The more "Adult" aspects of RuneQuest/Glorantha...

[Adept]

It's OK. You are a Finn, after all. ...with a big knife. :shock:

It's blunt though, with a rounded tip (the only "big knife" is my sword-practise sword).

 

[SteveMND]

And, yes, it is denial if you pretend a setting is static and finished when it's constantly being updated and changed.

I think it is a better definition of denial to think that any campaign setting is going to have some sort of defined end to the material being released for it (barring settings that have been retired, of course)... All campaign settings are assumed to have more material as time goes on.

I wasn't saying that you somehow "pretend" that the setting has gone static; that would be silly, yes. Just that you don't have to use everything that comes out. YOU, as the GM, decide when your campaign is how you like it, not the publisher. It is "finished" when you say it is, no other.

Interesting. You reply directly to my comments, quote me, and address my post. But then call to the assembled audience with your closing comments. Like a Barrister calling to the jury as he breaks down the witness' evidence...

I'm afraid the tone is lost on me. I was using the term "you" as a reference to all players in general (I had it as "we" in the first draft of my reply, but changed it because I figured it was more appropriate to use 'you' instead. Mea culpa if that somehow offended).

 

[Adept]

By having an Orlanthi sun-aspect, Orlanthi culture can justify the act by maintaining that Orlanth mythologically killed the oppresive aspects of the sun (Yelm) while retaining the helpful and respectful aspects (Elmal).

If you go back to the source myth, you find that Orlanth killing Yelm was a bad thing that through the cosmos out of order -- where was Elmal then?

Elmal was sitting on top of the mountain Kero Fin, shining his light for the Vingkotlins (the orlanthi of the era). As the great darkness progressed Elmal had to fight more and more battles, and as he became wounded his light grew dimmer and dimmer. Eventually he got so weak that the light on top of Kero Fin was just a bright star, but he was still there, leading the Vingkotlins in the absense of Orlanth.

 

[Adept]

I understand how some people want a static, unchanging setting they can base things off of, but honestly, I like the fact that there is always new stuff coming out, and that Greg is constantly refining his world (because when you get down to it, that's really who it belongs to, even if others have made great contributions to it over the years).

Paradoxically, that's one of the greatest problems I have with it... I have a growing feeling that, no matter how much I put into my game, no matter how much I may modify 'my' Glorantha, it will never be mine, I will never do more than look over Greg's shoulder and borrow his ideas. If he's leave the damn thing alone and let us all get on with playing the game, I could feel some connection to the world, but increasingly it's becoming just another world somebody else is running. And there's nothing more boring than listening to someone else's gaming stories.

Wulf

I've never understood this problem. Greg has a great and complex vision on myth and magic, and I love to read and hear new revelations about it.

As for running a Glorantha game, I leave out bit's that don't seem to fit, and use all that makes sense to me. A good example is the fact that lightning is often seen as "fire" instead as "storm". That has never made any sense to me, elementally, so I don't use it.

Luckily the offiscial material actually supports it. Yavor Lightning was a warrior of the Sky (fire) pantheon, but he made his lightning javelins from the brains of Umath, the original storm god and father of Orlanth.

So even if lightning was, mythically, a weapon of the Sun tribe for a while, the source of the power was always Storm. Even if the offiscial material claimed othervice, I'd still link lightning to storm instead of fire.

Nephilim has the same strangeness. A lightning wyvern (an elemental creature formed from lightning) is a creature of Fire, instead of Air. Not in my game.

 

[Enpeze]

I dont like several aspects of Glorantha. For example the geographical names. Maybe this is because I am german native speaker, but everytime I try to say "Kralorela" I get a knot in my tongue. Many of these geographical names sound very artificial to me.

Also I dont like the cultural mix of dragon pass. While the general setting is fine (civilized culture against barbaric culture) I think that all those other different cultures like Knights (Blackhorse troop), Indians (Grazers), Dwarfs and Undead dont fit at all to the setting. It seems that they remained from older, rather immature ideas of a 18 year old Greg, like "how to populate dragon pass with many cool races and of course some Indians". The only ones I am missing in this odd setting are samurais.

On the other hand I do really love some aspects of the Glorantha world. Eg. conflict Lunar Empire vs. Orlanthi, the good mythological stories and the way heroes, gods and spirits are presented. So what to do? The solution for me is incorporate the infos I like to our homebrewn campaign world and discard the ones I dont like.

 

[Adept]

Wait, what? Denial? So, are you saying that you have no choice but to incorporate every last bit of Gloranthan lore that comes out?

Specifically, that was aimed at the comment

Glorantha becomes "finished" and "static" whenever you as the GM decides it does, by simply not having to add every little new thing in that comes out.

And, yes, it is denial if you pretend a setting is static and finished when it's constantly being updated and changed. You're perfectly entitled to deny it, mind you, never said otherwise. But as you do so, things move on without you.

Wulf

Strange. Why is that important? You say you feel Glorantha was great (at her peak) at a certain time. Why on earth don't you take the material as it was at that stage, and say that as far as your game is conserned Glorantha is exactly as presented then?

Why should you care about anything that has come out since then? It's your game, for Gaia's sake. How is that living in denial? Aren't you denying your power and responsibility as a GM there? Are you saying you are forced somehow to incorporate sub-par material to your Glorantha game?

 

[Turloigh]

Why are we talking about the sun??? I came here to find out about sex!!!

We are just waiting for the sea and the sand...

Nah, won't happen - we're already too far off-topic.

I think I'm unsubscribing. These guys are SO serious...

 

[andakitty]

The best thing about Glorantha for me was the more Bronze Age feel of Prax. And the barbarians against the Empire vibe. The rest of it? Sort of 'meh'. Stafford can mix and match mythology, but so can anyone else. I just take what I want, leave the rest, and don't worry about it. And it worked just fine. Now, Second Age Glorantha might be a different matter. It sounds MUCH more interesting to me than Third Age. As long as there are still ruins to explore as well as mercenary chores and quests, although I suppose these themes would be mixed anyway.

For a setting with well-done adult themes there is Tekumel. I suspect there may be similar elements in the new Glorantha setting. The Godlearners in particular sound a bit Tekumelish to me. Multiple empires struggling for dominance does too.

I can't wait...a month to go.

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

Strange. Why is that important? You say you feel Glorantha was great (at her peak) at a certain time. Why on earth don't you take the material as it was at that stage, and say that as far as your game is conserned Glorantha is exactly as presented then?

The only problem there is that said material is (a) pretty damn difficult to get hold of, and (b) patchy and incomplete anyway.

The best source for a Gloranthan campaign is Crucible, and even then there is so much left out, half-hinted juicy bits, and it only gives an overview - you need detail as well. The RQ2 stuff, while incomparably excellent, is nowhere near sufficient if you want to run a world. It gives the detail, but lacks the overview. You need both, and that's a lot of money.

So the only remaining option is to take the new Glorantha, and hope you can remove what you don't like without breaking anything.

 

[homerjsinnott]

Strange. Why is that important? You say you feel Glorantha was great (at her peak) at a certain time. Why on earth don't you take the material as it was at that stage, and say that as far as your game is conserned Glorantha is exactly as presented then?

The only problem there is that said material is (a) pretty damn difficult to get hold of, and (b) patchy and incomplete anyway.

The best source for a Gloranthan campaign is Crucible, and even then there is so much left out, half-hinted juicy bits, and it only gives an overview - you need detail as well. The RQ2 stuff, while incomparably excellent, is nowhere near sufficient if you want to run a world. It gives the detail, but lacks the overview. You need both, and that's a lot of money.

So the only remaining option is to take the new Glorantha, and hope you can remove what you don't like without breaking anything.

Wulf has already said that he has all the Gloranthan material published so it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[ned-kogar]

Why are we talking about the sun??? I came here to find out about sex!!!

We are just waiting for the sea and the sand...

Nah, won't happen - we're already too far off-topic.

Ok, for those that want to swing back towards topic:

Has anyone ever had an adventurer have kids during a campaign?

I think I'm unsubscribing. These guys are SO serious...

And what are your worst / dumbest experiences of mishandled 'adult' themes..?

Ned

 

[Cobra]

I dont like several aspects of Glorantha. For example the geographical names. Maybe this is because I am german native speaker, but everytime I try to say "Kralorela" I get a knot in my tongue. Many of these geographical names sound very artificial to me.

On the other hand I do really love some aspects of the Glorantha world. Eg. conflict Lunar Empire vs. Orlanthi, the good mythological stories and the way heroes, gods and spirits are presented. So what to do? The solution for me is incorporate the infos I like to our homebrewn campaign world and discard the ones I dont like.

Same with me. Why, for instance, is Kralorela in the far east, but Pralorela in the southwest? Glorantha always had the feel of a hodge-podge to me - an inconsistent world that was built bit by bit. Despite that it has a certain charm and I do like the feel of the place, although I have trouble taking it very seriously. There is something undefinedly teenage about the place, with a dash of compelling myth thrown in.

Because Glorantha was something great, something virtualy unequalled (Tribe8 comes damn close). But the important word here is 'was'. Now it's being drowned in excessive, pedantic detail, and retconning in unnecessary and over-intellectualised detail. It's like a novel that's been through too many pre-publication drafts and rewrites, and is losing all the initial promise and drive it once had. It doesn't mater how good the initial draft is if the published article doesn't work. It was more important, once. Now it's just another over-thick fantasy potboiler trilogy.

And, yes, it is denial if you pretend a setting is static and finished when it's constantly being updated and changed. You're perfectly entitled to deny it, mind you, never said otherwise. But as you do so, things move on without you.

Wulf, I think it is you that has "moved on", not Glorantha. The point is that you've lost interest in it and it is no longer poignant to you - and that's a fair point that you don't need to justify. As someone who was never that fond of Glorantha to begin with, I can relate. The debate over the word 'denial' comes down to semantics, but Steve makes a valid point in that you need not adopt every future change (although, admittedly, it means more work for you if you chose to use a future publication - perhaps this is what you meant?). Personally, I do not see why a veteran such as you, who has already stated he would not let a rule system get in the way of good creative role-playing, would let published changes to your game world do the same.

Interesting. You reply directly to my comments, quote me, and address my post. But then call to the assembled audience with your closing comments. Like a Barrister calling to the jury as he breaks down the witness' evidence...

This is rather unfair of you. You posted your comments in a public forum, presumably with the intention that many people would read them. I'm pretty sure Steve was also only assuming that many people would read his reply. I don't think he was 'calling to the assembled', but even if he was, so what? The first meaning of the word Forum from the Oxford is "A place of or meeting for public discussion" and, interestingly, the third is "A court or tribunal". What did you expect?

Cobra

 

[SteveMND]

Has anyone ever had an adventurer have kids during a campaign?

Yes, actually, and due to it having a bit of a chaos taint (it was a Lunar-friendly campaign) it actually grew to adulthood during the five-game-year campaign and ended up being played by one of the other players after his previous character died.

 

[RMS]

Has anyone ever had an adventurer have kids during a campaign?

Yes, multiple times in different campaigns. I've had characters who's entire drive was to establish enough of a name and brideprice to marry their love and then run several years after the marriage, including children and even questing to help fertility.

I have a character in my current campaign that's ended up being a bit of the classic man-whore, and has over a dozen children (by several different women) throughout Glorantha. The great thing is that it's a very complex, interesting character and that's only one aspect of him that simply developed over time. By pure luck, this character was always the one that had a chance to get 'lucky', etc. so it's just developed it's own subplot. (He's also married now, but not particularly loyal. He tries, but can't always help himself.)

I have an online character (Issaries merchant sort) who started the game happily married and with three young children at home. He's driven by wanderlust when home and driven by his desire to see his wife and kids when he's on the road.

I have plenty more...

 

[homerjsinnott]

Glorantha always had the feel of a hodge-podge to me - an inconsistent world that was built bit by bit

So like the real world then, which also wasn't built to some grand scheme, unless you actually believe in Intelligent Design... :lol: :roll:

Can you expand on what you mean by teenagery? If by that you mean a plethora of cultures/peoples smashed upon one another which doesn't seem to you to make any kind of sense, then study India or the Balkans.

And if you are worried about place names not making sense, then come to Oxford where North Parade is south of South Parade, or go to Cumbria where there is a Hill Hill Hill Hill (Torpenhow hill).
The real world doesn't make complete sense, it's not new news, so why should a fantasy one?


This is getting a bit dull this lament about things having changed, the bits that are continually being harping on about have had what? two major overhauls( I do not mean just two single changes) in twenty years. Yeh! that's continual tinkering that, the real world must just be a blur.

As someone who was never that fond of Glorantha to begin with.

Really? it doesn't show. :shock: :wink:

 

[jorganos]

I dont like several aspects of Glorantha. For example the geographical names. Maybe this is because I am german native speaker, but everytime I try to say "Kralorela" I get a knot in my tongue. Many of these geographical names sound very artificial to me.

As a fellow speaker of German, I don't see the problem, except when forming german adjectives from those names.

The geographical names ending on -ela are quite consistent and convey a sense of "this is Glorantha".

Of course the names are artificial. The naming we use has been done by the God Learners, with natives probably begging to differ.

Also I dont like the cultural mix of dragon pass. While the general setting is fine (civilized culture against barbaric culture) I think that all those other different cultures like Knights (Blackhorse troop), Indians (Grazers), Dwarfs and Undead dont fit at all to the setting.

The Grazers are as much Skythians or Awars as they are Indians, and the Blackhorse Troop aren't knights but hell "horses" with armored riders - Ethilrist may once have been a knight, but knight mercenaries go everywhere.

There is no native civilized culture anywhere in Dragon Pass. Both Sartar and Tarsh have imported civilized culture in their cities and maybe some mansions.

It seems that they remained from older, rather immature ideas of a 18 year old Greg, like "how to populate dragon pass with many cool races and of course some Indians". The only ones I am missing in this odd setting are samurais.

Read up on the Danubian valley during the Byzantine Empire. Dragon Pass is a crossroads of cultures. So was the Danube.

On the other hand I do really love some aspects of the Glorantha world. Eg. conflict Lunar Empire vs. Orlanthi, the good mythological stories and the way heroes, gods and spirits are presented. So what to do? The solution for me is incorporate the infos I like to our homebrewn campaign world and discard the ones I dont like.

I had two long RuneQuest campaigns, one with RQ3 and on with the aborted playtesting rules of RQ4-AiG. The RQ3 campaign was loosely based on the RQ Vikings set and inherited themes from Earth history and myth, Glorantha, and Midkemia, while being set in its own mythological and historical frame. The Gloranthan campaign was set in Heortland.

Incorporating the features I liked into the homebrewn campaign worked fine, but took a lot of writing to set up a worthwhile history and mythology. I ought to put some of that on my website.

Given my later obsession with developing Glorantha, I can't say the Heortland campaign was less work, though...


To get back to the adult content:

Sex is a major theme in the myths and heroquests. An Orlanthi on a quest to slay Aroka, the Blue Dragon, will encounter a representative of the Dark Woman (Kyger Litor) and is supposed to leave her pregnant when moving on (or he will lack the Darkwind in the conflict). Yelmalio at the Hill of Gold has an encounter with Inora which, all prudishness and coolness aside, is sexual in nature. Mating with the Devil is at the core of both Arachne Solara's and the Red Goddess' myths. Exchanging two fertility goddesses to prove a theory sounds like having some fun between the sheets, too.

How to represent this in the game without using too cheap cliches depends strongly on your gaming group. Perhaps the Baseball comment in Meat Loaf's "Paradise by the Dashboard Light" can be a model...

 

[jorganos]

Strange. Why is that important? You say you feel Glorantha was great (at her peak) at a certain time. Why on earth don't you take the material as it was at that stage, and say that as far as your game is conserned Glorantha is exactly as presented then?

The only problem there is that said material is (a) pretty damn difficult to get hold of, and (b) patchy and incomplete anyway.

Not true any more - the only RuneQuest 2 supplements not in print are the rules themselves, the stuff redone for RQ3 (Trollpak, Apple Lane, Snake Pipe Hollow), and RuneQuest Companion. Getting the RQ3 stuff second hand isn't that hard.

The place information from "Genertela:Crucible of the Hero Wars" is being rewritten right now (in the final editorial stages, AFAIK).

The best source for a Gloranthan campaign is Crucible, and even then there is so much left out, half-hinted juicy bits, and it only gives an overview - you need detail as well. The RQ2 stuff, while incomparably excellent, is nowhere near sufficient if you want to run a world. It gives the detail, but lacks the overview. You need both, and that's a lot of money.

It's always either "a lot of money" or "not well supported".

The World of Glorantha supplement for Hero Wars isn't much at odds with anything in "Crucible" (although there are additional details at odds with common conclusions). "Dragon Pass - Land of Thunder" has plenty of detail info for that region. Neither have any relevant rules stuff.

So the only remaining option is to take the new Glorantha, and hope you can remove what you don't like without breaking anything.

There is no "New Glorantha". While Thunder Rebels has lots of strange names for Orlanth subcults, you can easily ignore them and say "Orlanth Adventurous the Scout" subcult rather than "Tatouth", if you want to include that. Or ignore it if Adventurous is good enough for your RQ game.

A glossary of Gloranthan terms (old and new) is under construction and will be available online, so you won't even have to buy everything to find out about strange names. In case of doubt, there are the mailing lists or contact web pages where you can ask. People will be happy to help out.

 

[Turloigh]

Hi, Ned!

Has anyone ever had an adventurer have kids during a campaign?

Yes, that has happened on occasion in our games, if we play long enough. IIRC, at least two of my characters got married, and one had three children (although he fathered only one - one was adopted and one was a stepchild). Once I played a half-elf who found out, in-game, that one of his adventuring companions was really his father. Great roleplaying stuff.

Sometimes, my group spends whole sessions just roleplaying affairs and relationships, with almost no adventuring.

And what are your worst / dumbest experiences of mishandled 'adult' themes..?

Actually, I'm proud to say that my group handles adult themes in a tasteful and mature way.

We had the topic of rape coming up once in our games, and decided it wasn't fun. It's unlikely to happen again.

As for Glorantha: I'm not really at home there, even though I'm an old-time RQ fanboy. But if I ever step on that world, I'll be the first to play an initiate of Uleria.

 

[Urox]

Has anyone ever had an adventurer have kids during a campaign?

I had a Praxian bison rider that the GM zapped with an unusual curse from a spirit at the Paps -- he was made 100% fertile for a year (every union would result in offspring) and commanded to go forth and multiply.

The 'curse' aslo affected his bison... :lol:

 

[StephenT]

I had a Praxian bison rider that the GM zapped with an unusual curse from a spirit at the Paps -- he was made 100% fertile for a year (every union would result in offspring) and commanded to go forth and multiply.

The 'curse' aslo affected his bison... :lol:

Was his bison female? :wink: