The Forge Archives

See about set up and Session 1 here.

Lot's quieter this week, as my wife had taken my two-year old son out of town. Nice.

Anyhow, things started off with Julie playing a very sympathetic yet realistic sister when her character's sibling got snubbed by one of the boys at the party (this is the same girl who Josh's character Killian ignored for Julie's character despite throwing herself at him). The realistic part was how, despite being sympathetic, she ended up being patronizing in effect. To further worsen the situation Salani also accosted the boy in question amidst a circle of his friends. She used some sort of Temper trait to try and pull it off (was supposed to be a Flaw, but I thought what the heck), but lost to the boy's Cool Trait. Thus she further embarrassed her sister.

At this point, Killian heads off back to the garden to look for where Traelie (the girl he suspects of being a priestess) and Esto (the good looking foreign boy) have gone so he can separate them long enough for Killian's sorcerer buddy to kidnap Esto. Salani also heads off in the direction of the garden to see how things are going with the lovebirds that she's pushed together. They (physically) bump into each other in the dark twisty garden, and spend a moment trying to discern what each is doing there. After a moment they are interrupted as they note the couple come into a nearby clearing. These two are obviously smitten, with Esto actually reciting elvish love poems in that sappy way that only somebody really in love can.

Killian heads over, to toast to "young love" (intent on finding a way to get the two away from each other). Salani, wanting them to be left alone comes to their rescue, and we head into our first extended contest. Both characters being all about the quick wits, and cunning, we decided that the contest would be like a Shakespearean verbal joust where each is trying to maneuver each other into a social situation where the other has to comply with the other's desire.

This goes back and forth in fun fashion as we get used to the rules and the players describe their verbal victories. At one point it looks as if things are going to turn on Salani (Killian has used a spell "The Black Tongue" to mess with people's understanding of each other; the first he's created for his grimoire), when she wins a big victory with a big edge for her good looks. Julie role-played this as Salani laying out a thinly veiled proposition to Killian. It was all downhill from there, as Josh commented that Killian figured mentally that if he needed an excuse to make to his friend as to why he was slacking off on his part of the conspiracy, that at least he had a good one. Salani leads Killian back around the house leaving the lovers alone.

The extended conflict was way cool. My players rock. But wait, there's more!

Coming back around the house, Salani introduces Killian to Traelie's mother, who, unbeknownst to him, is the real priestess. Anyhow, she engages him in some chitchat as a cover for casting a spell on him. Which fails. Killian on the other hand makes some good rolls, and determines that she is Traelie's mom. Thinking quickly, Killian tells her that her daughter is outside, and seems smitten with some fellow. A servant. And a foreigner. They take leave of each other, and Traelie's mom heads for the garden.


A scream is heard outside. Most of the guests emerge out onto the sward in front of the manor to find Traelie's sister standing on the gable roof of the main balcony about three stories above the portico pavement, and sobbing worse than before. Someone in the crowd (the GM) shouts, "we got a jumper!" Salani, fearing for her sister's life, and being an athletic sort, starts to climb up to her sister who tells her to keep her distance. Killian fires off a spell (creating the second spell of his grimoire; "Fog the Mind", IIRC) that shoots a black cloud up around Salani's sister's head, and makes her forget what she's doing up there (Josh uses this to impress his friend who's complaining about him not taking care of business during the calamity). Salani completes her climb and pulls her groggy sister off the ledge, takes her inside and puts her to bed.

Killian comes upstairs, to "see how they are" and they meet atop the stairs. Salani asks him if he's seen Traelie or her mother, and Killian lies and says that he's seen her heading out back towards the garden. She heads that way, and finds Traelie on the way. Traelie is looking for Esto who disappeared during the commotion out front. Killian finds his friend and after they consult, deciding that neither has seen either of the lovebirds for a bit. Killian decides to head back to the garden to check it out.

Killian ends up stealthfully trailing the two girls through the garden as they come to the ornate root cellar out back. There is an eerie red glow emanating from the cellar, and as the girls look in Traelie screams as she sees her mother preparing to sacrifice an unconscious Esto. "It's for your own good," says mom (who's secretly thinking that this is just a good excuse to sacrifice somebody who won't be missed much and simultaneously assure that her daughter won't end up marrying the wrong guy). Traelie tries to get in to stop the ritual.

What does her good friend Salani do? Narrativist decision time, baby! She holds her friend back so that the ceremony can continue! Swooot! Couldn't have guessed that was coming. And Josh's character decided that the whole thing wasn't his business and just slinked away. Long story short, a big crevice opens in the air, a huge set of jaws comes through, and gobbles up Esto in one huge bloody snap.

So much for Bang's # 4-7.

Traelie, traumatized by the event, grabs a pitchfork and Salani runs for it. Meanwhile, Killian has broken into her room, but has found scant evidence of her involvement in the cult. Salani comes running in, and after a moment goes out onto the balcony. This gives Killian a chance to escape from the dressing closet he's hiding in. From the balcony, Salani confronts her fear, and looks down into the garden. In the moonlight (three of the five that orbit Shadow World), she sees Traelie emerging from the cellar, bloody, and dropping the pitchfork.

She heads back down to see to her friend, and finds her on a garden path, heading to the front of the house. She's donned her mother's sacred bracelet, and seems stunned. Salani approaches trying to sound sincere about wanting to help her friend. The friendship roll comes up a 20, or fumble. Traelie raises her arm, and tries to perform a "Dark Absolution" on her old friend (in RM terms that's an attempt to kill you by destroying your soul). Salani runs as the red pseudo-flame stream from Traelie's hand flies over her head.

Killian, deciding to return to the garden, discovers Traelie shortly thereafter, but with the moonlight at her back doesn't notice all the gore. His comment to her is, "Hey, did your mother find you?"   :-)

Time for another Dark Absolution attempt, this time on Killian. He defends with his Sorcery ability but receives a "dazed" result. And that's where I called it. So, our intrepid Sorcerer is caught in a cliffhanger. Will he be able to resist having his soul ripped out by the roots? Stay tuned for next week's installment and see.

"What a party!" somebody commented. Indeed. I really wasn't intending for things to get so out of hand, but then, it all just seemed to be the right thing to do at the time. And the players just drove things that way with a lot of wacky Author stance. But I'm not only satisfied with how it came out, I'm ecstatic. The only problem is that I need to beef the R-Map back up again, as two important parts bit the dust, and another has become highly problematic. I could just let the game come to an end, but that's not what I'm looking for in this game. I'll figure out a reasonable way to make this just the first bold chapter in a much longer saga.

Comments welcome, though I don't have any particular questions. I am tempted to ask what people think will happen with the characters, but I don't want to engender any "playing before we play". :-)

Mike

I guess I'll chime in here & say that yes, the extended contest was fantastic. Loads of fun. We almost made the encounter between Killian & Traelie another extended contest, but it was late & we were tired.

But overall, I'm loving the Hero Wars mechanics. (In fact, I've pulled all of my Hero Wars books off of my shelf & started skimming them again. Hmmmm, a Lunar Empire game would be cool...) It works really well for this kind of Shakespearean-tragedy-meets-French-farce-with-creepy-magic game. Julie & I, at Mike's prodding, are getting more & more used to augmenting our roles, scanning our character sheets, looking for traits we can use to augment other traits.

And in terms of GNS stuff, the scene with Traelie & Solani discovering Traelie's mom sacrificing her new boyfriend was spot-on Narrativism. Julie got this look in her eye & asked out loud, "Wow. What a conflict! The priestess of my cult, who I look up to, is doing a really cool ritual. But my good friend is trying to stop her. What do I do?" She thought for a moment, & then said, "Nope. I have to stop my friend. Solani's interest in the ritual & the priestess is stronger." It was brilliant.

Hey,

How're the augmentation mechanics going? Any examples?

Minor point #1: Extended Contests are flat-out the best group resolution system I have ever seen. I love'em.

Minor point #2: Yes, Josh, a Lunar campaign would be one of my role-playing wet dreams come true. I have been waiting for this since 1982.

Best,
Ron

Quote from: joshua neff
And in terms of GNS stuff, the scene with Traelie & Solani discovering Traelie's mom sacrificing her new boyfriend was spot-on Narrativism. Julie got this look in her eye & asked out loud, "Wow. What a conflict! The priestess of my cult, who I look up to, is doing a really cool ritual. But my good friend is trying to stop her. What do I do?" She thought for a moment, & then said, "Nope. I have to stop my friend. Solani's interest in the ritual & the priestess is stronger." It was brilliant.

Not to derail this into a GNS discussion, but wouldn't the last sentence indicate more of a Simulation of Character decision.  I mean, in the most traditional hard core old school game you can think of a decision based on "Solani's interest" would be right at home.

Valamir wrote:

QuoteNot to derail this into a GNS discussion, but wouldn't the last sentence indicate more of a Simulation of Character decision. I mean, in the most traditional hard core old school game you can think of a decision based on "Solani's interest" would be right at home.

It depends upon how the decision was made.  If Julie looked at her character and tried to figure out what Solani would want to do, then yes, it was Simulationism via character exploration.  If Julie looked at the situation, decided for herself what was coolest, and then retroactively applied motivation to the character, it was Narrativism by way of good Authorial Stance.

I can't tell which of these is true based on Josh's post, and maybe only Julie can clarify.  Either way, it sounds cool as hell.

- Scott

I don't know what Julie's motivation was. I didn't ask her. I called it as Narrativism because the character was faced with a critical decision--help a friend or stay loyal to one's religion?--& came down on one side. Either way she'd done it, whether helping her friend & rebelling against her priestess or staying loyal to the priestess & catfighting with her friend (& yes, Julie got to roll on her Catfighting trait to try & stop her friend), it made a thematic statement.

At least, that's how I see it.

Besides, Ralph, we all know that what the decision is "based on", in terms of player motivation, isn't relevant to GNS, right?

(Actually, now that I think about it some more, I recall that right after that scene, Julie said, "That's what happens when you get two writers playing a roleplaying game--they make decisions based on story." Of course, Julie can elaborate on this if she wants to, but she hasn't shown much interest in GNS & gaming theory up to this point. She seems to know what she likes, & since it jibes with what I like, I haven't felt the need or desire to push any theory at her. So, here endeth the GNS talk on my part.)

Quote from: Ron EdwardsHey,
How're the augmentation mechanics going? Any examples?

Minor point #1: Extended Contests are flat-out the best group resolution system I have ever seen. I love'em.

Minor point #2: Yes, Josh, a Lunar campaign would be one of my role-playing wet dreams come true. I have been waiting for this since 1982.

I have to agree with #1. Mike's account highlights one of the reasons that Hero Wars was so revelatory to me - the excitement of blow-by-blow contests, but not tied to combat. Verbal debates are a favorite with our group, and often provide more imaginative narrative descriptions than fights. I'm still trying to explore the range of conflicts that the players do have fun playing extended versions of. I think that the success of an extended contest centers on the depth of the player's emotional interest in the exchange, otherwise simple contests are better because the bookeeping slows the pace of the story.

As for #2, as I am sure Ron knows, it is not far off now http://www.glorantha.com/products/1302.html. I am looking forward to it too, if only as some of the guys in the group want to run a  Lunar campaign set in Rinliddi (bird cults, guys in feather cloaks, giant riding birds etc.) so I get to play a bit for the first time after running our Orlanthi game almost continuously for a year. Huzzah!

Okay.  You're right.  I really do have no interest in theory.  I'm not a designer, nor a GM (in all my years, I've never actually run anything for anyone).  

I don't have a head for "crunchy bits" and tricky mathematical rules.  I play characters on whim.  My personal interest in seeing story unfold makes me pay attention to the surroundings and circumstances and act accordingly.   We're challenging Mike (aren't we?) and I think he's digging it.

Come to think of it, the first and second sessions now seem like newly-created backstory or prequel for my character.  She was just kind of slacking around being a spoiled little rich girl, but now one of her deepdark secrets is surfacing, her mentor has been offed by her own daughter who seems to have designs on her position  who ALSO happens to be one of Solani's best friends, maybe not so much anymore because I kept her from saving her new enamorata...why analyze?   Yes, we shattered that relationship map, didn't we?  Solani's lackadaisical, shallow ambitions (nice sequitur, no?) have found a new outlet.

I can't even guess what Josh is going to make Killian do.   He will have to come up with a damn good reason for hanging around.

The extended contest was good for laughs, as Josh and Mike and I couldn't keep straight faces at the way the dice were going. "The moonlight reflects overwhelmingly fetchingly off her eyes and her cleavage...Killian is now in 'guy' mode..." We were in fine verbal form, as both kids ended up crashing out early.   It was indeed comic.   We're so clever you could brush your teeth with us.

I know one thing for sure:  A few of my accumulated hero points will be used before we go again.  I think y'all can guess where and for what.

Quote from: JulieI know one thing for sure:  A few of my accumulated hero points will be used before we go again.  I think y'all can guess where and for what.

Yay! I was beginning to worry that nothing seemed worthwhile to spend them on.

Anyhow, if Julie's decision was character based, and therefore "accidentally" Narrativist, or not is not something I'm worried about. In Sorcerer, play results in people adjusting their humanity score. And somehow, even if it's "what my character would do" at that point it becomes efectively Narrativist. Because there is no prior indication as to what the character would do. We didn't, none of us, know enough about the character for it to have been a decision based on "consistency" or the like.

Anyhow, this again goes to show the similarities between Sim: Char, and Narrativism. And I'm just ecstatic with it being in that grey area. It may not be the "Impossible Thing" but it feels enough like it that it counts as meeting it for my goals. I'd rather not know what stance my players are in so long as cool stuff is happening. Whether it "counts" as a story or not.

We all seem to be having a great time, so I think I'll keep rolling on as I have.

On another note, Ian makes an interesting point. In counter to other theory that people propound about systems not doing a good job of simulating social stats or intelligence ("you can't play a character who's smarter than you") I think this system plainly shows that one can model these things. And for a Narrativist leaning game, even.

I was hesitant at first to allow the players to affect each other with social stats, for example, but as we've all come to trust each other's judgements regarding each character's protagonism, it seems more and more OK. And this is due to using a lot of FitM and player narration (more than the text would imply is supposed to be used). We just work out after the fact, the cool reason for the player being socially manipualted or whatever, and then go from there with all parties satisfied.

BTW, Julie, Josh, if this does bug you, let me know, as I scould just be obtuse to your suffering. It seems fun to me, and until I hear otherwise I'll contiunue playing allowing such rolls.

Mike

As long as we're all here, I thought I'd ask a rules clarification question or two.

Under the section that details Augmenting, Edges, and Lending AP, it says that to Augment that it takes an Unrelated Action. Does that also extend to Edges and Lending? (In play I just allowed one augment attempt per round, having missed that rule.)

Also, it says that one can only have a single "mundane" trait augmenting an effort at a time, and as many different Feats as you like. What about magic other than Theistic magic Feats? Also, I ruled that if one wanted to, one could augment with a second "mundane" trait, but that it didn't take effect unless it exceeded the first, thus supplanting it (not adding). Does that seem reasonable? Actually, given the rule that says that it takes an unrelated action to augment, I think this would be rarely used.

From other's description's of HW play, I'm going to guess that some people play with a simplified version of some of these rules.

Mike

Hi Mike,

I sure as hell simplify and somewhat modify these rules. In a discussion with Greg Stafford, he expressed some approval of the idea of "chaining" augments, so that you can have ability A augment B augment C augment D augment E, where E is your primary ability. This method still permits only getting up to the Augmentation effect (extent) from a single roll, though (D's).

I've been known to permit a very different mode of augmenting, in which any ability can augment any other with no numbers-limit. This can get scary: an ability at 15 can get slammed up to 10w or 15w this way. I think it makes for excellent play, however.

In both cases, I relax the time limit - time and order of actions during Extended Contests is a significant aspect of play, and I think it might be good to compare various groups in terms of how strict they are about it.

Best,
Ron

Okay, so instead of a whole host of traits augmenting a single trait, you have trait A augmenting trait B which augments trait C...

I like it.

And no, I have no problem surrending control of my PC to the results of the extended or simple contests of wits. I don't feel deprotagonized in the least. 'S'all good.

Quote from: Ron EdwardsI sure as hell simplify and somewhat modify these rules. In a discussion with Greg Stafford, he expressed some approval of the idea of "chaining" augments, so that you can have ability A augment B augment C augment D augment E, where E is your primary ability. This method still permits only getting up to the Augmentation effect (extent) from a single roll, though (D's).

That actually sounds legal to me. But of dubious merit. For example, if I chain five stats with a thirteen, and go pul two on each, giving a decent cahnce of continuing success, in the end, the last roll for augment is goingto be a 23, which makes for a potential +4 with the same good odds. That's a long way to go to get from + 2 on the first roll to just +4. Especially if you have to give up exchanges to do it.

QuoteI've been known to permit a very different mode of augmenting, in which any ability can augment any other with no numbers-limit. This can get scary: an ability at 15 can get slammed up to 10w or 15w this way. I think it makes for excellent play, however.

This sounds cool, but it makes magic less special. I waonder if there is a way to keep magic special, while also allowing for multiple mundanes.

QuoteIn both cases, I relax the time limit - time and order of actions during Extended Contests is a significant aspect of play, and I think it might be good to compare various groups in terms of how strict they are about it.

Well, I'm tempted to be a stickler. I like my structure. OTOH, I hate to disincentivize the use of such a potentially protagonizing, and interesting mechanic.

Mike

Quote from: Mike HolmesUnder the section that details Augmenting, Edges, and Lending AP, it says that to Augment that it takes an Unrelated Action. Does that also extend to Edges and Lending? (In play I just allowed one augment attempt per round, having missed that rule.)

Also, it says that one can only have a single "mundane" trait augmenting an effort at a time, and as many different Feats as you like. What about magic other than Theistic magic Feats? Also, I ruled that if one wanted to, one could augment with a second "mundane" trait, but that it didn't take effect unless it exceeded the first, thus supplanting it (not adding). Does that seem reasonable? Actually, given the rule that says that it takes an unrelated action to augment, I think this would be rarely used.

Hi Mike, one idea you might find useful was given in Barbarian Adventures and is likely to make it in to Heroquest which is automatic augments - you can have a +1 augment for each 10 points of an ability without rolling. So if you are 10W you can get +3 without the risk from a roll.

Leading on from that another idea, and one we use now, is to allow 'always-on' abilities like Strong to augment for free (without an unrelated action). Using this means that someone with say, Hate Lunars 17, can get an auto +1 when fighting the Empire (of course someone with Fear Chaos 17 gets an auto -1). We drop the limits on mulitple mundane augments, unless they seem logically contradictory, Greg and others have experimented with that idea too. I'm not sure of its HQ status.

Generally augments are treated the same, regardless of the magic system (there are some wierd rules for animists spirits adding APs, but not sure they are relevant here).

Quote from: Ian Cooper
Hi Mike, one idea you might find useful was given in Barbarian Adventures and is likely to make it in to Heroquest which is automatic augments - you can have a +1 augment for each 10 points of an ability without rolling. So if you are 10W you can get +3 without the risk from a roll.

I think Ron mentioned this to me the other day. This rule creates a breakpoint which I dislike, but does present an option to the players. Tough chioce.

QuoteLeading on from that another idea, and one we use now, is to allow 'always-on' abilities like Strong to augment for free (without an unrelated action). Using this means that someone with say, Hate Lunars 17, can get an auto +1 when fighting the Empire (of course someone with Fear Chaos 17 gets an auto -1). We drop the limits on mulitple mundane augments, unless they seem logically contradictory, Greg and others have experimented with that idea too. I'm not sure of its HQ status.

That sounds sorta cool, and makes logical sense. But won't that lead to players trying to take skills that are all of this sort? And how do you decide what counts and what does not? For example, in a fight, would Quick Wits count automatically or need to be rolled? Why?

My point is that if I can argue that an ability can augment a roll, then shouldn't it be automatic? In normal play I'd rather let a player roll an augment attempt with a big penalty than to to just say he can't at all. With the set system, you don't have this option. That makes me certain that I don't want to use the set bonus/penalty system. On the subject of Flaws, I'd just have players roll them in all applicable circumstances.

Here are some potential solutions to the problem. Let me know where the holes are, people.

[list=1][*]Have every Trait have a secondary descriptor that indicates what sort of conflict it counts for automatically. It counts for that type of Conflict and that only. Kinda rigid, and a lot of bookkeeping, but might be effective. Perhaps no more than five Traits to a conflict type. This is my least favorite idea of all of these, but gives an idea of what sort of thing can be done.
[*]Allow only 2 automatic augments (or some other reasonable number) per conflict. This almost garuntees that every conflict players will be looking for what to augment with, however, to get their freebies. (this is what I do in Synthesis)
[*]Usable with the above, or alone possibly, the player gets two additional free augments per Hero Point spent. (I'm not sure that balances with the use of a Hero Point for a bump, but it may over a long extended conflict.*)
[*]Allow one feebie to be introduced whenever a player initiates an exchange. In fact, this is what I was doing. Seems odd in some ways, that an augmenter should come into play only late in a conflict, but then with the rule as written, that's supposed to be the only way (unrelated actions).
[*]Allow more augments, but make them risky somehow. Like a potential overload of some sort. Like for every non-magic augment in effect after the first, treat the loss as one multiple worse a penalty. Or something like that. I like this sort of thing as it allows the player to dig his own hole.
[*]Charge AP (3?). It works for followers, why not for PCs? [/list:o]

These all could be combined in some fashion, potentially.  

Also, despite the practical problems with the augmenter limits, I like it conceptually. I'd like some harder limit like the above, but leave it open for magic augmenters.

QuoteGenerally augments are treated the same, regardless of the magic system (there are some wierd rules for animists spirits adding APs, but not sure they are relevant here).

Cool.

Thanks for the ideas,
Mike

*I have been assuming that augments last the entirety of extended contests; please inform me if I am mistaken.