Sorcerer online games

[DannyK]

Hi, just discovered Sorcerer after reading some posts about it on RPG.net, picked up a couple supplements ("Sword" and "Soul") and now waiting for the core rulebook to arrive.  I must say, there's an embarassment of riches here; "Soul" is strongly affecting the way I'm setting up my current Nobilis game, and "Sword" really makes me want to start a new game.

My question is, has anyone has experience playing Sorcerer online?  I do most of my gaming and GM'ing online by PBEM or Play-by-Post.

I can imagine that some aspects of online Sorcerer would be very similar to tabletop play, but what might need to be modified?

DannyK

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

My favorite sort of new forum member! Someone who's given me money already. Seriously, many thanks for your support and interest in the game.

There are several avenues for on-line play here at the Forge, which I'm sure some people will be happy to tell you about. Also, this thread is sort of depressing, but Fizzled online play is probably good reading as a cautionary tale.

Best,
Ron

[Lxndr]

There are two very, very different manifestations of online play, and I'd like to make sure which one you mean before I make any comments on sorcerer play specifically.  (I'm running a game in one medium, and have witnessed a sorcerer game in the other)  From your comments it SOUNDS like you're referring to play-by-post/email, but I'll address both.

The first form is real-time-chat play.  This can take place over IRC, any of the various instant message clients, various MU*s, certain programs like OpenRPG or GRiP, and so on.  I figure even voice-chat 'net games would fall into this category.  The main feature here is, obviously, the fact that it's happening in real time.  You have to make sure all the players schedules allow for the same bloc of time, as in a real-life game, but due to the speed of typing vs. talking and other factors, generally these games move at a slower pace.

The second form of online play can be broadly referred to as play-by-post.  This includes play-by-email games, play-by-message-forum games, play-by-wiki, and even play-by-newsgroup games (if there are any).  This requires a different organization of player schedules but, since generally they don't all have to be present at the SAME time, is easier.  On the other hand, play proceeds even slower apace, even if it happens in larger time blocs.  This, by the way, is the form of game that I run.  

If you're interested in seeing a (what I would humbly call) successful Sorcerer game in play-by-post, search for Razing Arizona at www.rpol.net (or click on the link in the thread Ron provided).  I'm especially fond of the "Pre-Game Roundtable" (and the "Mid-Game Roundtable" which cropped up when a player replacement was needed).  There's another link to a sorcerer game on playbyweb - but it doesn't look very active.  My main points of disappointment both relate to OOC kibbitzing:

1.  I've not managed to entice any non-players to join and kibbitz in the OOC thread, which feels like one of the great advantages of an online game, and

2.  Sometimes it feels like there's less cross-pollinization (through OOC comments) between the player's threads than I'd suspect would happen in a tabletop sorcerer game (and that I DO see happen in other tabletop games).

But that disappointment arises entirely from the format (play-by-post), not the game.

(As an additional shameless plug, when organizing a game, the people at Indie-Netgaming would be more than happy to help, regardless of format; although the indie-netgaming crowd generally uses IRC more frequently).

For some general comments, I think both formats CAN be used for Sorcerer (although in both cases, you're deprived of the wonderful, yet optional, tool that is "the weird diagram on the back of the Sorcerer character sheet").  I don't think there's much in the way of SPECIFIC problems with Sorcerer and online play in combination (though online play can be problematic, and Sorcerer can be problematic at times, especially for newcomers).

[DannyK]

Hey, nice stuff Alexander.  It really help fill out the mental outlines I have of the game.  

Honestly, I haven't been this excited about a game since I picked up Nobilis (and since I read the "Guide to the Technocracy" before that).  

I was really struck by the "Clicking Sands" setting in "Sorcerer and Sword", and it seems like some kind of modern-day occult setting would work really well,  and there was that post about using Sorceror for a spy game, with Humanity being defined as "trust" which really appeals to the Le Carre fan in me, and ... gosh, I do go on.  

I've also been thinking of trying a Mage/Sorcerer hybrid; this is a habit with me, since I love the Technocracy setting but dislike the Mage mechanics.  I've tried grafting Mage onto sturdy Godlike and Nobilis rootstock, with mixed results.  

But, since the basic shtick of Mage Technocrats is that they're defenders of the natural order who use supernatural pseudoscience in their work... they have a tendency to crack up due to the inherent hypocrisy and get shipped off for re-education.  It feels very suitable for Sorcerer; but first I have to get the game and read it, I suppose.  

DannyK

[djarb]

A while back, I ran across Sorcerer somewhere, found the website, and was intrigued. I bought the core book immediately, and "Sword" shortly after reading and loving the core. Since then I've been reading and rereading, thinking up settings and characters... everything except playing the bloody game. So naturally, I'm getting desparate.

If anybody is setting up a game, online or in the Los Angeles area, I'd love to be included. :)

[Ron Edwards]

Los Angeles!? You are in prime Sorcerer territory, my friend!

Get in touch with Christopher Kubasik and Jesse Burneko, two very active members of this forum. I'm not saying they have room for you in their game, or anything like that, but they can give good advice for how to set up a group and otherwise be nice fellow Sorcerer folks in your area.

Right guys?

Best,
Ron

[Christopher Kubasik]

Yes.

Click on button below.

I
I
I
v