Enough of us have it now, so I thought I'd start up a new thread to discuss the salient points of the sourcebook.

And what a sourcebook it is! Fun to read, fantastic artwork, and a proper homage to its source material. Ron obviously loves this stuff, and it shows. I read it straight through in pretty much one sitting, and I'm jazzed to play Sorcerer again.

One thing that caught my attention - not only in S&S, but also in the core rulebook - is the breezy, easy way that Ron covers vast amounts of material, especially when it comes to the scenario prep stuff. It works for me, but then again, I'm already familiar with the terminolgy and theory behind it. I'm wondering what the non-CoRE contingent makes of this, whether it strikes a chord or not. Not that I expect to get that answer here, of course.

The part I liked best? The chapter on setting. I'm not sure where the idea of growing the setting as you play was first put forth - I know Dying Earth, and maybe Alyria (not sure about about this last) have similar takes on the concept - but this stuff really captured my imagination. It perfectly describes what first endeared me to the REH stories, and I can't wait to attempt it in play.

Overall - and here I'm stepping out of my role of fawning sycophant to try to give an honest appraisal - this is one of the best sourcebooks I've ever seen for an existing game. Awesome.

- Scott

Like I said in the other thread, I won't have time to give it a proper read-through until next week. But my first impression: it looks GREAT! I love the cover, the cold-steel logo & the dark-blood background (& Raven, great pic on the cover). And the interior art is gorgeous. Man, this book looks good.

I'm not sure where the idea of growing the setting as you play was first put forth

Heh. I grew my setting as we played our first game. That's how we all did it, way back in the Polyester Age. Just goes to show, the shortest route between two points is a circle.

Best,

Blake

Ooh. It's so good it makes me tremble even thinking about it. I just want to say, Ron & Manu, that you can ignore just about everything I said in the Dune/Sorcerer crossover thread. It's all doable with S&S. Which is fantastic. It's so damn friendly, and easy to read. And I have a copy! In Scotland! Haha! Though I did get funny looks when I was doing my Christmas shopping with it in my bag, as I was pulling it out and cackling maniacally as I read it while waiting in queues. So much niceness, so nice to look at. A sterling job. Now to hunker down and wait for Soul in realback...

Thanks, Drew. As soon as the discussion in the Dune thread turned toward Destiny, rather than demons per se, I said "Spoo! I get it!" and sat back to wait until Sword hit the mailboxes. I'm glad that it's making sense to others too.

I should like to see some Sorc&Sword play in the next few months. Oddly, I got all inspired myself just recently and am prepping up some notions. It will probably have to wait a little while, though.

Best,
Ron

I should like to see some Sorc&Sword play in the next few months.

Hi Eric,

I think I speak for many here at the Forge when I say that I'd love to hear about your S&S game. It sounds like you've already gotten to a character creation session (the thread on prices); does that mean you're starting to work out setting details?

I've never seen an Actual Play S&S game discussion, and I'd be mighty interested to hear how it goes. I originally wanted to do S&S for our Sorcerer game, but nobody else had a clue as to the source literature and I realized it was going to take too much work to try to explain that "No, sword and sorcerery does not mean Kevin Sorbo as Hercules."

Tor

I'd love to play some S&S. My eventual goal is to jump on the mini-supplement bandwagon with a Sorcerer & Sword related product, and I have the bare bones laid out, bleaching in the sun. But some actual play...that's where it's at...the whole thing would take shape. However, I'm kind of tapped to run Orkworld for my current group - which I'm really jonesin' about BTW - and anyway, I've run Sorcerer for them before. I may have to give some of my old gamist/simulationist buddies a call and see if I can goad them into play something "Stormbringeresque". They love that game.

- Moose

On 2001-12-22 15:38, Tor Erickson wrote:
Hi Eric,
I think I speak for many here at the Forge when I say that I'd love to hear about your S&S game. It sounds like you've already gotten to a character creation session (the thread on prices); does that mean you're starting to work out setting details?

I've never seen an Actual Play S&S game discussion, and I'd be mighty interested to hear how it goes. I originally wanted to do S&S for our Sorcerer game, but nobody else had a clue as to the source literature and I realized it was going to take too much work to try to explain that "No, sword and sorcerery does not mean Kevin Sorbo as Hercules."
Tor

Ahhhh ... I see. Thus the Price discussion actually concerned the L5R disadvantage "Brash."

I think the exercise sounds like a lot of fun, and I'd be glad to hear all about it. 'Sword is a very different sort of game in some ways, especially if you're interested in the out-of-chronology sequence of play and Destiny, both of which work well for the Rokugan setting. I suggest examining the differences in combat mechanics very carefully; L5R combat (both iaijutsu and kenjutsu) is designed according to different assumptions of play from Sorcerer's.

Have you read the Tomoe Gozen trilogy by Jessica Amanda Salmnson? I highly recommend it for both games - definitely the type of story representing their zone of overlap. The heroine also presents a good example of sorcerer-by-the-rules in the same way Conan does.

Best,
Ron

On 2001-12-23 12:53, Ron Edwards wrote:
Ahhhh ... I see. Thus the Price discussion actually concerned the L5R disadvantage "Brash."

I think the exercise sounds like a lot of fun, and I'd be glad to hear all about it. 'Sword is a very different sort of game in some ways, especially if you're interested in the out-of-chronology sequence of play and Destiny, both of which work well for the Rokugan setting. I suggest examining the differences in combat mechanics very carefully; L5R combat (both iaijutsu and kenjutsu) is designed according to different assumptions of play from Sorcerer's.

Have you read the Tomoe Gozen trilogy by Jessica Amanda Salmnson? I highly recommend it for both games - definitely the type of story representing their zone of overlap. The heroine also presents a good example of sorcerer-by-the-rules in the same way Conan does.
Best,
Ron

Eric,

I must apologize for an attack of Rigelian mindworms, which is the only way I can explain my reading of "L5R" for "7th Sea." Or, I think it's just because I've got the former game on the brain at the moment.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

Just got my copy in yesterday, and spent today burowing through it. A delight! I especialy enjoy the lack of overhead as GM. I've always felt compelled sit at one extreme or another in this- to generate vast, complex, and fully realized settings before even begining play... and by then, I'm usualy sick of them, or on the flipside to run totaly off-the-cuff with no prep at all. One turns into a morase, the other total chaos.

Enlisting the players in the setting creation... ah, an excelent way of both binding the characters into the setting and fleshing it out. "So, tell me where Burndon MocMoron is from?" says the GM to the player...

S&S is much more fully realized now... the .PDF was good, but the book delivers the goods much better.

Your three mini-settings are great mind-seeds for jumping off a fast and dirty campaign, or inspiring new ones.

The Bibliography is an excelent resource in itself. I've only read about half the recomended reading, and then only the most common (Howard, Moorcock, Lieber). Neato.



No complaints about the expanded mechanics; all looks quite playable. I don't know if I'd use the destiny mechincs myself, but found no problem with them other than personal preference.


One issue I'd like to bring up is of group dynamics. In virtualy all the S&S source material I've read, the protagonist is typicaly a loner or one partnered temporarily. F. and the G.M. are perhaps the only exception to this I've read much of... and of course Elric's unfortunate companions.

The "Adventuring Group" is so much more a product of High and Quest Fanstasy, derived in structure from a more Authorian Romance than from the low personal adventure of S&S pulps. Most figural right now is certainly "The Fellowship of the Ring".

What techniques would you recomend for keeping a coherent group dynamic in a genera which (in my experience) favors individuals as primary movers, while still maintaining the esential S&S crunchy goodness?



A great expansion all around.

Hi Bailywolf,

Thanks for the comments! I appreciate it a lot, especially from someone who has the PDF.

You've probably already read the material in the supplement that deal with this issue. I think it's clear that the Fellowship of the Ring model is usually worthless in Sword-style play. But I do see how one can have, say, three or four players involved.

1) Nothing says that every character has to be involved in every story, especially if you're running the out-of-chronology method.
2) Even if you do have them all involved, there's no reason why each character actually has to see or deal with one another in a given story. Given the high degree of Author stance that I recommend, this doesn't break player engagement either.
3) Character relationships can become sources of narrative conflict throughout many of the stories. By "conflict," I do not necessarily mean that the characters have opposed interests or don't get along; I mean stuff like the Howling Tower and Tomoe Gozen references I give as examples.

Oh well, I'm looking over this post and it seems kind of short and maybe unclear. Let me get an argument or two dusted off and I'll come back to it.

Best,
Ron

On 2001-12-24 15:57, Ron Edwards wrote:
Or, I think it's just because I've got the former game on the brain at the moment.

What techniques would you recomend for keeping a coherent group dynamic in a general which (in my experience) favors individuals as primary movers, while still maintaining the esential S&S crunchy goodness?

On 2001-12-25 15:29, Bailywolf wrote:

What techniques would you recomend for keeping a coherent group dynamic in a genera which (in my experience) favors individuals as primary movers, while still maintaining the esential S&S crunchy goodness?

Hello Again,

Well, S&S came last night and I got a chance to read most of it. I simply couldn't put it down and the only thing that prevented it from being a one sitting read was the fact that I started reading it rather late and I was overcome by sleep before I could finish it. Of course after reading it, I realize that my Relationship Tree comments above were probably not suited to the rest of the discussion. Damn my over eagerness. In any event here are my comments about the book.

1) The phrases 'page turner' and 'role-playing suplement' have NEVER been uttered simultaneously from my mouth before now. THIS is exactly what the role-playing world needs.

2) This is exactly the kind of book I was describing up in my 'Litterary Gamers Guide To...' thread. After reading it all I wanted was MORE. I didn't find anything missing but I'm a greedy bastard and I wanted MORE analysis, more food for thought, more of anything of this sort at all. Just more of everything. Note: This is a good thing. It's entirely possible that there isn't any more to be said and that the writing itself was just so compelling that I wanted more of it.

3) Here's my one and only gripe: I still don't understand why Chapter 7(?) The Anatomy of Authored Roleplaying was not moved from S&S into the main rule-book for the print version. I bought the .pdf of Sorcerer and Sorcerer's Soul basically looking for this EXACT essay. I had skipped purchasing S&S in .pdf format because I was not interested in running Sorcerer as a fantasy game. I only purchased it this time around because I discovered through The Forge that what 'fantasy' meant to me and what 'fantasy' meant to Ron were not the same thing. If it weren't for the interactions here on The Forge I never would have found the thing I was looking for in Sorcerer in the first place. Namely, the role-playing paradigm shift.

In fact, if I was one of those anoying nay-sayers of the role-playing world, I'd say that that Ron Edwards was leveraging his reputation for having somewhat radical role-playing notions and that spreading that vision out across all three books was a greedy money-grab on his part. But thankfully, I'm not one of those anoying nay-sayers.

Other than that the book is brilliant and between Sorcerer and Sorcerer's Soul my understanding of Sorcerer and it's goals feels 'complete.'

So, what are the future plans for Adept Press and/or The Sorcerer Line after Soul goes to print?

Jesse

Here's my one and only gripe...

Okay...since you started it Jesse...my one gripe is that the Les Evans artwork is too awesome to have been reproduced so small. The page design is excellent, and the sizing of the artwork layout-wise is excellent, but the artwork itself really demands to be reproduced larger. I think the detail of the artist's work has been done a bit of a disservice.

In fact, if I was one of those anoying nay-sayers of the role-playing world, I'd say that that Ron Edwards was leveraging his reputation for having somewhat radical role-playing notions and that spreading that vision out across all three books was a greedy money-grab on his part.

I don't own the .pdf either, but my impression is that the "Anatomy of Authored Roleplaying" has been substantially written over what it was previously, subsequent to the typesetting of the Sorcerer hardcover. I think Ron has said that it represents his "most current thinking" on Narrativist roleplaying.

Paul

On 2001-12-27 13:31, Paul Czege wrote:

I don't own the .pdf either, but my impression is that the "Anatomy of Authored Roleplaying" has been substantially written over what it was previously, subsequent to the typesetting of the Sorcerer hardcover. I think Ron has said that it represents his "most current thinking" on Narrativist roleplaying.

Hey,

Paul's right. Sorcerer and Sword underwent a substantial rewrite throughout 2001, and Chapter 7 had entered editing-draft form during GenCon. A number of hotel-room discussions entailed whipping out the scribbly pages and waving them around.

Also, just so people don't get the wrong idea, The Sorcerer's Soul is not being rewritten to the extent that the first supplement was. Lots of new art and a lots of clarifications, but not much difference of content.

Best,
Ron

Damnit.

Now I have to order S&S. I already have Sorcerer on the way, now I have to get this one too.

You see, I've been working on a sword and sorcery game for a couple of weeks now. I even broke out the old Conan stuff. And now I find out that Ron Edwards has already done that too. (you'd think that by the title I would have guessed that his book was about s&s...duh)

Damnit.

I can't wait to see it.

Before I read Sword and Sorcery I never read any Conan before. I went to my local used book store and actually found one written by Robert E. Howard, and let me say thank you for spurring me towards reading his work.

In the book, there is a letter written by Howard talking about how he didn't ever think of Conan chronologically. I think that Sword and Sorcerer does an excellent job of getting that feel that Howard tried to do with Conan.