shadows and (identical) curling corners; just very, very ugly and wrapped in a hideous and busy cover.

I will grant you there were some shocking things in later AH items.

Spoiler

We will not speak of the fighting scorpion queens in Lords of Terror. We will not! We will throw all copies into our deepest, darkest oubliette — where they will bounce off the bonce of John Norman.

[SDLeary]

1 hour ago, mfbrandi said:

I will grant you there were some shocking things in later AH items.

Yes... after Glorantha (Box 8 ) for the most part.

SDLeary

[Jeff]

5 hours ago, SDLeary said:

 

And yet, mRQ and mRQ2 IS part of Runequest history, as much as many would like to excise it. mRQ rules were atrocious, but seriously cleaned up by Loz and Pete for mRQ2 into something playable. Even though I didn't agree with all the rules systems, the further refined RQ6 would have been a fine engine to game on in Glorantha. And I'm sorry that The Change™ occurred before they could get out AiG, so that we could see their take more fully.

Mongoose's treatment of the Second Age may not have been what Gloranthan purists wanted, but Third Age was off limits, and Greg said they could use Second Age. Now, Mongoose's treatment is much more along the lines of Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance in tone, but oddly enough this was able to draw players of those other properties into Glorantha for the first time.

As far as art is concerned It wasn't all that bad for games of that day. Certainly not up to Chaosium's currently high standards, but certainly much higher than the low point (*cough* AH before the First Renaissance *cough*).

SDLeary

Not as far as Greg was concerned, and not as far as I am concerned. The whole Mongoose episode was a disaster. 

 

[Darius West]

On 4/30/2023 at 8:44 PM, mfbrandi said:

 on the one hand, the Nysalorean illuminates are right: the warring sides in Glorantha don’t really have a casus belli — “These people and their gods are all crazy. Why can’t we all just get along? Stop choking me!” — still, it looks like fun, I’m gonna hit something;

Are they really right though?  I mean, Chaos monsters did murder Rashoran despite his tolerance.  The idea of forming a tolerant relationship with a lethal malignant tumor (like Chaos) doesn't sound very wise to me.  It sounds to me like embracing the Death of the World.  Then there is the whole power gamer aspect of deception that goes with Nysalor, that essentially allows people to infiltrate even enemy cults without the gods being able to object.  Nysalor is Gbaji, there is no contradiction, and Arkat was right to rid Glorantha of the bulk of this insidious threat.  Also, Nysalor is a very shabby and inaccurate rip-off of Zen Buddhism which insults it.

On 4/30/2023 at 8:44 PM, mfbrandi said:

on the other hand, there is an intolerable hole-which-is-not-a-hole in the world — Earth or Glorantha? In this person’s mind, probably both — and we must fill it with blood; Orlanth is a stand-up chap, and anyone who doesn’t think so can duke it out with Robert Bly.

Glorantha is an RPG which features bronze age action and adventure.  Are we apologizing for having fun now?

On 4/30/2023 at 8:44 PM, mfbrandi said:

 I get the feeling — maybe wrongly — that some people want Orlanthism/the Lightbringer religion to be acceptable as an IRL religion of the religion-must-tell-you-how-to-lead-your-life stripe. But some presentations of Orlanth make one think that one of these must be true:

1. it was written by a crazy person;
2. it is satire and we are supposed to be in on the joke;
3. it is a joke at our expense.

While I think it is crazy, I can understand how some people could feel more attached to their religious identification via an RPG experience than they do to the religion of their birth.  I think that is unfortunate on so many levels.

[DrGoth]

20 hours ago, Jeff said:

Given that neither Greg nor I had anything to do with the Mongoose material - when we finally saw it, we were both shocked and horrified at how bad the art was in MRQ2 - I wouldn't consider the Mongoose material as indicative of anything about how we view Glorantha.

My Mongoose stuff is packed away now, but surely the art can't be as bad as certain AH publications?

There were a couple where it was truly appalling.

Edited May 10, 2023 by DrGoth

[DrGoth]

4 hours ago, Darius West said:

Are they really right though?  I mean, Chaos monsters did murder Rashoran despite his tolerance.  The idea of forming a tolerant relationship with a lethal malignant tumor (like Chaos) doesn't sound very wise to me.  It sounds to me like embracing the Death of the World.  Then there is the whole power gamer aspect of deception that goes with Nysalor, that essentially allows people to infiltrate even enemy cults without the gods being able to object.  Nysalor is Gbaji, there is no contradiction, and Arkat was right to rid Glorantha of the bulk of this insidious threat. 

Do we really need a strict answer to this?  I mean that quite seriously. YGMV.  YGWV. Some may take a very Urox approach "Chaos! Die!".  Others may take something analogous to "Nuclear bombs bad, nuclear medicine good" view of it.  Some may want a game where their players can work out which of those (or something else) it is.

I have my own view on this. But really, that only matters in that it is my own view. Which I can implement in my games. All I ask is the freedom to do that. I remember what first drew me to Glorantha:

• it wasn't medieval Europe with wizards
• it was wonderfully deep
• it wasn't black and white

It's the last of those that is relevant here. What I want is the freedom for each gaming group to decide for itself where they want the truth for their game to lie.  I don't want someone telling me that the right way to play in the world is "Chaos is absolutely evil, no two ways about it.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."  I also don't want someone telling me "The Lunars are absolutely right.  Using chaos is the way to go.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."

There are options, there are different takes. Even if I agree with one of the statements in the preceding paragraph (in the sense that that is how I want to portray it in my game) I don't want anyone saying that it is the "one true way to play in Glorantha"(tm). I think it was a wonderfully clever move that the descriptions of illumination on p 724 of the guide were presented as direct quotes from Gloranthan documents.  I take it as they are not meant to be read as the objective truth.  Space is left for your gaming group to explore, discover and define the truth for their Glorantha.

Now, to indulge my own views for a moment. Is Nysalor Gbaji? Or was Arkat?  Or, in the end, were they both Gbaji? And, whatever the answer there, were they always Gbaji or did they fall?  Someone who was good can turn bad.  Don't assume how someone ended up is how they always were.

[Darius West]

15 minutes ago, DrGoth said:

It's the last of those that is relevant here. What I want is the freedom for each gaming group to decide for itself where they want the truth for their game to lie.  I don't want someone telling me that the right way to play in the world is "Chaos is absolutely evil, no two ways about it.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."  I also don't want someone telling me "The Lunars are absolutely right.  Using chaos is the way to go.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."

No, Chaos isn't absolute evil, but neither is cancer.  Cancer is just the system of the body getting it wrong and breaking down.  It's all a part of Glorantha's "world machine" but Chaos is entropy and wear, leading to death.  Chaos serves the necessary function of being a good adversary to make a compelling story.  And yes, perhaps you can negotiate with some Chaos creatues, and even feel like you are in control.  After all, even Praxians hired Broos to help them fight the Lunars at Moonbroth...  The politics of that slice of Gloranthan history is... fraught?

[mfbrandi]

9 hours ago, Darius West said:

It sounds to me like embracing the Death of the World.

Well, it is that. Maybe it won’t come today, but it will come. Let us make peace with it.

And after the world has returned to Chaos, perhaps a new Cosmos will form spontaneously from that non-state — just like last time. ‘We’ won’t be there to see it, of course.

Or we can rage, rage, rage against the dying of the Wind [or insert preferred element here]. I would prefer not to.

9 hours ago, Darius West said:

Then there is the whole power gamer aspect of deception that goes with Nysalor

I agree that illumination — not necessarily via the Riddler — as a key to superherodom or godhood (collect the whole set of magical power Top Trumps) is extremely tedious. Climb your pole and meditate long enough and you can take on the world thanks to your austerities — whack, whack, whack! It has its non-Gloranthan sources, but it is dull even so — possibly worse in a game than in a story, I don’t know. If it were my world to retcon — oops! — I would bin that, but I doubt anyone would thank me for it: some people like the One Man Army Corps thing, and it has always been part of the setting, AFAICT.

I guess it comes down to how one feels about dragonslaying: if you think the way to kill a dragon is to be more powerful than the dragon, then you are probably OK with the blue tights/red cape thing. I prefer that if you succeed, it is because you are lucky, or there is a quibble or trick you exploit, or the dragon wants/is fated to die, or … well, you get the idea. Even if you are a god. But mostly, the dragon eats you.

9 hours ago, Darius West said:

Are we apologizing for having fun now?

Don’t do that. But to me — and maybe it is only me — the God Who Would be King (and one need not pick the obvious candidate) is an intrinsically ridiculous fellow, and the way to get fun out of the vainglorious ninny is to guy him mercilessly. You don’t have to, and I promise not to come round to your house and shove tofu through your letterbox till you agree to join in with me. Pax?

[Rodney Dangerduck]

6 hours ago, Darius West said:

After all, even Praxians hired Broos to help them fight the Lunars at Moonbroth...  The politics of that slice of Gloranthan history is... fraught?

As I understand things, Praxian - Broo alliances happen frequently.  (This factoid shocked our old-timey Glorantha group, but I don't think we played much of the Praxian material)

Chaos isn't the ultimate evil.  Chaos serving your opponent is.

[dumuzid]

1 hour ago, mfbrandi said:

Well, it is that. Maybe it won’t come today, but it will come. Let us make peace with it.

And after the world has returned to Chaos, perhaps a new Cosmos will form spontaneously from that non-state — just like last time. ‘We’ won’t be there to see it, of course.

Or we can rage, rage, rage against the dying of the Wind [or insert preferred element here]. I would prefer not to.

Here's the thing: the end of the world isn't inevitable in Glorantha.  That the world will change is inevitable, but The End, total dissolution and return to Void, is preventable.  The End is staved off again every year through the Sacred Time rites, and through each new adult's experience of I Fought We Won during their initiation,  as filtered through their culture's practices.  It was staved off most forcefully in the original I Fought We Won, when existence was at its absolute nadir but the people remaining within it still said 'No' to oblivion, fought it, and won.

What they won wasn't 'the world as it was before all this,' but a world that was transformed by the conflict, yet still connected to and nourished by its past.  Fighting The End, even at the point when fighting seemed most pointless, created a method for cosmic rebirth other than total dissolution.  The trick is that to achieve each new world without losing everything prior, you do have to fight the devil.  No way around it.  Thesis and antithesis have to clash before they produce synthesis.

 

  P.S.

20 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

As I understand things, Praxian - Broo alliances happen frequently.  (This factoid shocked our old-timey Glorantha group, but I don't think we played much of the Praxian material)

Chaos isn't the ultimate evil.  Chaos serving your opponent is.

Given the amount of service they do Ompalam by widely practicing slavery, the Praxian tribes are a lot less pure of Chaos than most would like to think--with the exception of the Agimori.

Edited May 10, 2023 by dumuzid

[mfbrandi]

38 minutes ago, dumuzid said:

That the world will change is inevitable, but The End, total dissolution and return to Void, is preventable.

So the Great Compromise — what that old thing? We are all “Thesis vs. Antithesis — grrr!” But that means we all die today (most of us are dead already), so we resign ourselves to entropy in order that we can die tomorrow, or a week next Windsday, or in a billion years time. But die we will.

That is our deal with the Devil — she won’t stomp around the place like an angry toddler if we stitch her into every bit of the universe — and it beats the hell out of having stabby gods running riot (and running the show).

And so the elder races fade, the world thins, the gods die — “The only good god is a dead god; I mean, look at ours.” Isn’t that the Nysalorean motto? —, the black hole at the centre of things keeps “sucking” at reality, and we get on with our wonderful lives, stopping frequently to smell the flowers.

But our slide to oblivion is not straight, there are humps and dips, many spirals — but with every synthesis reached, the energy available to achieve new syntheses drops. One day, there will be none left. But it is OK: finitude is a beautiful thing.

Or that is what Rashorana told me, anyway. (I think. The music was quite loud.)

[Eff]

I think that this entire discussion is predicated on taking it for granted that chaos means the end of everything, when the comment which precipitated it was about the openness of whether that was the case or not, and whether other interpretations of chaos and chaos's positionality ought to be foreclosed within the text(s) or left somewhat open. Which in turn points at a kind of metadiscussion about whether Gloranthan doohickeys should be understood as metaphorical or as imagined noumena and to what degree for either. 

[Ormi Phengaria]

Most of the gods calmed by Rashoran did take the Bartleby conclusion. Of course, by making peace with oblivion in such a way, it hardly follows that you've also made peace with the world and your own existence within it. That mystery remains, even if painful to acknowledge and so typically ignored.

But why postpone fate? The placid ones thought "the cosmos is senseless suffering moving towards inevitable doom," and so allowed themselves to dissolve. One might instead think "the world is meaningless and full of suffering, but it's peppered with ephemeral pleasure, and I like that better than the thought of non-existence." Maybe this is extended in more sophisticated ways as well.

But no matter the stipulations, it isn't a justification for inaction, it's deflecting from an earnest appraisal between oblivion and your life. It's a wound you will continually pick at until it festers. Perhaps as a Hate (Life) passion. In RuneQuest. (I'm talking about RuneQuest.)

[Eff]

11 hours ago, DrGoth said:

Do we really need a strict answer to this?  I mean that quite seriously. YGMV.  YGWV. Some may take a very Urox approach "Chaos! Die!".  Others may take something analogous to "Nuclear bombs bad, nuclear medicine good" view of it.  Some may want a game where their players can work out which of those (or something else) it is.

I have my own view on this. But really, that only matters in that it is my own view. Which I can implement in my games. All I ask is the freedom to do that. I remember what first drew me to Glorantha:

• it wasn't medieval Europe with wizards
• it was wonderfully deep
• it wasn't black and white

It's the last of those that is relevant here. What I want is the freedom for each gaming group to decide for itself where they want the truth for their game to lie.  I don't want someone telling me that the right way to play in the world is "Chaos is absolutely evil, no two ways about it.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."  I also don't want someone telling me "The Lunars are absolutely right.  Using chaos is the way to go.  If you are playing any other way you are wrong."

There are options, there are different takes. Even if I agree with one of the statements in the preceding paragraph (in the sense that that is how I want to portray it in my game) I don't want anyone saying that it is the "one true way to play in Glorantha"(tm). I think it was a wonderfully clever move that the descriptions of illumination on p 724 of the guide were presented as direct quotes from Gloranthan documents.  I take it as they are not meant to be read as the objective truth.  Space is left for your gaming group to explore, discover and define the truth for their Glorantha.

Now, to indulge my own views for a moment. Is Nysalor Gbaji? Or was Arkat?  Or, in the end, were they both Gbaji? And, whatever the answer there, were they always Gbaji or did they fall?  Someone who was good can turn bad.  Don't assume how someone ended up is how they always were.

The flexibility or multiplicity of mythology in the real world is a very potent aspect of Glorantha, not least because it makes it much more playable. Instead of having to conform closely to a specific text that carries the absolute truth which may not be questioned, the players of a given game can and will adapt the presented material to their own ends and interests based on what resonates with them. It's quite possible to play games where Chaos is irrelevant (I've done that), games where Chaos is non-eschatological, games where Chaos is truly amoral, games where Chaos is Moorcockian, or Luciferian, or like the use of the term in academic study of mythology. It's even possible to play games where Chaos is eschatological, both evil and amoral simultaneously, an incursion into reality and also an expression of Lovecraftian horror at the reality of the cosmos at the same time, etc., and so much the better for all of us. 

 

[mfbrandi]

13 hours ago, Eff said:

chaos means the end of everything … or not, and … other interpretations of chaos … left somewhat open.

Sure, open is good.

It is just that when the objection to Chaos is “but then everything ends”, my knee-jerk response is that an attachment to immortality — for oneself or the cosmos in general — is pathological, so if people want to pin the denial of that on Chaos, fine — let them.

————————
EDIT:

I suppose Humakt might say, “I am the end of everything. Am I then Chaos?”

Edited May 11, 2023 by mfbrandi
Death

[Ali the Helering]

6 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

I suppose Humakt might say, “I am the end of everything. Am I then Chaos?”

A very interesting question, in the light of the Humakti broos of Dorastor.  

As Storm Tribe put it "Few non-humans (especially Chaos creatures such as broo and bagogi) can maintain this discipline for long, so few join.

Which means that some do, and can maintain their position in the cult.  So for them, perhaps, he is.

[French Desperate WindChild]

7 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

I suppose Humakt might say, “I am the end of everything. Am I then Chaos?”

not for me

 

in glorantha, once you experiment Humakt, you are still somewhere (solace, hell, hall of your god,  what you want)

once you are eaten by chaos, you are nowhere, you are not at all

 

[ffilz]

On 5/9/2023 at 4:24 AM, Shiningbrow said:

Apologies - I was wrong! I'll correct myself - not in the the Core Rule Book under the Rune Cults section for the descriptions of levels didn't have them! (ie, pp 54-59). They are, however, listed in various cults' descriptions.

Yes, I was wrong, both with my checking and my memory.

Apologies - I'll correct myself again... the Core Rule Book under Rune Cults ranks didn't have them (except as above) ! (I didn't check CoP as I was writing)

RQ1 Only has Rune Lords and Rune Priests. RQ2 adds Initiates (becoming an Initiate is on p.54) and Orlanth Initiates get some 1/2 price skills and spells just as in Cults of Prax. So Lay members weren't described with obligations and benefits until Cults of Prax, though the Orlanth description does mention Lay members in a paragraph, just no obligations or benefits. Kygor Litor describes Lay members a bit more, mentioning some spells they have access to (but no discounts) and more requirements to join as a Lay member.

I personally pretty much ignore the cult descriptions in the rule book other than Black Fang Brotherhood since Orlanth and Kyger Litor are given full descriptions in Cults of Prax.