[Sorcerer] Sorcerer and Sword questions

[Adams Tower]

The only good part of being sick the past couple of days is it gave me the chance to read through Sorcerer and Sword. I now have some questions, both about Sorcerer and Sword, and about Sorcerer (no sword), inspired by comparison.

To start with, let me list the sword and sorcery fiction I'm familiar with, because I think it might help in answering my questions. Night's Master and Death's Master; numerous Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser stories; a few Robert E. Howard stories, the one I remember the best is "The Worms of the Earth"; Elric of Melniboné, The Eternal Champion, and Gloriana; some Clark Ashton Smith stuff, particularly "The Tale of Satampra Zeiros" and "The Seven Geases"; the Jakko Orange and Tam-tam stories in Worlds without Master; A Princess of Mars; and Jack Vance's The Dying Earth and Cugel novels. Also, some barbarian jock stuff and the first half of Cerebus, which feels like it's on the border of sword and sorcery.

My group and I haven't decided yet whether we'll be playing Sorcerer (no sword) in the here and now, or Sorcerer and Sword. For one thing, I'm not sure I've read enough sword and sorcery, yet, to run it.

So, on to questions.

1) In all kinds of Sorcerer, what does Total Victory get you, and why is it worth saving victories to get it in
Sorcerer and Sword?

2) The stuff about interpretation of "failed" conflict rolls, on page 68 of Sorcerer and Sword, applies to Sorcerer (no sword), too, right?

3) On page 44, you say "... in game terms, as in the base Sorcerer rules, the GM exercises veto power over how the Humanity 0 character is role-played." I was under the impression that a Humanity 0 character became unplayable as a PC, not just giving the GM veto power. Is that not correct?

4) On page 79, you say that Sorcerer is built to be played mostly in Author stance. In what way?

5) In the Chapter 2 bibliography, is there a reason you only list the Elric and Corum stories of Moorcock's? Are those two heroes particularly more appropriate to Sorcerer and Sword than his others?

6) On page 26, you talk about sword and sorcery settings generally being racist. I notice this a lot in Robert E. Howard's writing, but not in the rest of the sword and sorcery I've read. Am I missing it, or have I just been reading the wrong stuff?

7) At the end of Chapter 1, you talk about discussing what kind of heroes the group wants to play, as the first step of Sorcerer and Sword. Why doesn't Sorcerer (no sword) have this step, before the two statements?

8) The second step, vague setting creation, is a more elaborate, but not more concrete, version of the two statements in Sorcerer (no sword), right?

9) On page 24, you talk about giving the players a small sword and sorcery reading assignment. Would you do this before or after the talking about the heroes Step 1?

10) In Sorcerer, you talk about creating a PC as having three parts (quoting Christopher Kubasik); creating a person, creating a person who is a sorcerer, and creating a sorcerer with a Kicker. Is character creation in Sorcerer and Sword the same way, that is, are you still creating someone who wanted something bad enough to Bind a demon? I ask because the example characters you give don't mention why they Bound their demons, just that they did, and a naive sorcerer may not even have a demon.

11) I'm not entirely clear on what an Immanent demon is. It seems like the things that make them unique are that they are physical and that they exist in the "real" world. But, it also seems like Beasts, Pagan Things, and Old Ones are physical and exist in the "real" world. What makes Immanents different? What would be really nice is an example of each kind of demon from the literature.

12) Have you ever used any of the extra sorcery rules in Sorcerer and Sword in a here & now game? If so, how did it turn out?

13) On page 83, you talk about different ways of structuring PC relationships. Is the one you describe as "60-60" equivalent to what you call "the dumb way" in Sorcerer (no sword)?

14) If you're doing adventures out of chronological order, how do you decide on order? I get the idea of putting the fulfillment of Destiny at the beginning, but aside from that? Just whatever the group feels like?

15) On page 87-88, you talk about the intermezzo adventure for bringing a PC back to life particularly requiring player-authorship. In what way does it require more player authorship than anything else? Is it because the players are all working towards the known future event that the PC comes back to life?

16) For adventure creation, you talk about having the GM create a locale, and NPCs in conflict in that locale. This seems equivalent to the step in Sorcerer (no sword), where the GM develops all the NPCs listed in the PCs diagrams, potentially adding a few more if it doesn't seem like there's enough. In Sorcerer and Sword, are these steps done before or after the players come up with their Kickers? If before, how much information do you give the players to write their Kickers? It seems like it could work to come up with the Locale, have PCs write their Kickers, then come up with NPCs.

17) Does Sorcerer and Sword use the 4 quadrant character diagrams?

18) If you were running a game with one adventure per session, how would you handle Kicker writing? Would the GM write the adventure between sessions, then pass on some information about it to the players, then have them write their Kickers, still between sessions, then play?

19a) On page 93, you talk about "the physical space of each Bang". I'm really confused about that. I thought Bangs were events? Do you mean the physical space of the scene in which the Bang takes place?

19b) On page 94, you talk about starting a Bang in media res. I thought a Bang was defined as an event that engages the players, requires a response from them, but doesn't dictate the response. How can you start it in media res without starting in the middle of a dictated response?

19c) On page 96, you talk about ending a scene once a Bang is resolved. Is there an assumption in Sorcerer that there is only and exactly one Bang per scene?

20) I'm just curious, ignore it if it's too personal. Several things in Sorcerer and in Sorcerer and Sword make me suspect you've studied martial arts. Have you? What style?

Man that's a lot of questions. Feel free to take your time answering, or to split this into multiple threads.

[Ron Edwards]

1) In all kinds of Sorcerer, what does Total Victory get you, and why is it worth saving victories to get it in
Sorcerer and Sword?

Total Victory gets you a flawless version of whatever it was you were trying to do. This can be a very big deal. The mechanics don't change – it's not  a "critical" in that it does extra damage or kills someone when the number of victories say otherwise. But it can matter very much in ways that will make more sense after you play.

2) The stuff about interpretation of "failed" conflict rolls, on page 68 of Sorcerer and Sword, applies to Sorcerer (no sword), too, right?.

Not so much. It depends on the look-and-feel of the game in question. In my experience core-Sorcerer is less sympathetic to the player-characters in terms of expecting to look good. Think of it as the difference between

3) On page 44, you say "... in game terms, as in the base Sorcerer rules, the GM exercises veto power over how the Humanity 0 character is role-played." I was under the impression that a Humanity 0 character became unplayable as a PC, not just giving the GM veto power. Is that not correct?

That is correct. The Sword text shows a little bit of legacy there. The phrasing might apply best if Taint were involved and effective enough to drop a character to 0, though.

4) On page 79, you say that Sorcerer is built to be played mostly in Author stance. In what way?

Not sure what to tell you. As apparent in the examples, I think. If it's not clear, then I suggest ignoring the issue. Consider too that Stance has absolutely nothing to do with "playing in character," in terms of speech and depiction, so it really doesn't matter unless you're feeling theoretical. Stances are an ordinary part of ordinary play, and the terms are describing what people do anyway (and have been doing since the hobby began), not recommending something new.

5) In the Chapter 2 bibliography, is there a reason you only list the Elric and Corum stories of Moorcock's? Are those two heroes particularly more appropriate to Sorcerer and Sword than his others?

The bibliography is intended to help people who don't know about some of the authors, not to provide a comprehensive titles list. If you don't know Moorcock's stories, then the ones that will help you the most, for playing Sorcerer & Sword, are the ones I mention. That's also why I list only a subset of the Elric stories too.

Aside from that, I belong to the camp which thinks most of the Eternal Champion stories are dogshit.

6) On page 26, you talk about sword and sorcery settings generally being racist. I notice this a lot in Robert E. Howard's writing, but not in the rest of the sword and sorcery I've read. Am I missing it, or have I just been reading the wrong stuff?

It doesn't show up much in the other titles you mention, that's true. I suppose I'd think of that being the right stuff rather than wrong ... anyway, it's most egregious in the Carter and DeCamp stories, as well as in a lot of the late-60s and 70s Howard-inspired books. White guys trying not to be racist is kind of a thing of its own, especially at that time, so I grant authors like Offut and David C. Smith points for that.

7) At the end of Chapter 1, you talk about discussing what kind of heroes the group wants to play, as the first step of Sorcerer and Sword. Why doesn't Sorcerer (no sword) have this step, before the two statements?

Because the two statements are sufficient. It is extremely valuable in core-Sorcerer to let unhindered, individual player work initially shape the characters, rather than coming to any kind of prior agreement – or even any discussion at all following the two statements.

8) The second step, vague setting creation, is a more elaborate, but not more concrete, version of the two statements in Sorcerer (no sword), right?

I prefer to think of the two processes as distinct.

9) On page 24, you talk about giving the players a small sword and sorcery reading assignment. Would you do this before or after the talking about the heroes Step 1?

Depends on who they are. If they are people whose sword-and-sorcery seems very compromised to me, then I probably wouldn't want to play with them at all unless they showed enough interest to read some C. A. Smith or Leiber or whoever - anyone, really. For others, I'd get the process rolling and then recommend some stories that seem in the right zone.

10) In Sorcerer, you talk about creating a PC as having three parts (quoting Christopher Kubasik); creating a person, creating a person who is a sorcerer, and creating a sorcerer with a Kicker. Is character creation in Sorcerer and Sword the same way, that is, are you still creating someone who wanted something bad enough to Bind a demon? I ask because the example characters you give don't mention why they Bound their demons, just that they did, and a naive sorcerer may not even have a demon.

The basic concept still applies. Christopher didn't articulate that insight until long after Sorcerer & Sword was published.

11) I'm not entirely clear on what an Immanent demon is. It seems like the things that make them unique are that they are physical and that they exist in the "real" world. But, it also seems like Beasts, Pagan Things, and Old Ones are physical and exist in the "real" world. What makes Immanents different? What would be really nice is an example of each kind of demon from the literature.

I still say the sabretooth in Beyond the Black River exemplifies the difference so perfectly that it's all you need. As for the "really nice" concept, it would work best if you treated it as a personal project.

12) Have you ever used any of the extra sorcery rules in Sorcerer and Sword in a here & now game? If so, how did it turn out?

Yeah. We did a modern necromancy game which included both Pacting and all the necromancy rules in exquisite detail. It was great. Given his recent research on one of the demons that was featured in that game, Moreno can probably provide the threads which discussed it.

13) On page 83, you talk about different ways of structuring PC relationships. Is the one you describe as "60-60" equivalent to what you call "the dumb way" in Sorcerer (no sword)?

No. 60-60 is a good thing. My favorite example is "The Phoenix on the Sword," in which Thoth-Amon and Conan are best understood as protagonists who never meet. Besides, I don't really like that old breakdown in the core book, and tried to correct it in the annotations.

14) If you're doing adventures out of chronological order, how do you decide on order? I get the idea of putting the fulfillment of Destiny at the beginning, but aside from that? Just whatever the group feels like?

Just whatever the group feels like. Or in practice, as one person might suggest and the others find interesting.

15) On page 87-88, you talk about the intermezzo adventure for bringing a PC back to life particularly requiring player-authorship. In what way does it require more player authorship than anything else? Is it because the players are all working towards the known future event that the PC comes back to life?

Probably. I'd describe it as working with a prevailing constraint.

16) For adventure creation, you talk about having the GM create a locale, and NPCs in conflict in that locale. This seems equivalent to the step in Sorcerer (no sword), where the GM develops all the NPCs listed in the PCs diagrams, potentially adding a few more if it doesn't seem like there's enough. In Sorcerer and Sword, are these steps done before or after the players come up with their Kickers? If before, how much information do you give the players to write their Kickers? It seems like it could work to come up with the Locale, have PCs write their Kickers, then come up with NPCs.

After the Kickers, very much so. I like to think of "Rogues in the House," with one player saying, "Hey, I've been thrown in prison to rot," and the other saying, "Hey, the high priest is going to have me executed for my little embezzling ways." So the GM comes up with Nabonidus and Thak.

17) Does Sorcerer and Sword use the 4 quadrant character diagrams?

Yes.

18) If you were running a game with one adventure per session, how would you handle Kicker writing? Would the GM write the adventure between sessions, then pass on some information about it to the players, then have them write their Kickers, still between sessions, then play?

It's a bad idea to play Sorcerer of any kind as "adventure per session." It's only functional when you let the sessions have no fictional unit-making identity at all.

19a) On page 93, you talk about "the physical space of each Bang". I'm really confused about that. I thought Bangs were events? Do you mean the physical space of the scene in which the Bang takes place?

Yes.

19b) On page 94, you talk about starting a Bang in media res. I thought a Bang was defined as an event that engages the players, requires a response from them, but doesn't dictate the response. How can you start it in media res without starting in the middle of a dictated response?

I'd prefer to reserve answering until after you have played the game with specific Bangs and have a sense of what constitutes a productive constraint without being railroading.

As a general point, I'd prefer people not even to read or discuss either Sorcerer & Sword or The Sorcerer's Soul until after playing core Sorcerer, and not to read or discuss Sex & Sorcery until after they've played using the first two supplements. But I recognize that this preference is unrealistic.

19c) On page 96, you talk about ending a scene once a Bang is resolved. Is there an assumption in Sorcerer that there is only and exactly one Bang per scene?

No. It does work well to do so in many cases, but if it doesn't, there's no obligation to force the scene to stop.

20) I'm just curious, ignore it if it's too personal. Several things in Sorcerer and in Sorcerer and Sword make me suspect you've studied martial arts. Have you? What style?

Yes. Most formally and thoroughly, a brand of traditional Taekwon-Do which is not oriented toward sport. During intermediate training in that, I cross-trained (not formally, but for a while) in both Five-Animals kung fu and Shao-ryu jujitsu; I also frequently sparred for fun in many other local schools. I am a big advocate of non-sport, continuous contact sparring. I was good enough and a decent enough person to be a welcome guest in those schools, which was unusual in that town. After gaining a certain rank in Taekwon-Do, I then began parallel training in fairly intensive Tai Chi, and found that the two combined in me to produce a distinctive personal "fight." Before I fell prey to serious breathing problems in about 2005, I was training as well in Hapkido in alliance with Taekwon-Do and also instructing several classes in the latter. My physical condition deteriorated so badly in 2006-2010 that I am pretty devastated about it, but at least the breathing is largely corrected. I turn 50 in September – a tough time of life to try to get back in shape.

[Moreno R.]

12) Have you ever used any of the extra sorcery rules in Sorcerer and Sword in a here & now game? If so, how did it turn out?

Yeah. We did a modern necromancy game which included both Pacting and all the necromancy rules in exquisite detail. It was great. Given his recent research on one of the demons that was featured in that game, Moreno can probably provide the threads which discussed it.

The word "necromancy" seems to make the Forge Archive search engine go mad (I just tried to search for modern necromancy post by Ron Edwards and I got more than 1000 results, with the "more relevant" being posts about DitV with no necromancy, no modern and no Ron) so I can only refer you to the Sorcerer page on the Adept Press site: 
http://adept-press.com/games-fantasy-horror/sorcerer/sorcerer-promotion-education/
...that list the two more important threads about that campaign. It's important to start from the adept press site page because you can find there the updated links to the handouts (the ones in the threads don't work anymore).

If you find some posts missing text, or totally blank posts, this is an issue from the more recent forum migration, I don't know what's causing it, but you can still read the complete threads by clicking on the "print" button that give you the printable no-frills page, that has the entire text.

The list of the powers of the demon Veniamin can be found in this post (as a not named example demon) http://indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=8771.msg91515#msg91515

[Adams Tower]

Ron,

Seems like the answer to a lot of my questions is "Can't answer until you've played Sorcerer." Well, it looks like my group will be playing here & now Sorcerer, starting with a character creation session on the 25th.

I'm thinking of a Silent Hill-ish demon/sorcery look-and-feel statement, so I'm also considering using Mystic Otherworlds.

I'll see about making a list of example demons by kind. You can expect a post about it at some point.

It's cool to hear about your martial arts history, and I'm sorry it's been difficult recently. I studied fighting oriented Tai Chi for the past 6 years, achieving what my school calls mastery. I'm considering studying Wing Chun when I move to the Philadelphia area next year. I definitely see parallels between Tai Chi and roleplaying, particularly the ideas of not trying to force things to happen, and following the other participants.

2) The stuff about interpretation of "failed" conflict rolls, on page 68 of Sorcerer and Sword, applies to Sorcerer (no sword), too, right?.

Not so much. It depends on the look-and-feel of the game in question. In my experience core-Sorcerer is less sympathetic to the player-characters in terms of expecting to look good. Think of it as the difference between

Looks like you got cut off in post editing here?

Moreno,

Thanks for the links! I'll check them out.