[Indie-netgaming Elfs] Lord of the Rings

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

I'm glad Raven posted, because I couldn't figure out a way to say what he said, and then he said it perfectly. I shudder at the idea that Nathan's transcript is being taken as an example of Elfs as a game design.

Elfs is a game about killing things, getting treasure, and being at risk from the environment as well as from one's fellows on occasion. It's not story-stuff, and putting it into a story-framework, I think, is an exercise in nothing. Nathan provided me with the LotR writeup before playing, and I mentioned the problem then, but he was pretty committed to the parody and that's OK.

I also think the internet-context is a poor medium for the game. It's built so strongly to capture the 70s dungeon crawl - in many ways, it's my homage to Dave Arneson - that taking it into any other medium besides face-to-face doesn't work for me. To clarify, by the way, Elfs is not built for characters like Pimpin; I can't see how he got made up from the rules. That character must be understood as a product of this group.

Oddly, people seem to be getting the idea that it's pretty much kill puppies for satan with Elfquest characters, which it's not. Your character's "stage" is a satire on alignment, specifically in terms of how it affects nothing about the reward system of play. I think Raven's point about the character/player disconnect is well taken and should be understood better in play for this group.

Best,
Ron

[C. Edwards]

(I don't have a copy of Elfs.  The rules examples are taken from the quickstart that Nathan wrote up for the Elfs LotR game on the Indie-netgaming site.)

Any character in the Genital stage gets a +1 to Spunk for 24 hours if they get laid.  It doesn't seem to matter if the target of affection is a sheep, an old granny, or a knot hole in a fence.  The game offers a reward for base behavior or base behavior results from failure, as in the Anal stage where lack of success results in a gaseous expulsion.  How is this ever not vulgar?

I can't speak for anyone else that played in that session of Elfs, but by my own scale I did go over the top.  Before play started the group agreed to not pull any punches and I'm sure that stamp of approval was partly responsible for the resulting game.  The IRC format was also partly responsible I'd say.  Based on my own understanding of the system though I can't help but wonder how many groups who have played this game have played it "incorrectly".

-Chris

[Walt Freitag]

I'm just curious; was emulation of Bored of the Rings an influence (overt or perhaps subconscious) on the play session? Had any of the participants read it?

- Walt

[Paganini]

Based on my own understanding of the system though I can?t help but wonder how many groups who have played this game have played it ?incorrectly?.

I was thinking the same ting. I *do* have the Elfs rules, and based on them and other accounts of actual play (the edible fart comes to mind, as does the humping into submission of the naga, the gang-banging of the princess from Ice & Fire, and so on) I'm a little surprised at the comments here.

As the GM I honestly wasn't expecting quite the level of "Depraved hobbits! Yeah!" that I got. But reading over the transcript after the game, I in no way got the feeling that what we were doing wasn't "Elfs."

I'm actually inclined to think that Elfs doesn't really do what Ron thinks it does / wants it to do. Don't misunderstand, the Director / Author stance mechanics came off great. But the rules do not suggest parody D&D to me. The presentation, from artwork, examples, the sample adventure, and so on, suggests to me the kind of play that actually does take place. It's funny, because Ron's reactions in other Elfs threads often seem to be sort of surprised and taken aback, like "gee, how did you guys get that out of Elfs?" When it seems obvious to me that those sorts of transcripts are exactly what Elfs produces.

[Bob McNamee]

.....

To clarify, by the way, Elfs is not built for characters like Pimpin; I can't see how he got made up from the rules. That character must be understood as a product of this group.

.....

Best,
Ron

By this you mean that he is not 'in-style' for a standard Elfs game. He should be described more as... ? rogueish cutpurse? ... or 'conman pickpocket' in terms of Thiefly parody? (This was my general conception)
I got carried away by some of the 'off-color' mentality myself in character creation because of the name parody I thought of.
Probably a mistake.

[Bob McNamee]

I actually kinda liked the idea that Pimpin would fast talk (Low Cunning Roll) the Raiths into giving him their Cloaks at the Cloak check room, and have them vanish because they had nothing to hold their form...

[Paganini]

Walt:

I've read bits of Bored of the Rings, but mostly I was inspired by the material at the Tolkien Sarcasm Page. (URL not handy, but it's a high-traffic site . . . should show up on google.)

Bob:

Next time you have an idea like that, feel free to tell me. It's a good one, I just didn't think of it. Better yet, you could make it explicit when you call for a roll. I.E., "I'd like to fast-talk the wraiths into giving me their cloaks so that they vanish because there's nothing left to hold their form."

[greyorm]

"What would happen if the Hobbits were all a bunch of Selfish, Greedy, Violent adventurers instead of Noble, Generous, Peaceloving countryfolk?"

"What would happen if the Hobbits were all a bunch of Bestial, Off-color, Sex-crazed Frat pledges."

Though opposed to one another, neither statement is correct.

I think this is what is being passed right over by everyone: Elfs isn't about "what would happen if X were Y?"...I strongly feel the group is trying to role-play elfs, which is wrong, wrong, wrong.

I'm fairly certain Nathan takes the stance he does because despite this not being the case, he's not recognizing he's making certain assumptions about the method-play-level of elfs that do not fit: it looks like an RPG where you play smart-ass, horny, disgusting little twerps...but it isn't! That's an assumption that gets dragged in from other games.

The same thing happened with my Orx game and, unfortunately, I wasn't quite prepared to deal with it because I thought everyone would just "get" it. Like Orx, this isn't a game where you characterize or role-play.

Think about a D&D game in terms of gamers playing solely for the socializing. Like your standard solely-for-social-play D&D game, the next sesssion might benefit from clearly defined goals rather than set-pieces and "we'll see what happens" interaction: think munchkin, think powergamer, think roll-playing, think cardboard pawns being moved from spot to spot and lots of "metagame thinking" going on.

Then use the elfs to add Color to the situation; ie: "Normally I'd search for secret doors here, there HAS to be one! So that's what I want...my elf, however, is busy trying to get it on with this cute cleric chick, and that's what he wants!" And then you roll.

Also, I understand precisely what Ron means about the face-to-face social aspect of Elfs play and IRC not cutting it. However, having been in a number of IRC games over on the #indie channel, I have to say that the OOC channel really does add that extra purely social aspect and makes it feel like a real tabletop session.

The difference between my regular IRC-based D&D game and the regular IRC-based indie games because of this one simple difference -- the addition of an OOC channel to the latter -- are remarkable and clearly distinctive! So in this specific case, I think the concern is unneccessary.

[C. Edwards]

Ahhh, so in a way Elfs is more akin to Shadows, kind of a Shadows: The Farting.  Taking that into account should definitely increase my enjoyment of the game.

-Chris

[efindel]

Well, to hit various points as one of the playtesters...

Personally, I found the granny rape to be beyond anything that I'd want to do... but since we had agreed that "anything goes" beforehand, I didn't say anything during the game, but pretty much just tried to ignore that bit.

Bored of the Rings was definitely an influence on me... indeed, I just re-read it a few months ago, so it would have been hard for me to avoid as an influence.  

To Raven, the way that you describe things is pretty much what I think I was trying to do on the two points where I actually did something with game significance -- on the first one, I wanted to find more clues about what was going on, and decided that Merry wanted a doobie.  On the second, I wanted to knock down the wraiths so everyone would have a chance to get away, and I decided Merry just wanted to get the hell out of there.

--Travis

[Bob McNamee]

The directors stance things primarily apply if using Dumb Luck however.
For the record, Pimpin isn't being roleplayed...its being moved as a Pawn from my perspective as a Player.
"Hey, lets try to tie the laces together, then scram...if he gets caught its just more motivation to run along..."

[Bob McNamee]

Nathan, no prob I should have voiced that idea...although I liked what you came up with..."master never lets us have girls..."
got rid of them...for a bit ... my real intent.

[Paganini]

I'm fairly certain Nathan takes the stance he does because despite this not being the case, he's not recognizing he's making certain assumptions about the method-play-level of elfs that do not fit: it looks like an RPG where you play smart-ass, horny, disgusting little twerps...but it isn't! That's an assumption that gets dragged in from other games.

Hey Raven, I agree with your post in the mean, but I think you've misread the point I was making. What you say above is just precisely what I was getting at. Elfs looks exactly the way you say it does. Unless you have an explanation of intent (like the one Ron gave in this thread) ahead of time, I don't see how it could be anything else. I think this is also what Chris meant when he said he wondered how many other groups play Elfs incorrectly. I find this statement to be telling in that respect:

"Oddly, people seem to be getting the idea that it's pretty much kill puppies for satan with Elfquest characters, which it's not."

(Which is kind of strange in and of itself, since the game itself mentions Elfquest as being a big inspiration.)

[Bob McNamee]

You know, I've been re-reading the rules to see if I just skipped a section or something when I was quickly reading the rules the day we played (I had just gotten them).
Other than a bit of 'feeling our way around the system' and not getting into defined 'combat rounds' etc, I haven't been able to find these intent things in the rules.
Yes, directors stance. I LIKE directors stance (sometimes too much as Mike can attest). I don't particularly care about my character,so I have no problem wanting something vastly different than he does.
He (Pimppin) is created as a Spunk 2 Dumb Luck 2 Low Cunning 4... the same as Toe Cheese. Genital Stage with Sleazy demeanor (which I invented). Equipment is vaguely emphasising phallic overtones.

Powergaming Munchkin play indicates he should do as many underhanded, tricky, backstabbing, creative acts as possible (ie Low Cunning Rolls)...and preferrably try to 'get some' every couple days for that +1 spunk. Only after botching the Low Cunning roll (which drops my Low cunning to 0 for Genital), or Running out of ideas does it make sense to play him using Dumb Luck (thus going into contrasting what he wants with what I want... which is to complicate his life generally).
Other than doing some 'speaking in character' which is to show attentiveness/go for humor I fail to see how play is going wrong given this character.

I want to see the game go to a more 'powergame module' parody, but I'm just not seeing the 'playing it wrong' in the rules.

[Bob McNamee]

Hmm, that last post seems a bit defensive reading it in the light of day.

I guess my main point would be, if a group of gamers, some who've read the rules and some who've had the rules explained to them, none who've played it before, can botch the intent of the game... that's a good thing to know!
It might mean a helpful "Elfs-Munchkin Manual.pdf" would be useful to help get them on the intended track.
Consider too, this game group isn't your 'generic D&D VtM gamer' group. This intent botching group hangs out here, have read GNS, are comfortable with Dir stance, and 'loose holds' on Player/Character divide. Our last several games have been Universalis, Soap, Cornerstone, and The Questing Beast...lots of Dir Stance, and some Character control swapping there.
Several of us read some or all of the Elfs threads before playing.

If we went wrong, what's a more standard group going to do?

(of course maybe we're more Narrativists instead of Gamists...I doubt any of us WERE powergamer/munchkins, but we most likely all played with some, I had one or more in my games)

edited : This is only the first session. We could be on-track from here, and at least part of the reason would be threads like this.