First off, I hate the name.
I mean "At the Dawn"? How shallow and cheesy is that and completely uninventive is that? Seriously, "The Two Trees" would have been a better idea, or some elvish sounding name like Anuninlavalaein.

Second, yes, complete Tolkien rip-off. I'm safe only insofar as I haven't used copyrightable materials (ideas, rather than names).

On that note, I find thinking less of something because it is a homage or attempts to emulate a very specific pre-existant item of literature or film is a huge mistake. Thus, no offense to Mike and his judging, but I do not find that a thing needs originality in order to be worthwhile, that originality has all that much to do with quality, or that more originality somehow means "better."

Even so, and my rant aside, the Tolkien estate is pretty powerful and could probably squash it (and thus me) like a bug if they wished, so Mike is correct about the publishability of the game being questionable (though only from a "who could throw more money around" standpoint, not necessarily a legal one, where I am on firm ground).

So, why'd I do it? Why not change it a little more?
Simple: it's a Tolkien homage. Make no mistake, that's its whole purpose.
The Silmarillion is one of those long, beautiful epics that just screams to be made into a game -- especially given that it centers around REAL TOLKIENSINEN ELVES, not these crap modern fantasy rip-offs.

Elves are really Christian angels dressed up in fantasy's myths: immortal, powerful, wise, inspiring, full of magic and grace. They're the exact equivalent of the beautiful, powerful angels of Tolkien's religious beliefs: the paragons of good and the servants of God.

The superior, haughty elf is another foul modern archetype that disgraces the original conception by utterly failing to even remotely understand or emulate it. Its like a base orcish depiction of elves: what demons and their worshippers would make the elves out to be.

So, as I made it in homage to Tolkien's elves -- first-born and perfect, inacapable of failure at any task they set out to do because they hear the song of the world, the divine plan speaking directly to them -- that's what the mechanics thus had to emulate.

That said, "incapable of failure" makes for a pretty boring game, and even Tolkien's elves faced failure. I noted, however, that it often seemed to be a failure of the spirit, that it wasn't they couldn't do something, but that they decided NOT to.

I had begun my planning by thinking of making a game about playing the Gods of the Norse myths, with mechanics centered around the Nine Noble Virtues of the heathen. I used them as the centerpiece of this game as well because it seemed to fit.

However, even with that, the mechanics weren't working quite right -- just rolling Virtue didn't seem to do enough mechanically, and it felt rather empty. So I fought with myself over the creation of attributes, given that they might make it seem as though success and failure would hinge on something other than Virtue.

I also wanted Color in the game, specifically reinforced and used by the players. I wanted to avoid "good/bad writer" syndrome in this, where players are rewarded for being more prosaic and creative than other players, where the whole reward system is based on your skills as a player. As such, I wanted to detail clearly what sorts of statements (and the context to draw them from) would earn points of Virtue.

I hope I succeeded, and I'm curious what others think of that mechanic? I want to know if it avoids the usual "cool statement bonus" pitfalls of, say, Exalted or even Sorcerer? Or if I not clear enough in how it works?

One of the interesting developments in the mechanics occurred as a by-product of writing them: the way one conflict can lead into another, what Mike referred to as the roll-over mechanics.

I hadn't conceived any such possibility until I was right there writing it and saying to myself "Wow! That's an awesome idea!" even as the words spilled themselves out onto the page. Frankly, I consider that the best part of the design, besides paying homage -- possibly because it was just such a stunningly good idea, rife with possibility for play.

Now, Mike feels there's just not enough in the mechanics for players to DO. I'm afraid I'm not certain what he means, even while I agree with him.

Along these lines, I'm not sure I gained any insights, per se, into development or theory in writing my submission, though I "discovered" I suck at coming up with decent mechanics in anything under a year of development. Perhaps this is showing through in my writing and that's what Mike is reacting to?

Unlike mechanics, Color is something I can do on short notice. Unfortunately, as it is the former and not the latter that makes a game, I'm sort of out in the cold feeling like I ought to just stick to writing supplements for d20 and other people's games.

So, yes, the game is too short to really do much with right now, but I don't know what else to do with the mechanics, or if there is anything more that should be done with them. If I were to exapnd it, there would be alot more setting info (from where the Color would be drawn), and specific places, people and current events/future plans.

At least it pushed me to get some writing done under a deadline, and that part was fun (writing under a deadline is fun!? Unh, yeah, I think so, at least).

First, I didn't say that originality is a requirement, or that the deductions were for being unoriginal. In fact I complimented the choice of source material - I am certainly a fan. But just as I'm a fan, I've played a lot in Middle Earth. And, believe me when I say that there are some problems with doing so. The weight of the original setting is potentially crushing to the imagination of the potential players.

Now, that said, you actually only closely emulated Middle Earth. Closer than Midnight does, but not quite perfectly. So I think there's plenty of room to make the game it's own thing. And your mechanics are a good start.

On the issue of incompleteness, what I see is a game where either the players (and GM) will have read the Silmarillion, and therefore have some idea of what sort of action is supposed to take place, or they'll have to totally guess (meaning in practice that play won't happen). The monsters would help only slightly lending to a more D&D approach. What you need is a sample adventure, or something in the mechanics that drives the players to figure out what they want to do with their characters. Or some structure - make it mandatory to eventually face the Morgoth cognate.

Something to give a vision of how to play. You probably have one, but it needs to be in the text for people to read.

And yeah, of course it's the shortness of the deadline that caused it - same as causes the problems in everyone else's game. You'll note that the winner of the contest actually had precisely the same criticism of his game as yours did in terms of completeness. It would take a miracle of design for anyone to completely satisfy me in that category in under a week.

You're only human after all. The game is good. Work out some of the bugs and publish it.

Mike

Mike Holmes wrote: ...the Morgoth cognate.

Mike,

My bad, I completely misunderstood your meaning in your criticism. The above makes much more sense to me, and helps me guide development of the design.

The weight of the original setting is potentially crushing to the imagination of the potential players.

What you need is a sample adventure, or something in the mechanics that drives the players to figure out what they want to do with their characters.

Or some structure - make it mandatory to eventually face the Morgoth cognate.

Something to give a vision of how to play. You probably have one, but it needs to be in the text for people to read.

greyorm wrote:
My bad, I completely misunderstood your meaning in your criticism. The above makes much more sense to me, and helps me guide development of the design.

The weight of the original setting is potentially crushing to the imagination of the potential players.

Yes, definitely. I'm hoping there's enough divorce of the game's material from the source material that players would feel comfortable ignoring what they "know" to be the history of Middle-Earth (since it isn't actually Middle-Earth).

Both good suggestions, but the latter moreso than the former, in my opinion. I'll have to mull that over. A question arises about that, however: would that be so substantial an alteration/addition to the mechanics that it would not really qualify for the IGC:F publication you and Dav will be editing and putting out?

One of my first ideas, actually, that I abandoned for lack of time to develop decently: play occurred in "acts" of Dawn, Noon, Evening, and Nightfall. Each detailed various events that would occur within that Act -- the events the elves would have to deal with and react to. Each Act also had only certain Virtues that could be utilized within it, without penalty. Unfortunately, the supporting mechanics were a mess and more a headache than an innovation, so I scrapped the idea.

Agreed, completely. As you can tell, I originally did have a vision of play, but removed it because the mechanics simply weren't supporting it all that well, though the color text referencing various events remained to a degree.

Mike Holmes wrote: ....I think that it would be good to have a number of places where your version veered away from the canon in a very noticabable and undeniable way. Saying to the players that it's fine to do whatever they want with the canon.

Honestly, I really should read the Silmarillion again before I develop this any more. Last time I read it, and LotR, is creeping up on two decades ago.

Hence, I'm actually surprised that my memory appears to have been so sharp regarding the actual events of the tales. I was certain I had completely mangled the stories and they bore only a passing, though marked, resemblance to the originals.

As to the theme, it wasn't about inevitable failure at all. Quite the opposite, really...it's about the sacrifices and triumphs of virtue.

The goal is to return to the West, having secured the light of the Two Trees from the Enemy. The elf must gain Virtue in order to succeed...this begs the question: how?

I think that's where I'm looking to go with development of the "what do elves do" mechanics. Tying Virtue into defeating the Enemy, securing the Light, and, ultimately, a return to the West -- symbolizing a severing of earthly ties for the elf, and abandonment of the enchantment of a Creation not meant to be theirs.

Like fallen angels pulling away from the earthly world they became enamored of, in order to return to a purer, less sensually exciting but more fulfilling heaven.

More later, when it isn't 2am.

Alright, more thoughts and some design changes to At the Dawn. Which still needs a new name.

I'm thinking, honestly, that the best sorts of names for the game would be a combination of Finnish with Gaelic. It would be appropriately imitative of Tolkien's elvish, which had the same roots. I'll have to pull out my language creation tools and throw some word-lists together quick for download off a website, and to drop some names into the document itself.

I've tried to expand the details of Color and its use, and link it to another idea: that the goal of the elf is to overcome the temptation of Creation and return across the sea to the West. I'm thinking this means that a certain amount of Virtue is necessary for an elf to return; that he must pass at least one test of each of all nine Virtues.

I'm wondering if the idea of using only one Quality to resolve a conflict with someone or something makes any sense. Mechanically, it works, but I can see wanting to switch tactics in the middle of an Exchange -- perhaps bringing Skill to bear instead of Might when battling an enemy (described as tricking them somehow).

Perhaps total Virtue should be involved instead? I don't know how much I like that, however, as it more or less removes Quality from the equasion (it wouldn't be used for anything anymore).

I've added an "Equipment and Companions" section, which give bonuses to your Qualities (ie: a sword gives a bonus to your Might score when used to attack an enemy, etc). Companions, like a pack of wolves, or an eagle, or a force of men-at-arms, would also provide various bonuses.

Also, I've changed "Kindness" to "Hospitality" to prevent confusion that could arise between applicability of the various Virtues. This is perhaps my greatest concern regarding the game's mechanics: that the Virtues are not clearly defined enough that it is obvious which should be used when. Any insights into this would be appreciated.

I thought that the virtues seemed pretty straightforward (thought I was looking at the boyscout motto for a moment).

I like where you're going with the testing virtues idea. How about allowing the player to switch up what virtue he's using for tactical reasons, but then having a roll at the end of the test where it's seen if he learned anything (possible development mechanic here), based on how many rolls they made using the virtue in question. Or something along that rout?

Mike

I've trawled all over the place for a link to the game writeup, but only found a very cursory post about it in the IGC thread. What have I missed?

Simon Hibbs

Heya Simon,

The whole thing is in the IGC thread. The second post about the game, mind you, not the first. Here's the link. As for now, that's all there is.

Mike Holmes wrote: (thought I was looking at the boyscout motto for a moment).

I like where you're going with the testing virtues idea. How about allowing the player to switch up what virtue he's using for tactical reasons, but then having a roll at the end of the test where it's seen if he learned anything (possible development mechanic here), based on how many rolls they made using the virtue in question. Or something along that rout?

I think there could be an "appropriateness" modifier or something. Indeed, I don't think that every virtue works as well on every test. I think that's interesting itself. The player should have to explain how the virtue in question is applicable, and the GM can penalize if it's too much of a stretch.

For the werewolf, I might narrate hospitality as, "I back off, produce some meat from my pack, and offer it to the savage beast, to show I'm not an enemy." Then you as GM decide if you buy it or not.

Mike

I'm not sure how much I like that. Too much Fiat for my tastes. I hate Fiat. Fiat gives me a headache.

Anyways, I would think this to be a serious system-change, and thus not for this edition. I'd rather keep the changes simple enough that I can write them without feeling despondent and worried that it will be crap in play.

Any advice on fleshing out what I already have? Specific examples, please? (you need more advice on running the game isn't very helpful...because, well, I know I do. What, though?)

Anyone should feel free to answer.

greyorm wrote: Anyways, I would think this to be a serious system-change, and thus not for this edition.

Any advice on fleshing out what I already have? Specific examples, please?

Here's another update to progress on "At the Dawn":

1) As Dav was drooling over the possibility, I've created a cover pice for it. It ain't finished, but nearly so.

2) I can't find the name generation program I used to use to mix language sounds, so I haven't done much about names for things.

3) I've added the following piece about Color to the text and added a section on Returnign to the West. I desire commentary on both. Thanks!

Added to the section on Color

Each group should create a small “Color Bible” at the beginning of play, describing in short detail (a sentence or two) people, places, events, creatures, and items of the setting. It need not be exhaustive or all encompassing; this will help provide focus to play as players will be personally served by tying their characters and game events to the setting material and background during play, and form a basis for player Color-use by providing a common source for each member of the group from which to draw inspiration and broad details.

Returning to the West

Within them, all elves know they should return to the immortal and undying lands of the West, but Creation has ensnared them with its beauty, and they have lingered long. Before they can return to the West, they must recover and perfect their Virtue, and abandon their attachment to Creation.

At the beginning of play, the group should discuss the Temptation found in Creation each elf faces that keeps him specifically from returning to the West. This Temptation is the Enamoring, and is linked to a specific Virtue.

Of course, most of these situations entail the risk of Virtue loss, as well – for in striving against vice, more vice might be created, and another Virtue tested. Even if one is enamored of their lover, what would willingly abandoning her to torture and horror in the black pits of the Enemy mean for the elf’s soul? The elf must find his path through these tests himself, for there are no set answers to guide them.

For example, many elves love to stand upon the seashore, for they believe the Song of Creation can be heard most strongly there. Thus, it may be their attraction to the sea and it’s both dark-and-brilliant nature that keeps them bound to the East: they cannot bear to leave the seas of Creation behind.

The Enamoring here may be opposed to Honor – that the elf’s obsession keeps him from giving respect to all else which should be respected; or it may be opposed to Responsibility – the elf perhaps puts aside his other duties in order to stand at the seashore, including his greatest duty: to return to the West.

Another common example is many elves are motivated by the desire to reclaim the Light of the Two Trees. Their desire to reclaim the Light is what keeps them bound to Creation, thus their test of Virtue may be to have the Courage to abandon their self-proclaimed mission and return to the West.

The wilderness may test the elf’s resolve, he may love the freedom and beauty of the wilds, fooling himself, for true freedom would be in returning to the gentle hills and quiet forests of the West, not enslaved to his desire...thus the test would be against the Virtue of Truth.

Nor must it necessarily be Creation itself that ensnares the elf, but another elf there in Creation: a lover or the object of courting, whom the elf has devoted themselves to.

In order to overcome the Enamoring, each elf must have a rating of 10 in the specific Virtue Creation is testing before being able to return to the West. Once the elf reaches 10 in that Virtue, he is compelled to return across the seas, his attachment to Creation finally put aside.

Yet Creation is a difficult beauty to let go...even if the elf has a 10, he cannot have a rating of 0 in any other Virtue(s). He must maintain at least 1 point in all Virtues, or his way to the West is blocked, and he must strive to attain the Virtue necessary to return.

The immortal elves, in their endless spans of time may grow apart from one thing and towards another. During a game, any player may declare the elf’s Enamoring has changed from one subject to another; the Virtue being tested may also be changed at this time. It does not matter whether the Virtue is higher or lower than the current Enamoring. In this fashion, the player may exercise some control of how long his elf’s story plays out.

I'm also desiring to add something about how a 0 rating in a Virtue makes the elf susceptible to corruption by the Enemy; but I don't really know where to go with that, or if my Gamism is starting to leak into my Narrativism.

I'm working on some examples of Virtue challenges, and thinking about how play should go. I might need to run a playtest before I'm really able to add that text. Unfortunately, I have the feeling this might bump it above the 150% for the IGC publication.

greyorm wrote: 1) As Dav was drooling over the possibility, I've created a cover pice for it. It ain't finished, but nearly so.

2) I can't find the name generation program I used to use to mix language sounds, so I haven't done much about names for things.

Added to the section on Color

Each group should create a small “Color Bible” at the beginning of play, describing in short detail (a sentence or two) people, places, events, creatures, and items of the setting. It need not be exhaustive or all encompassing; this will help provide focus to play as players will be personally served by tying their characters and game events to the setting material and background during play, and form a basis for player Color-use by providing a common source for each member of the group from which to draw inspiration and broad details.

Returning to the West

Within them, all elves know they should return to the immortal and undying lands of the West, but Creation has ensnared them with its beauty, and they have lingered long. Before they can return to the West, they must recover and perfect their Virtue, and abandon their attachment to Creation.

The Enamoring here ... may be opposed to Responsibility – the elf perhaps puts aside his other duties in order to stand at the seashore, including his greatest duty: to return to the West.

Another common example is many elves are motivated by the desire to reclaim the Light of the Two Trees. Their desire to reclaim the Light is what keeps them bound to Creation, thus their test of Virtue may be to have the Courage to abandon their self-proclaimed mission and return to the West.

In order to overcome the Enamoring, each elf must have a rating of 10 in the specific Virtue Creation is testing before being able to return to the West. Once the elf reaches 10 in that Virtue, he is compelled to return across the seas, his attachment to Creation finally put aside.

Yet Creation is a difficult beauty to let go...even if the elf has a 10, he cannot have a rating of 0 in any other Virtue(s). He must maintain at least 1 point in all Virtues, or his way to the West is blocked, and he must strive to attain the Virtue necessary to return.

The immortal elves, in their endless spans of time may grow apart from one thing and towards another. During a game, any player may declare the elf’s Enamoring has changed from one subject to another; the Virtue being tested may also be changed at this time. It does not matter whether the Virtue is higher or lower than the current Enamoring. In this fashion, the player may exercise some control of how long his elf’s story plays out.

I'm also desiring to add something about how a 0 rating in a Virtue makes the elf susceptible to corruption by the Enemy; but I don't really know where to go with that, or if my Gamism is starting to leak into my Narrativism.

I'm working on some examples of Virtue challenges, and thinking about how play should go. I might need to run a playtest before I'm really able to add that text. Unfortunately, I have the feeling this might bump it above the 150% for the IGC publication.

Mike Holmes wrote: Sweet. Dav's not the only one drooling.

Just mix and match syllables of the original names until you come up with something that seems right? Would that work?

Sounds good. But it needs an example. And, yes, it should be usable as is. Sure the players should make the stuff up if they feel like it. But if there was a simple default to follow, it would make things much easier for first time players.

If this is the case, then Responsibility is always an option, no? Is it true that all virtues are applicable to all Emamorings? Or just this one? Might deserve some special mention?

I'm uneasy with the Two Tree's reference. Would it be too much to replace that with something else? Am I being overly paraniod?

Nice, simple, effective mechanics. My own interpretation would be that an elf with a zero doesn't want to go West. That is, either he effectively has a new vice keeping him from going, or he feels that he's not worthy.

Very cool, but leads right into a question that I have about the idea as a whole. What happens to the player of an elf that goes West? What if one player wants to play a really long game, and another player only wants to play for one session?

I think that's Narrativist. I can't see where the Step on Up would be, so it's really just a matter of the elf dabbling in low numbers - much like dabbling in low humanity for Sorcerer. The player can elevate these if he really wants to do so.

I'm not sure what corruption would do, however. Does the player lose the character? Can it be redeemed? Can a once corrupt elf ever go West?

Ok, folks, if you were playing in a game and your character's time was over by your choice, but everyone else kept playing, what would you want to see happen? What do you think would be a fair and reasonable way to deal with the game?

greyorm wrote: It's my feeling that a lot of the text of the game serves (in part) as the Color Bible already; but you are correct that a more specific and concentrated example needs to be created for players. I'll work on that, too. Just a page, or a half-page would be good, I think.

That's likely the advice I should give, while you can fit nearly any Virtue to nearly any situation, don't force-fit Virtues into situations. Go with the obvious and most inherently logical choice(s), rather than trying to argue your way into the connection.

I think you're being paranoid. I like the imagery, and I think it would take a great deal away from the Tolkienish heritage, diluting the homage, to change it.

Nice, simple, effective mechanics. My own interpretation would be that an elf with a zero doesn't want to go West. That is, either he effectively has a new vice keeping him from going, or he feels that he's not worthy.

It's never the latter, it's always the draw of Creation, of a vice born by being enamored and addicted to Creation.

Hrm, I hadn't considered that really...
The player leaves the game? All kidding aside, I'll have to think how to handle this. Ok, folks, if you were playing in a game and your character's time was over by your choice, but everyone else kept playing, what would you want to see happen? What do you think would be a fair and reasonable way to deal with the game?

Excellent questions, the very same I asked myself, actually, and thus exactly the reason I'm not sure where to go with it. Though I really like the idea and the evocative imagery of an elf falling to the Enemy, I'm not sure how much it adds to the game, or how to have it add anything right now.