Syncretism in HQ

[James Holloway]

But where I become less sure again is when I resolve character actions with magic.  If a character has something like "throw lightning" as an ability, or fly, when this ability is used I will be required to narrate causes and effects to that player.

Well, in the game as written, the character throws lightning or flies. That's not really in doubt. You want to run it differently, that's cool.

OK sure, we can of course always discuss this.  But my strong feeling is that if there was a section in the GM's books laying this out, and saying before you venture into Glorantha, you need to make a decision on this issue and discuss it with your players, then the product as a game would be much much less confusing to the buyer.

Well, I think that the books state pretty unambiguously that magic works and (slightly more ambiguously) how it works. I agree that the wording in the main books could really stand to be a lot clearer, but I'm not sure this specific concern (does magic really exist?) needs to be addressed, being pretty far off from what the game is about.

It would be quite interesting to play a game like this I think; please note I am not necessarily accusing the priests here of fraud, they may themselves believe this to be magic.  But it would be interesting for a modern to see such "honest deceptive magic" in action as a possible model of historical society.

Bernard Cornwell is  not a great writer, but his Arthur novels are full of superb examples of this, including a speech in which Merlin says basically: "well, yes, that girl was glowing because I coated her with luminescent mollusc secretions. I do do real magic, but it's clever and subtle, and you supertitious humps want fireballs and so forth, so I have to fake it."

[Mike Holmes]

But where I become less sure again is when I resolve character actions with magic.  If a character has something like "throw lightning" as an ability, or fly, when this ability is used I will be required to narrate causes and effects to that player.

Well, in the game as written, the character throws lightning or flies. That's not really in doubt. You want to run it differently, that's cool.

Well, like I've said, I think that he's right in that it's one way to explain things. Part of the reason that I don't play this way, Gareth, is because the game doesn't make it particularly easy to do. I'm pretty certain that it's not the default assumption. While it can work, it seems obvious to me that the game was designed to say that the magic in the world is real in that world and not just deception.

In fact, I think the reason that you and I can see it all as deception is that we are capable of seeing magic in the real world as deception. But here's your key. If, in fact, you want to run Glorantha as all deception, then all you have to do is to just be the extreme skeptic. No matter what comes up, find the explanation for it. Charaters flying? That's easy, they just think they are. Did they fly up to that cave? No, they walked, but in their state they thought that they flew. Lightning bolts? They were throwing spears, of course.

If you can explain the Egyptian Idol putting out fire away, or better, the Skyburn as a physical phenomenon, you can explain away anything.

But the odd thing is that you don't have to do so.

Let that sink in for a minute. You could explain to the characters just their characters perceptions of reality. In which case you're just back to playing HQ as written with all of the color and flying and lightning etc. This has been my point all along. It doesn't matter if magic is real or not in Glorantha. Some people percieve it that way, so when they do, just describe the characters' perceptions and let the player make of it what they may. When they ask "did that 'really' happen to my character" just shrug and move on. Because it really doesn't matter. It's a very abstruse point to argue that a magic effect in a fictional world was fictionally real or fictionally false.

Mike

[contracycle]

If you want to run Glorantha as "fake magic"--that is, what is called "magic" is actually trance states, hallucinations, and "magical" explanations for scientific events (like the Skyburn being a natural disaster explained through myth and magic), but you're worried about player expectations, shouldn't you declare, before characters are created and play has begun, how you want to run Glorantha? I mean, you'll be directly contradicting the text, which states that magic in Glorantha is obvious and flashy. A lot of players, I would think, would expect that the magic in the game, therefore, will be obvious, mythic, with lots of special effects.

First I want to make this abundantly clear: "this is not a way that I WANT to run  Glorantha".  I mean this is a sort of bizarre charge given that only a page back I said explicitly that if I had my way all magic would be unambiguously literal.  Please stop attributing arguments to me which I have not made.

Obviously I should declare it.  But the problem is, I will NOT be contradicting the text.  Because the text is relentlessly inconsistent with the voice it adopts for declarative statements about the nature of Glorantha.

As I have pointed out, there is literally nothing in Glorantha that can be firmly said to be magical.  There are NO verifiable claims.  The ONLY data is subjective, and discusses what Gloranthans BELIEVE, not the reality of Glorantha.

Back on one of the HW lists, I pointed out that because of this almost nobody has any idea of what Glorantha is supposed to be like.  Are Orlanthi like Celts, or like Germans?  It entirely depends on the accident of which publication you read.  And contradictory publications exist because none of them are authoritative.  And none of them are authoritative because they only discuss beliefs, not facts.

The only point I was trying to present with the discussion of deceptive magic is that DESPITE the alleged statements that magic actually happens in Glorantha, the deceptive model is AS GOOD OR BETTER for understanding Glorantha-as-written.  I cannot actually learn anything about Glorantha - I can only assert things about Glorantha.  For me, that kills Exploration stone dead.

I'd also like to drag this back to the topic of Syncretization and conversion, as StalkingBlue suggested we have drifted far from that topic.  In my view, all of these things are germane to that topic, becuase it speaks directly to what the players and characters understand about their world.

You see, I do understand the process by which Rome exerted its sybcretic agenda; I know both why and how they did it.  It is clear in the Annals of Livy, for example, that the senatorial classes pretty much only think of a religion as a way to keep the mob happy.  There is very little of what we would think of as faith or devition going on; religion is a mechanistic, almost engineered practice for the purposes of social cohesion.  As this appears in the conquest of Barbarian peoples, the Romans can convincingly assert that their broad empire has given them an insight into the universility of types of gods such that erecting a temple to Sulis at Bath can be seen as an act of piety in both Roman and Celtic terms.  The Celts can be brought into the Roman system by seeing their prior understanding of their god as a limited and local vision of a much more broadly recognised entity.  And once again, Glorantha can be convincinlgy interpreted in this sort of light.

But then, how on earth do I represent this in a game in which questions of conversion, faith, and culture are important?  In games in which I am simply allowing Orlanthi magic to happen becuase the Orlanthi characters believe it, the kind of process which James laid out seems implausible.  for one thing, their attempts to convert should trigger a serious response from the Orlanthi spirits of reprisal, possibly resulting in death!

The ambiguity of the true nature of Glorantha renders it, for me, almost exactly like the view of the Matrix that I think Soru gave in Christopher Kubasiks thread - set of cool characters doing cool things in a fundamentally shallow, meaningless world.  I don't think I can really get into the mindset of someone facing the kind of problems and issues raised by conversion and syncretism becuase the world itself is so nebulous, the nature of magic and the gods dubious, and the "reality on the ground" undescribed and confused.

[James Holloway]

Obviously I should declare it.  But the problem is, I will NOT be contradicting the text.  Because the text is relentlessly inconsistent with the voice it adopts for declarative statements about the nature of Glorantha.

As I have pointed out, there is literally nothing in Glorantha that can be firmly said to be magical.  There are NO verifiable claims.  The ONLY data is subjective, and discusses what Gloranthans BELIEVE, not the reality of Glorantha.

You keep saying this, but it relies on a very weird reading of, eg, HeroQuest pp. 97-110, which describe the reality of magic in a very firmly out-of-character, matter-of-fact tone.

[James Holloway]

Back on one of the HW lists, I pointed out that because of this almost nobody has any idea of what Glorantha is supposed to be like.  Are Orlanthi like Celts, or like Germans?  It entirely depends on the accident of which publication you read.  And contradictory publications exist because none of them are authoritative.  And none of them are authoritative because they only discuss beliefs, not facts.

That's an odd way to look at it -- the Orlanthi are a little bit like Celts and a little bit like Germans, and a little bit like Anglo-Saxons, and a little bit like Vikings, and a little bit like stock fantasy barbarians. And of course all these real-world cultures are a little bit like each other.

If you look at old-ass RuneQuest material, they're sort of Celto-Mycenaean. But that's just the world being changed over 25 years in release; the evidence presented by Sartar Rising, Storm Tribe, and Thunder Rebels is consistent, and those are the current authorities.

[soru]

As I have pointed out, there is literally nothing in Glorantha that can be firmly said to be magical.  There are NO verifiable claims.  The ONLY data is subjective, and discusses what Gloranthans BELIEVE, not the reality of Glorantha.

I think this has very little to do with the text as written, and rather a lot to do with the unwillingness of most people on the internet to say in a clear but polite way 'you are wrong about that, here is how it actually works'.

Most people these days do prefer to be spoken to using the more indirect language 'that is one way of doing things, but here is another you might like to consider'.

Sometimes this causes confusion, but once you get the hang of translating into normal speach it means much the same.

soru

[GB Steve]

As I have pointed out, there is literally nothing in Glorantha that can be firmly said to be magical.  There are NO verifiable claims.  The ONLY data is subjective, and discusses what Gloranthans BELIEVE, not the reality of Glorantha.

So, what would count as evidence of magic in Glorantha? What is it that is missing that would allow you play the game in the way you want to?

In other words, what is it that you call magic that would count as evidence of that in Glorantha?

Talking from the pov of syncretization, it's pretty clear that there are some things that some Gods promise to their worshippers that other Gods would not be able to deliver.

You'd never see a Lankhor Mhy performing the Sunset Leap, just as much as only a truth cultist can unerringly decide on the veracity of a statement (although I guess you might say this leaves open questions of what 'truth' is). There are things that some cultists can do, that they claim derives from their god to which other cultists make no claim, and indeed would sometime agree.

Some Lunars are proud of their chaos powers and Orlanthi would wholeheartedly agree that these derive from Sendenya, could never be supplied by Orlanth, and are a good reason for killing all the Lunars.

[joshua neff]

Gareth,

First of all, stop being so defensive. I'm not "charging" you with anything. You said, "Now, lets say I privately come to the view that Glorantha is not literally magical; what then do I say to a player who wants their character to fly to the top of a tower?" and I responded to that. I don't think my response was "bizarre" at all.

Now, you say, "There is literally nothing in Glorantha that can be firmly said to be magical. There are NO verifiable claims. The ONLY data is subjective, and discusses what Gloranthans BELIEVE, not the reality of Glorantha."

You're wrong. In the HeroQuest book, on page 97, it says, "Magic flows from the Other Side to the Mortal World, where beings use it to create, destroy, and transform. It has changed history, when mighty magicians crushed kingdoms. But not just the mighty have it! Everyone has a little. A humble farmer uses magic to improve his crops, a trader uses it to make herself more persuasive, and an artisan improves the quality of his handiwork."

That's not subjective, that's the rulebook talking objectively about magic in Glorantha.

On the next page, it says, "Magic is 'sensible'--it can be seen, heard, felt, or otherwise sensed when it is used. People glow, sparks shoot out of their hands, or a colored nimbus wavers around them. Attack magic is usually bright and makes a loud noise, detection magic makes the perceptive organs or the studied object glow, and healing magic sends gentle waves of energy flowing between healer and patient; the closing of the wound in a few seconds makes it even more obvious that magic is at work."

That's not in-game-voice flavor text, that's the objective voice of the rulebook.

And on page 222, the game text objectively states, "All peoples of Glorantha practice magic. All the various contradictory explanations for the origins of magic seem to work. No one doubts that magic exists; everyone can see its effects."

So, you're idea of Glorantha as a world in which magic doesn't objectively exists is your own interpretation, and it runs counter to every game text available. Similarly, the game texts objectively state that the gods and spirits exist. It's not just the view of the people of Glorantha, it's how the world works.

[contracycle]

So, what would count as evidence of magic in Glorantha? What is it that is missing that would allow you play the game in the way you want to?

An ability to really think in-character about the world objectively.

I am a gamist, after all.  I want to be able to lay traps, make plans, deceive my enemies, build defences.  But I cannot really lay a trap if I can't even really predict if my target can really fly, or merely believes they can fly.  I need to be confident about my knowledge, be confident it is sound and reliable, so that I can make informed decisions.

But I find the nature of Glorantha too fluid and in some sense contentless to ever really be confident about anything.

For example, Thunder Rebels page 119, last paragraph:
"Kero Fin is the Greatest Mountain".

Seems clear cut, good firm statement from author to reader, should be reliable.  Except at the end of the paragraph it says:

"Orlanthi in other lands, such as Ralios, have their own Greatest Mountain, and fly to their instead of to Kero Fin."

So clearly Kero Fin is not THE Greatest Mountain, it is A Greatest Mountain.
(despite the fact the form greatEST is pretty specific).

But on the next page it says:

"Thus in their general clan ceremonies the Orlanthi go the Greatest Mountain if they can reach it, or the Great Mountains, if Kero Fin is too far away".

... which again tacitly allocates 'the Greatest Mountain' to Kero Fin.

So, even as a GM, I could not answer the question "where is the greatest mountain" without knowing the religion of the CHARACTER asking the question.  The question as asked by a PLAYER is unanswerable.

So, I sort of find myself in perpetual existential doubt about the most trivial facts, which is highly annoying and not fun.

[pete_darby]

Player: Which is the Greatest Mountain?
Me: That's the one the Orlanthi fly to in their great ceremony.
Player: But is it Kero Finn, or...
Me; Who's asking? You or Cormac Swensson?
Player: Me
Me: The Greatest Mountain is the one the Orlanthi fly to in their great ceremony.
Player: Fucker. WHICH ONE?
Me: What the fuck does it matter?
Player: Listen, if there isn't one answer it's a crock of shit.
Me: Okay then; whichever mountain they fly to in the great ceremony is the greatest mountain
Player: Oh. So they all fly to their own mountain, and go to different ones that they say is the Greatest Mountain..?
Me: No. They all fly to the Greatest Mountain. They fly to their nearest Greatest mountain, and all arrive at the Greatest Mountain.
Player: I don't get it.
Me: It's symbolic
Player: It's bullshit
Me: But it works
Player: But here it talks about "We go to the Greatest Mountain, but those other fuckers just go to great mountains."
Me: Yes
Player: A straight answer or I hurt you
Me; Okay. Maybe that's supposed to be what the Kerofini think, "We've got the great mountain, they're just fooling themselves." Maybe, and this may be hard to accept, Issaries have missed a very minor continuity point.
Player: Or maybe Glorantha's all a crock of shit by a stoned hippy and his acolytes who can't even keep their story straight.
Me: Why the fuck do you even play this game?
Player: ...You all say it's cool and interesting.
Me: But you think we're the acolytes of a stoned hippy. What do you care what we think is cool?
Player: I still think you're full of shit.
Me; And we love you. Do you need a hug?

[droog]

That's pretty funny.

I enjoy a bit of existential doubt, myself. It allows me to explore my head.

[James Holloway]

But I cannot really lay a trap if I can't even really predict if my target can really fly, or merely believes they can fly.  

Pick one. I recommend a).

So, even as a GM, I could not answer the question "where is the greatest mountain" without knowing the religion of the CHARACTER asking the question.  The question as asked by a PLAYER is unanswerable.

Unless you pick one. I like Pete's explanation: all great mountains can lead to the Greatest Mountain. I would say "all very important mountains share to some extent in the trait of Great-Mountain-ness. Kero Fin is probably more Great than the others."

I mean, seriously -- unless for some bizarre reason what you really care about is being able to sling shit at Tentacles with the other guys from the Digest, who gives a hoot? Just pick one and play the game, or don't and pick one when you get to it. How hard is that?

[contracycle]

I mean, seriously -- unless for some bizarre reason what you really care about is being able to sling shit at Tentacles with the other guys from the Digest, who gives a hoot? Just pick one and play the game, or don't and pick one when you get to it. How hard is that?

Sure James, I can pick one, but then you know, why I am paying money for this stuff in the first place if I'm just going to have to make it all up again?

It would be nice to just USE the materials.  There comes a point where buying materials I'm going to have to effectively rewrite is just a waste of time and money.

And this is also annoying and pity because most of it is well written.


--
Lovely stuff Pete.

[soru]

Sure James, I can pick one, but then you know, why I am paying money for this stuff in the first place if I'm just going to have to make it all up again?

Except that that you seem to be complaining about is not so much that you need to make anything up, as that it would be possible for you to make something up that's different from what's clearly stated in the books without anyone breaking down your door and stopping you.

I can't promise to break down your door, but would it help if I told you your Glorantha is not allowed to vary?

soru

[joshua neff]

And this is also annoying and pity because most of it is well written.

I think it is, in general, well-written. But it just doesn't seem like your thing, Gareth. You seem to want a game that rewards gamist play. I don't think HeroQuest does that. You want a game world in which certain things are objectively true. Glorantha can be that, but you're going to have to decide which things are objectively true, and you seem to not want to do that--you want the game to explicitly say what things are objectively true, and Glorantha books don't do that. I honestly don't see what it is about Glorantha and HeroQuest that you find intriguing enough to rage about the things you find frustrating. You've asked questions, people here have tried to give you answers, and each answer just seems to make you more frustrated. We, apparently, don't understand what it is you're confused about and can't give you the right answers.

So answer the questions yourself. You obviously know yourself better than we do. You know what you want, you know what you don't want, and I don't think anyone here can answer the questions you have in a way that you'll find satisfactory.