Birthroot Ending

[jburneko]

Okay, so I've finally seen the Birthroot ending.  In a word: "GAH!"  What is that; somekind of freaky Trollbabe-Sorcerer cross-over ending?  That was definitely the best story and most certainly the best ending so far.

So do future Tha stories feature freaky-baby-root-thing?  Because now I want to know.

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jesse,

I knew you'd be all over this one. Get laid and kill a guy, and Jesse pouts. Pull freaky-weird mystic shit about birth or something, and he's all pumped up.

Ha! I was looking forward to this.

Only three stories so far, right? If you're seeing longer-term plot glimmerings here and there, you're right. There's three more in the can, and I've got plenty of plot notions for afterwards.

Best,
Ron

P.S. Jesse, read the first Retta story again, bearing in mind that we don't know whether the Ancient Enemy exists - and that it might. Seem more interesting now?

[jburneko]

It's just because getting laid and killing people is something I do on daily... oh, wait, nevermind.

But seriously, I admit that when I FIRST read the first story there was something crucial I missed that I only realized latter.  I think I said as much in another thread.  I misread the scene where Rhetta says: "You killed them," and the Bard replies, "Not me.  The Curse is upon us."

I assumed there were two options.  One, the ancient enemy does not exist and insane bard killed everyone.  Two, the ancient enemy DOES exist and the sign of its coming was that everyone around them died thus "clearing" the battle field, so to speak.

For some reason my mind didn't realize that the NEXT line, "My old foe has possesed you," coupled with the bolding of "ME" in the previous frame was implying that RHETTA killed everyone.

So, yeah, the fact that Rhetta MIGHT have killed everyone and doesn't remember it is pretty darn freaky.  Not as freaky as baby-root-thing though.

Jesse

[Bankuei]

For some reason my mind didn't realize that the NEXT line, "My old foe has possesed you," coupled with the bolding of "ME" in the previous frame was implying that RHETTA killed everyone.

Reading the first story, I always had the "what would this be like in play?" sort of question in my head, and that was the first thing that occurred to me, and made me think, "What a great/fucked up way to start a campaign!"

Excellent stuff Ron.  Maybe you should see if you can get enough to put out a mini-comic.

Chris

[Ron Edwards]

Hey guys,

This thread gives me a good opportunity to make a point about the comics.

They aren't transcripts of play, or even hypothetical examples of play.

For example, what is that battle with the bard, in game terms? Oh, a fight conflict, duh ...

... are you sure? What if it's a Magic conflict with the Ancient Enemy, and Retta's character uses her relationship with the bard to give her a re-roll?

And so on. There are many, many ways to make Story with Trollbabe, and a comic (or novel, or movie) is a made story - you can't see, and aren't supposed to see, the actual laying of the bricks when you're admiring the finished house.

Best,
Ron

[Ron Edwards]

Also, folks, as of today and Clinton's efforts, you can read the whole story of The Birthroot Bargain now.

Best,
Ron

[jburneko]

For example, what is that battle with the bard, in game terms? Oh, a fight conflict, duh ...

... are you sure? What if it's a Magic conflict with the Ancient Enemy, and Retta's character uses her relationship with the bard to give her a re-roll?

Ron,

This question is probably about to illuminate WHY the comics aren't examples or hypothetical instances of actual play but it's nagging me and must be asked.  What would be the point of that second interpretation?

Here's the issue: The story is effective because the audience doesn't know whether there's Ancient Enemy or not.  But in an RPG the Players and the Audience are the same.  If Rhetta's conflict is indeed with the Ancient Enemy then shouldn't there be some evidence of that in the story?  What's the point of having a character work out a conflict the audience never sees?

I think my key issue is that you're now using the word "conflict" in a manner I don't understand.  Isn't the point of a story to illumante how a character chooses to deal with a conflict?  If there's no demonstration in the text of the story of how the conflict is being dealt with, yet alone what the conflict is to begin with then, again, I ask, what's the point?

A long time ago I let go of the idea that Character Experience must equal Player Experience.  But now you're suggesting that "in game" resultant conflict does not have to equal meta-game mechanical conflict?  I'm not sure I'm capable of handling that.

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jesse,

I knew this was going to cause problems. Let me clarify my point: given a comic, a novel, or a movie, it is not possible (or in my view desirable) to translate its content to a role-playing creative context in a 1:1 fashion.

You've misread me, I think, to be claiming that while role-playing, the two versions of conflict resolution (Fighting vs. Magic) would be "the same." That is not my claim at all. I am saying that the comic, because it was not created via role-playing, does not model any special instance or application of the Trollbabe rules.

Best,
Ron