Topic: [& Sword] Help On The Setting
Started by: BeZurKur
Started on: 8/5/2007
Board: Adept Press
On 8/5/2007 at 5:11pm, BeZurKur wrote:
[& Sword] Help On The Setting
I am planning a Sorcerer and Sword game. This is the first time I’ll be running (or even playing) Sorcerer. I get the impression that certain elements and directions need to be clearly defined. I read the core book and first supplement, as well as doing my homework: going back to the original Conan stories. Still, I’m not totally comfortable with what is in my head, on paper, and what to expect. Despite not completely getting it, I’m confidant this is the game to run it with.
Setting
I’ll start with the setting. I’m really into the Les Evans art in the supplement and I want that kind of feel. What I get from Evans’ art is barbarism versus civilization and the grey area in the transition. The game is set in that grey area. I am looking for feedback to what I have on the setting. The difficulty I’m having is I’m trying not to assume too much and leave it up to the players instead, but also offer enough to give them a base. I’m not sure how I did balancing the two. This is what I have:
Mankind is slowly clawing its way out of barbarism. It has been only a few short generations since they broke free from oppressors who were not human. They did so, not with the sword, but with the plow. Humans are making their way from the tribes into the stone cities of their previous dark masters. Tall doors and high ceilings are reminders of what still hunts them. Seven – now human occupied – cities are spread throughout Ashkindur. Their tall walls keep out an unwholesome past, but are useless to the threat within.
There is a whisper, however, in priestly rituals and sorcerer incantations. It mutters of demons and men as one. The secret of the powerful is not that all humans have a demon inside of them; it is that humans are tamed demons. Civilization is what tamed them, but if lulled too much, they will fall to the wilder humans and demons beyond their walls. Too reckless and they will destroy their civilization from inside. It is what happened countless times before: a cycle of rise and fall that’s left behind timeless ruins. That is the grey area for you to explore and decide where to draw the line. How will your actions affect the cycle?
Ashkindur Demonics
The demons are best categorized through the seven deadly sins: primal and selfish. They are also exemplified in the movers and shakers of the world. Player characters are those kinds of people. Their starting demons are possessor demons that somehow reflect the sin. This is a very open interpretation – such as the bloated body of a glutton being armor – to give each sin a practical game use. The need for the demon is to impact the world and gratify itself through change, possibly chaos. Failing that, the character becomes complacent, losing what makes him special. He can be a farmer or merchant and end up completely average.
There are living demons, who have given up their humanity entirely in their pursuit of gratification. They are what enslaved humanity before, and used people as the means to their selfish ends. Then are the demons who died – millennia or more old – who are no longer bound by flesh and many times more powerful. The most powerful and insane sorcerers, however, can even summon demons from other worlds, but these are completely alien and beyond understanding.
My chief concern about the demon definition is whether it is wide enough. I’d rather not have a small party of characters who all rage when possessed by wrath, or should I even care about that? Also, is it wrong to state everyone must make their first demon a possessor, and how does that impact their sorcerer abilities such as binding? I suspect that answer lies in the “In game terms, Conan is sorcerer” from page 41, but I’m definitely having some difficulty wrapping my head around that.
The sorcerer concept as presented in the Sorcerer and Sword is still intact. Most demons are Immanents, Beasts, and possibly Pagan Things. The Old Ones are the spirits that usually reside in the ruins, and True demons are the alien ones that only the insane summons. True demons will be extremely powerful but also have crazy needs. The undead are bodies separated from the spirit while it is still alive.
I’m scheduled for a Sorcerer game at GenCon and I’m hoping after playing it once, it will all gel much better. As it stands now, however: can it fly, and what should I do so it may?
Joel
On 8/5/2007 at 9:21pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
Re: [& Sword] Help On The Setting
Hi Joel!
You’re much more on the right track than off it. My first recommendation is to print out stuff you like most from Les Evans’ Gallery and share it with everyone. See what sort of inspirations come from your write-up combined with the images.
I think this bit is hard to understand – too much gibble-gabble (like the voice-over that begins an over-produced SF movie) and not enough of you, Joel, speaking to them, the people who are going to play:
There is a whisper, however, in priestly rituals and sorcerer incantations. It mutters of demons and men as one. The secret of the powerful is not that all humans have a demon inside of them; it is that humans are tamed demons. Civilization is what tamed them, but if lulled too much, they will fall to the wilder humans and demons beyond their walls. Too reckless and they will destroy their civilization from inside. It is what happened countless times before: a cycle of rise and fall that’s left behind timeless ruins.
I’d get rid of that entirely. All the stuff before that is great, though. I also like everything you have under the demonics, and I think you should include the up-front statement that demons do not have to be Possessors.
Best, Ron
On 8/6/2007 at 6:01am, BeZurKur wrote:
RE: Re: [& Sword] Help On The Setting
Consider that bit gone, and it didn't even hurt. I felt forced writing it and it shows. I'll use the idea to explain the Mystic Otherworld, but it will only remain as a note for myself. The players may explore it only if they are so inclined. I also reworded my notes to include that players do not need to have possessors, and even though I sorta said it before, putting it upfront like that took care of my own mental road blocks. Cool. I feel ready to move forward on this. Thanks, Ron.
Joel