Gloranthan Genre conventions / tropes

[pete_darby]

Just want to chip in to thank John: his essays noted at the top of this thread (you remember the top of the thread? You know, way back when I thought I had a point...) really are, IMHO, the best starting point for defining Glorantha as a genre.

That being said, I'm actually starting to dsiagree a little with John: as far as I see it, in myview of Glorantha, the gods are expressions of the fundamental forces of the cosmos, which can only be comprehended by mundane minds through the tools of myth. This shapes the gods to an extent, as the Orlanth that can be comprehended and experienced by his worshippers can only be defined through the myths they use to understand him: as more primal myths are discovered, so the nature of Orlanth grows to encompass more. As the myths are lost, so Orlanth as understood within the world of Glorantha lessens. Is there an Orlanth beyond what is known by his worshippers? yes, but without myths to guide them, they will never know him... and since the range of myths any individual can know is limited, so the full knowledge of Orlanth is limited.

We can see aspects of this hidden in the story of the God Learners, in the history of Western monotheism (the devolution of nature in the actions), and most strongly in the struggles to define mysticism within the game: since mysticism is the struggle to commune with the cosmic without the aid of an established mythic structure, it is a) fucking difficult to succeed in, and b) in as much as it can bring game benefits, counter-productive (if it allows you to act directly in the mundane, it distances you from the cosmic).

What I admittedly don't grok yet is how animism fits into this, but since my readings on animism have been somewhat less than those into theism & monotheism, I'm filled with hubris about getting that too...

So, John, I'd say I've got a model of it that lets me see inter-faith struggles within a wider context that, perhaps, the characters in the struggle could see.... with the benefit of illumination!

I don't see Glorantha as story all the way down, but that story is the only way it can be understood, without acheiving enlightenment.

BTW, I see the "downspiraling" nature of Glorantha as yet another retelling of the Hero's Journey, with humanity as the Hero, and the otherworlds as the "enemy/father" figure. The tale of KoS is how Argrath, on behalf of humanity, confronts the otherworld powers, and shows that he has outgrown them, and liberates humanity from their rule. Same as Lord of the Rings, then, but it's one of the more powerful myths in Western civilization.

But, to tie up, the process of accessing cosmic truths and powers through myths plays against a materialistic view of there being a source of power which the gods control, and parcel out to their followers if they agree to exchange worship and obediance. The Gods are an expression of that cosmic power, expressed and understood through myth, and by participating in that myth, their followers participate in that power. The continuity of power-God-follower is one of mythic identification, not commercial transaction.

[Mac Logo]

Now we are in an interesting place. Perhaps to illustrate for clarity (and hopefully a little smile) I shall use the example of Hindu Mythology as quoted in The Science of Discworld by Terry Pratchett, Ian Stewart & Jack Cohen

Pete's view of Glorantha is much like that of the Discworld: It's a place that from groundlevel looks remarkably like Earth. But it's not Earth.
It's almost entirely narrative-driven. All stories have power.

The rest of the Discworld cosmology is actually pretty similar to the "real World" - in that real science also works and the Wizards are heading rapidly toward a scientific understanding of their Universe (splitting the Thaum etc...)

The point being (I'll get there eventually) that Great A'Tuin the astrochelonian "swims" through a universe of stars and galaxies, where logic and analysis work as long as some bugger dumping Narrativium doesn't bend the universe out of shape (again). It's not too different from 21st Century Science - except for the storypower - which is powerful enough to create a giant turtle and associated biosphere  - Myth on a grand scale! The myth sits on a solid (chelonian) foundation of modern, scientific thinking.

John Hughes' view of Glorantha is "Turtles All The Way Down". From an old lady espousing Hindu mythology*, when she was asked by a learned astronomer "What holds the turtle up?", she replied "Ha! It's turtles all the way down". An infinite regression.

To most modern people, I suspect that being asked to believe that will be just a little too much. Folks tend to get uncomfortable around infinities.

Not that it isn't a valid premise for a fantasy world. It quite clearly is a fascinating possibility, even if it does make my head hurt. For John, it seems that under every story is another story, or worse/better (take your pick...) a web of stories that is a synthesis of previous stories and will be used in creating new stories ("Clarifying and explaining", says my innate GodLearner :D).

Bloody Hell, from a linear infinity (Turtles all the way down) I've just extrapolated to infinity (... turtles/myths) in 4 dimensions - 3 spacial and 1 temporal. Turtles all around and from the "big-bang" onwards. I'll stop this train(wreck) of thought before it careens through the buffers and hits Superstring Theory.

Anyway, are these views reconcilable? Yes, YGWV! The actuality of either of them is utterly irrelevant to Gloranthans. The only way they can get off the Lozenge is using the magic at hand - and it is always going to take you to the Otherworld most relevant to the magic used. (c.f. The Stars Example.)

Related to that last point is that Greg, I believe, has stated that "Science" doesn't work in Glorantha. The Scientific method requires repeatabilty and consistency. (That's my take on Greg's position... salt pinches at the ready!)

When your world is built entirely on myth (all the way up!) and those myths are passed on through verbal tradition, and they all interact, especially in regions where folks with different myths are competeing for resources, the last thing you are going to get is consistency. (the sentence that would not end...)

The "best" you'll get is a (possibly) peaceful clash between the Orthodoxy and those indluging in cross-pollination between the two ideologies. That would be like the Lunar takeover of the Dara Happan Empire. The worst being a clash between various sets of heretics/heterodoxies where all the original myths are swamped out by powergrabbers taking what works best for them and stuff the rest of you.**

Ah. That sounds like the Hero Wars.

So, I suspect Greg's Glorantha is probably closer to John's.
But That Doesn't Matter! Rule One: YGWV. Rule Two: MGF.

Darn - that's one long, rambling post. Have I been fair to all parties? Have I helped clarify positions or have I added too many turtles?

Cheers

Graeme

* Which is where the whole disc on 4 elephants on a turtle thing comes from.

** And a few poor sods wondering why they don't all just get on with farming, hunting and actually making things to eat and drink - Hobbits in all but hairy feet.

[pete_darby]

My problem with that is reconciling it with other comments made by Greg and others that, at an essential level, the Gods really are unchanging outside of the major cataclysms that mark the end of ages (the creation/fall of Nysalor, the fall of the God Learners, the Hero Wars from the appearance of Sedenya to the end of the final battle). So the idea that if you change the myths, you change the entities seems ruled out. If it wasn't, everyone would be doing what the GL did, and there would be no reason for the cosmos to twat the GL so hard.

But that being said, yes, science doesn't work in Glorantha... unless scientism is the myth that you use to access the cosmic (this is, IMG, the way the Brithini and Mostali work).

Immodestly, i think I'm pretty close to how Greg's described the metaphysic of Glorantha. But if people grok John's view of layers of stories, and it works in their Glorantha, it really doesn't matter which is true... since we can both "demonstrate their truth."

Eek! "Ultimate self referentiality reached. Please extract yourself from your own back passage!"

Well, it's actually childs play to reconcile the visions: my interpretation of the Gods as expressions of cosmic princples is, lets face it, a myth, a story, it's the one told at the start of G:ittHW, it's the one that guided the God Learners into their great errors of judgement. John, would I be right in thinking that we're agreed that the story "under" that story is unknowable?

To paraphrase John's work: "The God Learners were half right, but only the Dragons know which half"

[simon_hibbs]

John Hughes' view of Glorantha is "Turtles All The Way Down". From an old lady espousing Hindu mythology*, when she was asked by a learned astronomer "What holds the turtle up?", she replied "Ha! It's turtles all the way down". An infinite regression.

To most modern people, I suspect that being asked to believe that will be just a little too much. Folks tend to get uncomfortable around infinities.

It's like the descriptions of the angels in Jewish folklore, one is described as having 70,000 bodies, each with 70,000 heads, each with 70,000 mouths, each of which has 70,000 tongues, which each speak 70,000 languages. Or something like that (it's been a while). The point is not to literaly describe the physical characteristics of an angel. The point is to knock your imagination for six because they're not imaginable - they're angels for goodness sake! :)

Not that it isn't a valid premise for a fantasy world. It quite clearly is a fascinating possibility, even if it does make my head hurt. For John, it seems that under every story is another story, or worse/better (take your pick...) a web of stories that is a synthesis of previous stories and will be used in creating new stories ("Clarifying and explaining", says my innate GodLearner :D).

That's right, you're not meant to be able to imagine what an angel looks like, yet the Prophets met and talked to angels. So now imagine the mind of a person who _can_ comprehend the appearance of an angel. Imagine what being able to do that would feel like. The point is not to translate that imagery into something you can understand, but to alter your state of conciousness out of the default literal, material interpretation mode into a transcendent state.

Bloody Hell, from a linear infinity (Turtles all the way down) I've just extrapolated to infinity (... turtles/myths) in 4 dimensions - 3 spacial and 1 temporal. Turtles all around and from the "big-bang" onwards. I'll stop this train(wreck) of thought before it careens through the buffers and hits Superstring Theory.

Or transcendent conciousnes, and a mental train wreck probably isn't too far off from what it feels like. Not everyone survives it intact, either.


Simon Hibbs

[Mac Logo]

Or transcendent conciousnes, and a mental train wreck probably isn't too far off from what it feels like. Not everyone survives it intact, either.

Perhaps Illumination might be a more Gloranthan term?

:)

Graeme

[simon_hibbs]

Or transcendent conciousnes, and a mental train wreck probably isn't too far off from what it feels like. Not everyone survives it intact, either.

Perhaps Illumination might be a more Gloranthan term?

Heh. Actualy I was careful to avoid that term as it's a very loaded one in relation to Glorantha. Nysalorian Illumination is a particular form of transcendent conciousness achieved as a result of a particular religious practice. There are other forms of transcendent conciousness achieved through other religious practices. In HeroQuest these are the Secrets and Great Secrets of the religions.


Simon Hibbs

[contracycle]

That's right, you're not meant to be able to imagine what an angel looks like, yet the Prophets met and talked to angels. So now imagine the mind of a person who _can_ comprehend the appearance of an angel. Imagine what being able to do that would feel like. The point is not to translate that imagery into something you can understand, but to alter your state of conciousness out of the default literal, material interpretation mode into a transcendent state.

That would be a great answer if only the question were about religious people or seekers after truth.  However, down in humdrum reality the game books are setting it up such that I-the-player have a real prospect of meeting an angel, and I-the-GM will have to roleplay it for them if they do.

The non-answer you give is an appropriate taster, but it does not allow for the question to be actually asked and actually answered, despite the fact that the default viewpoint characters are very likely to do the former and require the latter.

Edit: "turtles all the way down" is a joke becuase the answer is inadequate.  TATWD fails to answer the question under a cloak of faux-insight.

[pete_darby]

Okay, Gareth, how about this as an analogy: an angel is a being that cannot be conceived of by the mortal mind in it's natural form. It manifests itself in ways that mortals grasp through the framework of metaphor & symbolism that gets codified and transferred through religion and myth.

(Have you seen the Babylon 5 episode where the "transcdendant" ambassador Kosh manifests as an angelic being which is perceived by the various intelligent species according to their mythologies? It's pretty much what I'm talking about... if you forget how B5 muffed it when they revealed they were bog standard glowy space squid with mind control powers, and probably laser vision).

The mythic / mystic follower (john & simon) says "Since we can only see it through stories, it's made of stories, as any attempt to see it without stories is doomed to failure."

As more of an essentialist, I say "Stories are the only apparatus for comprehending it at a human level, but that is not to say that there is an essential something behind the story, however unknowable."

Furthermore, I think that "thing" is the cosmic building blocks of the Glorathan Cosmos, which would be the things expressed through the primal runes... which are themselves another myth.

I'm disagreeing at one level with John and Simon: it's not "stories all the way down, as "all the way down" implies that the idea of stories means something at the level of directly interfacing with the primal matter of the cosmos, a level at which human understanding is inadequate and meaningless (yes, it's an anti-scientific viewpoint, but I see it as hardwired into the setting). But I agree that the only way available to us to dsicuss the models of the Gloranthan cosmos is through stories and similar "mythopoeic" tools. Whichever of these views you take on it, you'll have to use stories to argue the case.

Here's another analogy: the photon. You can drive yourself nuts over the question "Is it a wave or particle?" You can do an experiment that'll prove it one way, and another that'll prove it the other. What you can't do is an experiment to prove it's both, or neither. AFAIK, every single experiment has answered it one way or the other. So is there no definitive answer? Of course there is: a photon is a thing that can behave either like a particle or a wave, depending on what you're measuring. So while we can quantify certain things about a photon (energy, wavelength, speed, etc), what we can't yet do is say what it is, only what it's like.

So let's look at our old friend Orlanth. We know that, when we sincerely go to the otherside, identify with Orlanth, participate in his myths, we partake of his nature, and thereby gain a measure of his power. In many respects, he behaves like a story, a character in a story, an active "Graeco-Roman" style god, and expression of a set of cosmic forces... so which one is he? Like the photon, it's the wrong question, because even the answer "all of them" is misleading. Consider that, to the Wenelian Orlanthi, Orlanth is a wild boar....

Rather, consider that Orlanth is the expression of something that can only be apprehended in part through the myths surrounding it. What it "really is" is less important than "how it behaves."

So, from a GM, I am running the universe standpoint, to run a game satisafactorily, with thematic importance beyond a mundane power struggle, you have to have the players (including the GM) engaging with the mythic expressions of, say, the Orlanthi and Lunar pantheons, and see the clash of these two mundane forces as another expression of a clash of cosmic forces either arising or expressed through the mythic structures around them, which are the only tools available to their followers to interact with them. Because in Glorantha the myths aren't like, say, Vancian spells which use the energy of the universe in a mechanistic fashion, but a relationship between the mundane and the otherworld, which defines and constrains both.

Is this helping?

[EDIT: Simple, direct answer for "How to roleplay an angel in HQ:" What does the mythic system the game is operating in say an angel should be like? Keeping with the example, an Hebraic angel would be a non-euclidean nightmare of infinite beauty and terror]

[Peter Nordstrand]

Hi folks,

Remember that you are under no obligation to try to please Gareth or anyone else. He hasn't really asked any questions, and he is not really interested in what you, I, or anybody else has to say. He just keeps repeating the same thing over and over again, in different wording. In my book, that is intellectual dishonesty. Also, he has pretty much presented the solution to his own problem long ago:

Oh, man I cannot play in Glorantha without knowing and understanding stuff that we all know will never ever be clarified.

Very well, Gareth. I suggest that you play something else.

/Peter Nordstrand

[pete_darby]

Peter:

At this point, I'm interested in getting my differences between my PoV and John & Simon's expressed. I'm hoping to get either a "I understand, that's great," or an "I understand, that sucks" from Gareth, but I'm doing this as a general public service... ("Oh lord it's hard to be humble...")

Anyway, me and Gareth have danced round this before... I think I may be expressing myself better this time. I honestly hope this helps Gareth and anyone else in the position of not grokking Glorantha to grok it.

I don't feel like I'm teaching a turtle to sing, here. When I feel I'm wasting my efforts, trust me, they will cease.

[simon_hibbs]

That would be a great answer if only the question were about religious people or seekers after truth.  However, down in humdrum reality the game books are setting it up such that I-the-player have a real prospect of meeting an angel, and I-the-GM will have to roleplay it for them if they do.

Then roleplay it.

Dustin Hoffman and Sir Laurence Olivier were one discussing acting. Hoffman described The Method, and how he spent weeks 'living' the part, maorphing his personality so that he could 'become' the character. Olivier's response was "My dear fellow, why don't you just Act?"

When I play a Superhero psyker character that can psionicaly delve into the subconcious of another person, I have absolutely no idea what that feels like. Nobody who's ever written a commic book about such a character has either, yet I can play that character and they can portray them to their audience. No game can make you actualy experience what your character experiences, but what's to stop us telling stories about it?

Edit: "turtles all the way down" is a joke becuase the answer is inadequate.  TATWD fails to answer the question under a cloak of faux-insight.

In your opinion, but probably not in the oppinion of many Hindus. Now let's suppose you are playing a Hindu, who has a thorough education in Hindu religious symbolism and believes that TATWD is symbolic imagery for the transcendent nature of reality, rather than a physical description of the world. You think your character's beliefs are a joke, so it would be hardly surprising if you had problems identifying with the character. There's not much a game designer can do about that. That's not my point, bear with me.

The difference of course is that in a world like Glorantha, you can 'kick the turtle up the backside' so to speak. But so what? I can give you drugs that make you believe that everyone's brains are made out of spiders, but you know it's not true even though you felt them crawling out of your ears. Even if you went on an Orlanthi myth-quest to the Storm Age, it's magic for goodness sake. Who's to say any of it is real? It could all be an illusion, and in fact Mystics believe that everything, including the apparently physical middle world, is a magical conjuration anyway. In Glorantha it still all comes down to faith.

Now if you can't even connect with the beliefs of a real world character's faith, how to connect with the beliefs of a Gloranthan character? Well, I don't see how you can if you just plain don't want to, no matter what the game designer says or does.


Simon Hibbs

[simon_hibbs]

Lots of good stuff in this post.

The mythic / mystic follower (john & simon) says "Since we can only see it through stories, it's made of stories, as any attempt to see it without stories is doomed to failure."

I wouldn't go that far, because obviously some people in the real world do undergo religious experiences of that order. Of course you may believe they're deluded, or on drugs, and either interpretation is just opinion. However in roleplaying games we can only engage with these concepts at the story level.

As more of an essentialist, I say "Stories are the only apparatus for comprehending it at a human level, but that is not to say that there is an essential something behind the story, however unknowable."

I think you're saying the same thing I just wrote above, but I'd just like to check.

Rather, consider that Orlanth is the expression of something that can only be apprehended in part through the myths surrounding it. What it "really is" is less important than "how it behaves."

From the point of view of running the game, how it behaves is what it is important. How we interpret that story is up to us.

So, from a GM, I am running the universe standpoint, to run a game satisafactorily, with thematic importance beyond a mundane power struggle, you have to have the players (including the GM) engaging with the mythic expressions of, say, the Orlanthi and Lunar pantheons, and see the clash of these two mundane forces as another expression of a clash of cosmic forces either arising or expressed through the mythic structures around them, which are the only tools available to their followers to interact with them. Because in Glorantha the myths aren't like, say, Vancian spells which use the energy of the universe in a mechanistic fashion, but a relationship between the mundane and the otherworld, which defines and constrains both.

Precisely. When I was at school, History was all about lists of dates - mostly battles. Nowadays it's mostly about what it was like to live in those times as an ordinary person. D&D is about who get's the XP high score, but HeroQuest is about the consequences of different, incompatible ways of life and world views clashing, and the moral compromises that arrise from that. What is worse, to kill a man or to destroy everything he loves? In the end our relationship to the world and to eternity is everything that we are, and HeroQuest is about just that.

Is this helping?

Yes, a lot.


Simon Hibbs

[pete_darby]

Okay, we've hit a point between me and Simon where the disagreement is about whether there's a functional difference between the truth being a story and the truth only being able to be transmitted through an allegorical story... and it looks like we both think the latter, and that for the pruposes of running the game, the distinction isn't all that important. Cool.

[Mac Logo]

[snip]
the disagreement is about whether there's a functional difference between the truth being a story and the truth only being able to be transmitted through an allegorical story
[snip]
and that for the pruposes of running the game, the distinction isn't all that important. Cool.

Cool! The distinction is only important if one or the other POV makes the game more fun.

Edit: "turtles all the way down" is a joke becuase the answer is inadequate. TATWD fails to answer the question under a cloak of faux-insight.

Uhuh. Whatever.
It's a joke because "turtles" are perceived as in some way funny - and somehow being obviously the wrong answer. How many people would then blithely accept it, if I said "spacetime" or "God". Any more "adequate"? Not really, but it seems to work for quite a lot of people.

These aren't the insights you're looking for. Move along.
:)

ObGlorantha: So what about the various forms of "Transcendental Conciousness"? In a thread that started as being about (paraphrasing) "What makes Glorantha Glorantha?", surely this count. It is an aspect of Glorantha that has been present from the very early days, has massive implications to the world and potentially affects everybodies game. Even though the magic system supporting it has been dropped from HeroQuest (for now...), its effects resound throughout the rules when discussing the Secrets of religions. It's also a fairly major part of the history of Glorantha and part of the reason that Orlanthi hate Lunars. The effects of it are everywhere. It must surely count as one of those trope thingies?

n) There are States of Mind in Glorantha that are not explicible except to those who have achieved them. Not all of these states are benign and not everyone appreciates/tolerates those who attain them.

(Carefully trying to avoid the "M" word that is currently even dirtier than the "I" word).

Graeme

[Nick Brooke]

n) There are States of Mind in Glorantha that are not explicible except to those who have achieved them. Not all of these states are benign and not everyone appreciates/tolerates those who attain them.

You might want to widen that example, as I think it's a broader trope than the one you're stating.

The Elder Races of Glorantha (Aldryami elves, Mostali dwarves, Dragonewts...) have their own distinctive mental states (vegetable, mechanical, draconic...) which are at least in part innate to the species (rather than directly related to attaining Transcendental Consciousness / Mystical Illumination), and are also incomprehensible to "outsiders" (other species): Elfsense, the World Machine, Dragonewt behaviour...

These are other "States of Mind that are not explicable except to those who have achieved them" -- or been born with them.

Cheers, Nick