
![]() |
8 people marked this as a favorite. |

OK thanks. How come love and lust are opposites? That seems unusual.
Because in Thassilon, chastity wasn't seen as a virtue or a sin. And because love is a positive force and it deserved a place on the list of virtues.
Lust, in this version, is overindulging in sexual pursuits, just as gluttony is overindulging in eating/drinking. Sex and eating/drinking are good things—they keep society alive and moving forward. The sin/virtue for each is overdoing it or not, pretty much.
Lust vs. Chastity makes no more sense to me than would Gluttony vs. Starvation. It's illogical and self destructive, more so than the sin, in fact.

![]() |

On, the topic, since we know that Sorshen and Xandergul were ones of the original runelords established by Xin, was there a time when they were known as Runelord of Love and Runelord of Humility respectively, and properly represented these virtues?
"Lived by" those virtues, surely? The virtues were specifically "of rule," that is, for rulers. The Runelords didn't need to "represent" the virtues to the people lower down in the Thassilonian caste system, because those people only needed to keep their place in the caste system. They didn't need virtues.
Interestingly, and in stark contrast, the sin framing is universalist. Only a few may live according to the good. But everyone may be and must be degraded.

![]() |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |

On, the topic, since we know that Sorshen and Xandergul were ones of the original runelords established by Xin, was there a time when they were known as Runelord of Love and Runelord of Humility respectively, and properly represented these virtues?
Nope. They were known first only as ruenlords. The "Runelord of Envy" and all that came later, after the seven originals had already well-established their evil; none of them ever represented the virtues.