Here are some ideas i am tryting to develop; some feedback would be appreciated.

1. Martian Book fo the Dead - a steampunk horror game. the premise revolves around the planet Mars being the home of the lands of the dead which are themselves a kind of shadowlands-mets-arabian nights setting. in the 19th century members of the Royal Society for Extraordinary Phenomena dsicover a means to travel to the lands of the dead, known locally as the Red Empire of the Scarab, This is the fables source of the wisdom held within the occult holy grail known as the Atlantean Book of the Dead (a recording of channled information taken from the lands of the dead). Through their investigation into the Red Empire the society members discover that something bad is brwwing in the underworld as the evil former ruler of the Empire seeks to overthrow his grandson in a quest for conquest that thretens the earth. the idea is ghostbusters meets cthulhu meets buffy (in terms of pulpy style) meets the mummy meets falkenstein. its implausible, fun horror with wierd science and b movie/steampunk sensibilities.

2. Olympus' Shadow - a war between the Band of Superheros and their enemies, the Crime Syndicate, reaches a cresendo as the two sides fac off aboard the Band's 'Olympus Alpha' space station; but in a blinding flash its all over as everyone is knocked out by an alien force. they awake to find themselves transported aboard a massive worldship amidst a lifelike replica of the earth that has since been destroyed. they were rescued by aliens who were unable to stop earth being destroyed. the heroes and villains learn these aliens have spent centuries tracking down the destructive aliens whom they regard as bitter enemies since theirt world shared the same fate. they have recruited the humans in order to preserve their culture and help save others with the hope of one day defeating these marauders. now the humans must put aside their differences in order to survive together and preserve their heritage and hopefully help other races.

***

what thinkest thou?

-S

Welcome to The Forge!

48 people have looked and only 1 reply, and that wasnt even regarding my ideas. perhaps not the place to post ideas then.

s

Hi and welcome to the Forge!

perhaps not the place to post ideas then.

signoftheserpent wrote:
what thinkest thou?

Hello,

I'm Ron - the Forge administrator who exercises authority about the boards' content. I'd like to welcome you here, as others have done, and to ask you to bear two things in mind. (1) Most people here take some time to think about a reply, rather than to type immediately upon reading a post. (2) Many people also like to let a discussion develop slowly before pitching in - this is not a "fire and forget" site, but a slow-paced symposium site. Therefore, for both these reasons, the number of "read" hits tends to skyrocket relative to replies. I suggest that you not pay much attention to the "read" hits, and also that you consider two to three days a reasonable window for replying, rather than a few hours.

As Roy pointed out, no really strong reply is possible because we don't have much to work with. It's hard to guess and then ask something.

Are you discussing these ideas in terms of ...

a) Publishing them for sales or wide-distribution purposes? If so, in what format?

b) Playing them among acquaintances only?

c) Making them available in a grassroots, non-distributed manner? (e.g. download on a website)

Providing an idea of the games' intended basic "identity" in these material terms will help me a lot, at least.

Best,
Ron

these are just ideas for setting that i have had (amongst others) that are wotht exploring. whether anythign will come of them is another matter. i would like to develop them as fully fledged games, but whether they will become professional products or remain just for my own enjoyment is also another matter.

i habe no idea what synnibarr is or why it would have any connection to concept 2 either.

thanks for the welcome.

s

s-

I like "Martian Book of the Dead." It's a really weird, exciting idea. Full of neat colour - the Red Empire of the Scarab's just cool. That said, I don't think you've told us what makes this a horror game; it looks like pure fantastical steampunk to me. Is there something Horrible in the Deeps of Space?

On the flip side, "Olympus' Shadow" turns me off. The whole benevolent aliens safety net, the worldship, superheroes, randomly evil aliens with no motivation...
...it's a lot of stuff, and I don't feel like everything works for everything else. The superheroes bit, especially, seems very much tacked onto a fairly workable space opera situation.
That said, I like the idea that the aliens only saved the humans to use them in their own petty vengeance war. (Okay, that's a highly unfavorable interpretation.) I see a lot of opportunities for the "nice aliens" to use their human buddies as ignorant pawns, or shock troops that make abig mess before they're shit down. Maybe that's what they do - throw civilizations at their counterparts to slow their pursuit.
Maybe they're really having a weird kind of civil war.
Maybe everything you know is wrong.

1. Der Martin Book of the Dead thing sounds like it would actually be a rolicking good Call of Cthulu by Gaslight game, if you removed the more pulpy elements. That'd be a great suprise to spring on the players at the end.
'You stand alone on the rocky red wastes of Mars, having traveled here to end the influx of horror to your home. From the mists and gravel, a low moan arises... as a thousand thousand thousand shades rise up. You recognize some faces- you dead mother, an old elementry teacher, a favorite friend who drowned a year ago. And, with dawning apprehension as the ghosts close in, you realize- there is no heaven nor hell for the dead. Nor do they even wander the earth or be reborn- only the dust trackless face of Mars, forever.'

Hell, I might steal that. ;)

Or, if you want to keep the more pulpy bits, then yeah- it virrtually is Adventure! campaign.

2. Eh... I'm more ambivelent about this one. Can't explain terribly well why, but it radiates unappealingness.

The Book of the Dead originated from a Vicotiran take on ghostbusters which is in itse;lf Lovecraftian (complete with supernatura;l literature). the people opf the Red Empire and Mars in general are the soul of the dead who now exist in a strange arabian nights style setting. they interact with the living through conventional hauntings and ghostly phenomena. the real demon and horrible monster types exist outside the Scarab Lands across somethign called the river of souls, which is a vast deep and wholly impenetrable canyon filled with fast flowing and turbulent soul energy. The Book of the Dead itself was the result of channeled messages from the Scarab Lands as set down in ancient atlantis.
the motive for the game derives from the formerly deposed King of the Scarab Lands, Imhotep, who became evil and power crazed and bent on preserving his rule forever. he was deposed by his son, Prince Anekh, who banished him to the river of souls. however imhotep survived and now marshals his forces in the hinterlands with armies of demons ready to strike at both the lands of the living and the Red Empire. he still has allies loyal to him in the Imperial court and has caused his on to be banished.
the players are members of a London based scientific organisation committed tyo studying the paranormal. they have met with a woman called Madame Blavaria who is a gifted if ill-reputable clairvoyant and the last remaining descdant of the atlantean tradition. she has made contact with a myseterious individual known as Anekh and they seek the scientists help in location the Book which anekh needs to defeat his father before it is too late.
as with ghostbusters, strange things begin manifesting all over the world as the forces of evil begin gathering. however the scientists are betrayed as one of their own, an inventor knwon as Edward Argossy Darklite, succeeds in inventing a means (thats the steampunk angle) to travel between the worlds. here he meets with imhotep's allies and offers his services to the deposed evil tyrant in order to himself gain immortaility.

thus the players fight monsters and ghosts through the fog shrouded streets of Old London town while their allies (those with the gift and other senstivies, including the mysterious Yogis of Swama Vishanti) work to find the Book and fight the denizens of the Red Empire (and beyond).

s

Actually, the second setting could be very interesting. A lot depends on the tone and themes you go for...

If I were developing it, I'd emphasize character motivation and conflict. Develop characters as superheroes or supervillains with standard motivations (Defend Justice, Punish Evildoers, Take Over The World, etc.) and then throw them into a situation where those motivations don't quite fit. How do they cope? Do they adjust their outlook (trying to fit their world-view onto an alien world)? Do they cling to their old goals no matter how irrelevant they are? Do they hold to their old rivalries or do they work together?

I think I might also leave it open as to whether the Earth was actually destroyed. Some may not trust the aliens (are we sure they even tried to save they earth?). Some might try to find their way back (to what?). These are potentially interesting options and probably shouldn't be automatically precluded.

I think that this would also work best if the player characters (who should, ideally, include both heroes and villains) are the ONLY survivors (as far as they know, at least... there may turn out to be other "teams" like them...). Otherwise I would find it very unlikely for the heroes and villains to work together.

~szilard

>If I were developing it, I'd emphasize character motivation and conflict. Develop characters as superheroes or supervillains with standard motivations (Defend Justice, Punish Evildoers, Take Over The World, etc.) and then throw them into a situation where those motivations don't quite fit. How do they cope?

thats really what its meant to be. the characters are meant ot be almost copies of exisitng comicbook types and the group of pcs meant to be made up of heroes and villains who are thrown together by circumstance as never before. there also needs to be some system whereby they are forced to act 'human' otherwise they wil lose their own identities. tnhis is why its important that earth doesnt exist anymore: they are the only living memor of their homeworld and their own internal conflicts could destroy that.

>I think I might also leave it open as to whether the Earth was actually destroyed. Some may not trust the aliens (are we sure they even tried to save they earth?). Some might try to find their way back (to what?). These are potentially interesting options and probably shouldn't be automatically precluded.

the aliens only ever preserve superhero types from whatever worlds they encounter (such as earth). they do not immediately admit this, but when interacting with other tlaiens this will become clear (interaction will have to happen as the aliens want them to become a cohesive force to beaet thir enemeis). the worldshp environemtn is meant to be a corss between the holodeck, the tardis and the fortress of solitie. it is a surrogate earth that cna be used for adventures, but not a complete gameworld and certainly not the focus of the setting.

>I think that this would also work best if the player characters (who should, ideally, include both heroes and villains) are the ONLY survivors (as far as they know, at least... there may turn out to be other "teams" like them...). Otherwise I would find it very unlikely for the heroes and villains to work together.

thje only stumbling block is in finding material for varying adventures. its too easy to have every adventure the same: pcs aboard ship help save another world from the marauders and bring them aboard the ship while their planet is destroyed.

s

the aliens only ever preserve superhero types from whatever worlds they encounter (such as earth). they do not immediately admit this, but when interacting with other tlaiens this will become clear (interaction will have to happen as the aliens want them to become a cohesive force to beaet thir enemeis).

Hello,

S, given your answers to my questions, I'm afraid that your ideas needed to be baked a bit more before presenting here.

It's fine to start with setting, as you've done. That would be a fine discussion here.

However, there doesn't seem to be anything in your mind about all this but setting. Unless I'm mistaken, you aren't working on games at all - you're chatting about neat ideas that could be a game, someday, if someone were to build a game around them.

Discussing settings as ideas, without reference to a game system or other aspects of real role-playing games, isn't useful here. At best, it's a creative idea-fest which is better held elsewhere (e.g. private email, discussion lists). At worst, it can go on forever and ever, with no actual ground gained toward the existence of the game itself.

However, I could be wrong. Maybe you are interested in setting up a more cohesive set of concepts about all aspects of your games, but aren't sure how to get started. In that case, here's my question for you: why not use GURPS? These ideas are very much like the stuff that used to fill the GURPS fanzines back in the 1980s. Or if not GURPS, why not use JAGS? Or D20? Or Fudge? Or any number of other useful game-engines specifically designed to plug-in settings?

In other words, I don't see any particular reason why these ideas merit building unique role-playing games around them. That reason may exist - I'm not saying it doesn't. I am saying that it's not showing up in this thread.

Best,
Ron

they are ideas for possible game settings, just the same as any other set of ideas. people will either like them or hate them or not give a hoot either ways. seems a bit odd to say that this isnt the palce to discuss such ideas, however i wont bother then if thats the way it is.

s

Hi S,

Welcome to the Forge!

I especially liked the idea of the Martian Book of the Dead. I'd love to see it made available in a "here's the setting, here's the rules" kind of format.

I think Ron was trying to nudge you in a positive direction. We can discuss ideas, but really, ideas are the easy part. What we often end up discussing is what rules are suited to what you do in the game. You can adapt an existing system or create an entirely new system, but that step--that marriage of system to setting--is crucial in producing a "game."

And I guess that's what the Forge is about for me: creating games, whether with a garage-band do-it-yourself ethic, or with the intention of becoming the next WotC. Discussing ideas is great, as long as it has that spin: "Here's an idea for a setting; what mechanics would you be curious about within that setting?", that sort of thing.

I'd like you to stay on the Forge. All I'd ask is that you start to ask yourself the tough questions about how this will eventually look in the hands of a "player" you've never met, and how it will get to them.

Best,

Dave Panchyk

Hello,

Dave said it really well. Setting's nice, OK, you have some setting.

Now what?

Best,
Ron

i dont think you can do anything until you have all the setting. mechanics are trhe easy part, creating a consistent and exciting world without soudnding cheesy, derivative or just plain poorly written is the hard part. for me a few paragraphs isnt enough for a setting. mechanics i think come last.

a

Alright, let me take a stab at this - fine, never mind the mechanics. Not eveyone's going to agreee with your assesment there, but let's not get into it. I'll simply say - you have ENOUGH setting to get some people interested. Seems to me what you need isn't more of that (setting), but a wider description of what this project is as an RPG.

Let me ask some of the Forge standard/classic questions - what do the PCs do in this setting? Why do the player's care about it? Or another approach - what's your setting for? What are you going to do to support that - provide "classes"? Write lot's of descriptive text? Either might not be seen as a great solution by some folks here, but if they're your planned method(s), let us know and those who think it's a bad idea will tell you why.

Knowing bits like that, folks can comment about aspects of the setting that are well-suited to your concerns, parts that might not be, areas that need more details, areas where details won't matter, and etc.

For example, in your setting 1 "implausible, fun horror with wierd science and b movie/steampunk sensibilities" sounds like you aren't very concerned with "realism", so I wouln't think you need a plausabile scientific rationale for much in your setting. I'd encourage you to look at Jared Sorensen's OctaNe for a game with some of this feel - and if you like the fit, I could easily see your setting as an OctaNe add-on.

But maybe you disagree - maybe you wanted a consistent scientific system for this world. Or you know OctaNe, and think the rules are "too light" for what you're going for. These are the kind of issues we can get up on the table and discuss - places where other people can contribute to your game creation effort. Without something like this, I'm not sure what we can say.

Another example - your description implies the PCs are all Earth-based - London, in specific. Why? If the Red Empire is where all the action is, why aren't we there?

I'm trying to find more ways to "hook" the info out of you - let us know where you want to take this thing, and you'll probably find some folks around here eager to help.

And I hope THIS post helped,

Gordon

>Alright, let me take a stab at this - fine, never mind the mechanics. Not eveyone's going to agreee with your assesment there, but let's not get into it.

im not saying that mechanics arent important at all, just that the setting has to be set down before you design mechanics.

>I'll simply say - you have ENOUGH setting to get some people interested. Seems to me what you need isn't more of that (setting), but a wider description of what this project is as an RPG.

what do you mean? its just an idea for a game, nothing more nothing less.

>Let me ask some of the Forge standard/classic questions - what do the PCs do in this setting?

they investigate paranormal phenomena against a nineteenth century pulp backdrop. the deeper storyline revolving around the deopsed king of the lands of the dead gives motive to their actions and the lands themselves are just a contrivance for strange science and high adventure in an alien bckdrop.

>Why do the player's care about it?

i dont understand this question. plkayers like whatever they like, there is nothing inherent in this setting that makes more people like it than perhaos they might. if the ideaas appeal to people then they will like it.

>Or another approach - what's your setting for?

these questions just seem strange to me, i dont understand how they relate to this as they dont seem to make any sense. its not 'for' anything other than a game setting.

>For example, in your setting 1 "implausible, fun horror with wierd science and b movie/steampunk sensibilities" sounds like you aren't very concerned with "realism", so I wouln't think you need a plausabile scientific rationale for much in your setting.

it isnt meant to eb realistic in an objecxtive sense, just enough to suspend disbelief. howver it shoudl be internally consistent and accurate.

>Another example - your description implies the PCs are all Earth-based - London, in specific. Why? If the Red Empire is where all the action is, why aren't we there?

it isnt where all the action is, however the pcs are likely to be human (ie not dead) as a default since they privde the focus for the setting and make the strange stuff seem strange by contrast.

>I'm trying to find more ways to "hook" the info out of you - let us know where you want to take this thing, and you'll probably find some folks around here eager to help.

what exactly are you asking me?

martin

Hi Martin,

Your setting ideas are fine, but as simply setting, they are not playable. If you were to give further information, such as, "I'm going to use GURPS/D20/my own system/etc.", your settings would actually be able to garner some useful criticism as opposed to simply, "I like/don't like it" opinions.

Right now, you might take a look around this Forum, and you'll find very few posts with "kewl ideas" because ideas alone don't make good games. Cool ideas are great, as sources of inspiration and goals, but not as actual finished anythings. No one can give useful feedback to what amounts to vaporware, or product that does not yet exist.

As far as cool ideas go, there's a mountain of books, movies, myths, comics, tv shows, and videogames to be mined for ideas. There are very few systems or mechanics in existance(by comparison) to translate a cool idea into a good game.

what do you mean? its just an idea for a game, nothing more nothing less.

>Your setting ideas are fine, but as simply setting, they are not playable.

at the moment no, and im not saying they are playable yet. they are just some ideas i wanted to get some feedback on.

>If you were to give further information, such as, "I'm going to use GURPS/D20/my own system/etc.", your settings would actually be able to garner some useful criticism as opposed to simply, "I like/don't like it" opinions.

does the setting need mechanics in order to garner discussion? surely the setting can be judged on its own merits. mechancis can come later, there is no rush. im working at my own pace.

>Right now, you might take a look around this Forum, and you'll find very few posts with "kewl ideas" because ideas alone don't make good games.

perhaps there has been a misunderstanding; i am aware of this fact and as i say i dont claim these ideas are complete as games at the moment.

>Cool ideas are great, as sources of inspiration and goals, but not as actual finished anythings. No one can give useful feedback to what amounts to vaporware, or product that does not yet exist.

no but you can comment on ideas so far, or works in porogress. i dont think you need mechancis to be able to judge a setting, and im not asking you to judge this as a complete game.

>And herein lies the problem.

im not usre there really is a problem, it is after all just a discussion and i havent made any claims to be a professional working on a load of hot air. its just a private project that - who knows -may go somewhere and make a few bucks. then again it might not. at this stage none of that is relevant, and thats my point.

>A good idea("World Peace" "Be Nice" "Don't trip, be cool") is just an idea without a means of making it reality. What people are asking you boils down to two questions:

thats a little harsh, i hvent said i have no intention of producing mechanics, or 'making it reality'.

>1) Are you going to do anything more with these ideas, such as create mechanics to go with them? If not, this forum really isn't going to help you out much. This is a game design forum, not a place to spew random thoughts.

what i do with the ideas depends on two things 1) whether i think the setting ideas are compelte enough to warrant mechanic ideas (ie whether they are playable and workable and not just vague impressions), and b) the rest of my life - im not actualy doing this for a living. at least not yet! therefore there is no immediate rush to fill in the blanks, and i dont feel its a competition.

>2)What mechanics would you use for these games? An existing system, or one of your own making?

i would prorbably use my own ideas which would be simple and probably along the lines of games liek feng shui (although sans the kung fu), tri stat and other minimal systems. maybe a fe gimmicks for added effect, possible some conversion notess. i think unique ideas are best because a) they dont infirnge on copyright, and b) they can be tailored to the setting better). using feng shui as an example, that style of customisable archetypoes is a good idea because it makes character creation quicker, focuses the players more, and is a good compromise between predesigned characters and total player freedom. the game would have basic stats and skills most likely, along with associated rules for 'wierd science', the supernatural/clairvoyance/mediumship (or magic, if you like), maybe some fear rules, although turning pcs into mental jelly isnt treally the focus. the system would probaly be designed to accomadate derring do action as well as clever thinking, although not outright stunts and crazy fighting styles (as with FS).

however i dont want to address this until i think the ideas are ready simply because i dont think its the right way to design a game. what i need to know is how much setting is required. do people _need_ hundred of pages of discourse on life n the age of steam, theories on mysticsm and science as well as a compelte tour, maps, history and social study of the lands of the dead, all beautifully illustrated by the Artis OF The Moment.

or not?

>How do we take your ideas, and implement them in the fashion that you see fit?

at the moment, you dont. however if this isnt a disucssion place for setting ideas, then thats fine. i dont see any need to rush anything as im not working to anyones deadline - and im not getting paid.

>You can play Feng Shui, Exalted, Ninjas & Superspies, and GURPS China/Japan, and get a million different styles of play, the big difference is the mechanics more than the setting. What mechanics would you use for your settings?

you woudl get a million different styls of play for any game, mechanics or otherwise.

s

OK, I'm going to jump in here and give it a shot.

There's really not much I can comment on beyond whether I like the basis for your setting or not. Here's what I think of each potential setting:

"Olympus' Shadow"

Nothing about this potential setting strikes me as interesting or fun, so there's really not much feedback I can give you on this. It's just not my cup of tea.

"Martian Book of the Dead"

This potential setting has some real possibility for further development, but I must admit the "Mars being the Land of the Dead" element really turns me off.

I think it would work much better if you just keep "The Land of the Dead" as an unspecified location, like the Otherworld is in old Celtic fairy tales. Perhaps you can get to it from where "The Veil Between The Worlds" is the thinnest, such as at "Places of Great Suffering" or some such thing.

in the 19th century members of the Royal Society for Extraordinary Phenomena dsicover a means to travel to the lands of the dead, known locally as the Red Empire of the Scarab

Through their investigation into the Red Empire the society members discover that something bad is brwwing in the underworld as the evil former ruler of the Empire seeks to overthrow his grandson in a quest for conquest that thretens the earth.

the idea is ghostbusters meets cthulhu meets buffy (in terms of pulpy style) meets the mummy meets falkenstein. its implausible, fun horror with wierd science and b movie/steampunk sensibilities.

the game would have basic stats and skills most likely, along with associated rules for 'wierd science', the supernatural/clairvoyance/mediumship (or magic, if you like), maybe some fear rules, although turning pcs into mental jelly isnt treally the focus.

the system would probaly be designed to accomadate derring do action as well as clever thinking, although not outright stunts and crazy fighting styles (as with FS).

what i need to know is how much setting is required. do people _need_ hundred of pages of discourse on life n the age of steam, theories on mysticsm and science as well as a compelte tour, maps, history and social study of the lands of the dead, all beautifully illustrated by the Artis OF The Moment.

you woudl get a million different styls of play for any game, mechanics or otherwise.

>There's really not much I can comment on beyond whether I like the basis for your setting or not. Here's what I think of each potential setting:

at shis stage feedback is all i want, perhaps practical suggestions. you may or may not like the ideas.

>This potential setting has some real possibility for further development, but I must admit the "Mars being the Land of the Dead" element really turns me off.

its meant to be a location in the way that John Carter's mars is (not literally, its a different place). somewhere that an be travelled to where adventure can be had. its connection to earth just makes it seem more sinister and strange - that it is the land of the dead.

>I think it would work much better if you just keep "The Land of the Dead" as an unspecified location, like the Otherworld is in old Celtic fairy tales. Perhaps you can get to it from where "The Veil Between The Worlds" is the thinnest, such as at "Places of Great Suffering" or some such thing.

while there needs to be more connection between the two worlds, that sort of thing i find a bit cheesy. im not keen on treading the boards with the usual horror ideas (its meant to be more wierd than horror - as if it were filmed in the 50's by ed wood).

>

snipped

>You definitely want full-fledged magic. How else can I have my hero mow down an army of zombies created by the Nazi necromancers with a flamethrower? :-)

problem with magic is that it has been done and done and done. if magic was used, it would be of the kind used in castle falkenstein, and more akin to the 'mandrake the magician - stage conjuro ar hetype (at least in appearance!). this means the introduction of secret societies, however i do not want to get bogged down int eh havy duty politics and realim' of real world secret societies because i think the game would suffer. gms can use them and pay lip service to them if they want, but i dont hink the game would benefit from having such things codified.

whats wrong with just using a flamethrowe, or gunpwoeder or whatever?

>I would NOT include any kind of fear rules. Fear is for those panzy investigators from that OTHER game. :-)

true enough, but it can be used as a weapon by powerful evil entities and gods and spirits which is somethign i dont think should be overlooked. fear mechanics if done right can serve a useful purpose which is to strike fear into the hearts of players when they know their characters are facing real stress.

>I would definitely play up the pulp influence. Think Indiana Jones and The Mummy.

tom strong's phantom autogyro, the league of extraordinary gentlemen, hohn carter, dr strange, even the nevermen comic book, lovecrafdt/lumley amongst others. but yes i think about the mummy quite a lot as it was a very good example of the genre.

>Definitely play up the derring-do, but don't rule out stunts. Don't design the game to prevent player creativity. Give your players the power to tell the story they want to tell.

by stunts i meant in terms of fengshui, such as dancing on bullets or gliding brefoot acorss cable car wires.

>No, you don't need that much setting. In fact, I believe that much info can be counter-productive to people who actually play your game.

maybe but if i wanted to someday pu t the game on the market, i wonder if that amount of information woudl be enough.

>Using Sorcerer as an example: Ron Edwards used a very strong concept (you are a sorcerer and you can summon demons) and combined it with a very strong premise (what will you do to get what you want?). The rest of the book goes into helping you tailor that concept and premise to your own setting and explaining the rules. I think it was a very novel way to approach a game and it worked perfectly for Sorcerer.

well ive necver read that, but does it have a setting that might require more description than usual (if its not set in the modern world with very few changes).

s

*pokes at his eyes*

Sign, please. Quite apart from any discussion on game mechanics or setting or concept or theme... please... take five seconds to open up Word (or the spelling and grammer checker of your choice), type your post into it, spell and grammer check it, then copy/paste it over to here. As is, your typing is an impediment to understanding.

Sidenote- Profuse apologies in advance is english isn't your first language.

First, a thought on 'I need a complete setting before I can contemplate rules'. I study linguistics as a hobby. As a consequence, many games I run- especially high fantasy sorts -feature highly detailed naming schemes and alternate languages. However, I don't try and create a completely unified grammer before using a conlang. Does that stop me from using the skeleton of what I've created to help enhance the world? Hell no! The language frequently devolps side by side with the rest of the world.

(For the unitiated, is the entire phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, lexicon, and other bits I don't remember goes into a grammer- and how these parts relate to one another. In the entire field of linguistics, there are no complete real language grammers- they are a holy grail of the field, akin to the UFT. Anywho. :)

Likewise, no one has ever written a 'complete' setting, which perfectly integrates every historical, sociological, social psychological, and whatever other fields of science you want to use-ological aspeect into a wholly imaginary reality. No complete setting has ever been written. 'Waiting' for a complete setting before moving on is akin to waiting for a no legged horse to finish the race. It might happen, eventually. Maybe. But it's seems like stalling.

On the question of originality- nothing's going to be completely original any more. Nor is it a good goal to try, as far as I'm concerned. Neither of your ideas are /original/ (hence why we can easily trace their origins), but that doesn't make them more or less good.

---

Now, on to more setting specific stuff!

*Magic as the Tool of the Devil: You said you wanted magic to mostly fall in the domain of secret societies, but didn't want to define those secret societies so as to avoid getting bogged down in the politics. Fair enough. But if you're going to have Evil Spirits and Eviler Gods, then having Magic becomes simplier- it's just an imitation of those powers, at lesser (or, for an amusing twist, greater) scale.

*Fear: Heroes should be Deathly Afraid of something dirt common. Hoardes of zombi? No problem! Rampaging Persian Demon? Feh. But keep those damn mice away from me! IMO, that fits the pulpy genre nicely, and could providee some amusing comic relief/story potential.

*The Cheese Factor: You're talking about making Mars the Land of the Dead, the Red Egyptian Empire, which hath Imohtep and legions of zombies as an integral part of the setting. You're using the Mummy and Indiana Jones as source material. Embrace the Cheese. As is, this could not be a deadly seriously played game- the echoes of 1920's pulp are entirely too strong.

And if you take out the elements which make it cheesy, what you're left with is, essentially, Cult of Cthulu by Gaslight. Which is fun, but I don't think what you want.

*White Hats and Black Headgear: There's nothing wrong with clearly defined good and evil. Unless one of the themes you intend to explore is 'What is morality?', then clearly and simply defining Who's Right and Who's Evil won't hurt the game, it'll help it be providing a clearer focus.

*Secret Societies are Bad!: You seem to have an inherent bias against secret societies which puzzles me. In particular, your note of 'Their secrets are more like privacy', when contrasting with the Masons or he Rosy Cross. First, are you refering to the /actual/ Masons, or more the Pulpy version of them (IE, more akin to Umberto Eco's Mason's, or the Illumanati, etc- while I realize that UE isn't terribly pulpy in and of himself, the secret societies of Focault's Pendulum are a good model for pulpy SS IMO).

In RL, bastard that it is, most secret societies... aren't. Terribly secret, that is. People tend to either know or be able to learn /of/ them fairly easily, and to learn what they're doing and why they're doing it (at least in vauge terms) with little more difficulty. But they are still /secret/, beecause some aspects of the society act to maintain their privacy from the outside world.

Hell, most large businesses are as much secret societies as RL secret societies. They have trade secrets and jargon and are selective with membership... Hm. Note to self, make a game exploiting this similarity. :)

Of course, if you're talking about the more pulpy sorts of secret societies, that's something else. But ever so terribly in genre, and so rich with potential stories. What if someone (man or beast? Infiltrator or traitor?) steals some Valuable Artifact from the Secret Vault? Or what if you go to do the same to a rival? What if a plucky reporter threatens to expose you to the World, only to need rescuing for Supernatural Muckitymucks?

*This before That: Specifically, 'I can't design secret societies exploiting the connection between the world until I design those connections'. After which, you'll make magic and SS that conform to those connections. Why not go the other way? What sort of magic and SS would make for a good story? What sort of connection to Mars do they require? Alright, that connection (or something similiar) is what exists. You don't have to draw the fault lines before deciding where land will be- you don't have to concieve of the reality of the situation before deciding how humans react to that reality. Let humans react in an amusing way, and figure out what they're reacting to.

*Metaplot: What you describeed was metaplot. Justifying all the Strange Supernatural Events down to a small set of actions is metaplot. Why not get rid of it and have 'We don't /know/ why Strange Supernatural Events are happening'- leave it undefined in the core setting. Then, adventures can be based around discovering that very thing- and possibly shutting it off or leaving it on or even making it bigger.

For your game, that's Imhotep. For mine, it's the King in Yellow. Or whatever. :) It's bad form (IMO) to write setting that you expect DMs to casually chunk. It leads to things like Nobilie-Mage, one of my more awful crossbred bastard children that plas far better than it has a right to. :)

Agh. I'd write more, but breakfast calls... bagels...

>Does that stop me from using the skeleton of what I've created to help enhance the world? Hell no! The language frequently develops side by side with the rest of the world.

Well that’s great if it works for you. However, I would feel better designing this if I knew the setting was complete enough, before getting into mechanics. I happen to think that's a more systematic way of working. It may work differently for other genres or types of setting.

>Likewise, no one has ever written a 'complete' setting, which perfectly integrates every historical, sociological, social psychological, and whatever other fields of science you want to use-ological aspect into a wholly imaginary reality.

Well there is complete and there is obsessively complete.

>On the question of originality- nothing's going to be completely original any more. Nor is it a good goal to try, as far as I'm concerned. Neither of your ideas are /original/ (hence why we can easily trace their origins), but that doesn't make them more or less good.

Indeed, but I think you should strive to be original because in that process you will perhaps produce better ideas. They may ultimately not be original per se, but they will be better for it.

>*Magic as the Tool of the Devil: You said you wanted magic to mostly fall in the domain of secret societies, but didn't want to define those secret societies so as to avoid getting bogged down in the politics.

Only in the sense of the example I used, Castle Falkenstein, which has a magic system and ethos that suits the setting very well.

>Fair enough. But if you're going to have Evil Spirits and Eviler Gods, then having Magic becomes simpler- it's just an imitation of those powers, at lesser (or, for an amusing twist, greater) scale.

There would invariably be the aspect of magical power within this setting (were magic to be used) that would incorporate the ambitious adept; the seeker after power that craves and covets the power of the lands of the dead and its greater denizens.

>*Fear: Heroes should be Deathly Afraid of something dirt common. Hoardes of zombi? No problem! Rampaging Persian Demon? Feh. But keep those damn mice away from me! IMO, that fits the pulpy genre nicely, and could provide some amusing comic relief/story potential.

That, I think, is a player choice. I don’t think you can make rules that would work that way because you would then have an army of characters who, while able to look scaly death in the face, run screaming from a creaking door. I would not like to encourage that with rules because it seems counter intuitive.

I suspect that all you would really need is a Fear effect for certain creatures, which can be used for powerful npc's. This can force a player to make a roll to avoid being cowed or terrified by the source thereof. The lotr RPG has good fear rules.

>*The Cheese Factor: You're talking about making Mars the Land of the Dead, the Red Egyptian Empire, which hath Imohtep

It’s Egyptian in eel because the near east has plenty of mysticism and suitable atmosphere and is suitably non-western. The name imhotep may very well change as I couldn’t think of anything else, but there is no need as yet to tie it into any persons real or imagined ;)

>and legions of zombies as an integral part of the setting.

They may be, I haven’t given any thought to actual monsters yet.

>You're using the Mummy and Indiana Jones as source material. Embrace the Cheese. As is, this could not be a deadly seriously played game- the echoes of 1920's pulp are entirely too strong.

Yes but there is cheese and thee is _cheese_.

>And if you take out the elements that make it cheesy, what you're left with is, essentially, Cult of Cthulu by Gaslight. Which is fun, but I don't think what you want.

Its not quite cthulhu, I think that world is a different beast. I use Lovecraft as an influence only in his more sci-fi leanings (which is why I mention lumley).

>*Secret Societies are Bad!: You seem to have an inherent bias against secret societies which puzzles me.

No bias, I just don’t want to get into writing up real world secret societies because they are so complex. If people want to use them, that's fine, but I don’t want the setting to be bogged down by trying to tie all aspects into real world history or cosmology or events that have happened.

>In particular, your note of 'Their secrets are more like privacy', when contrasting with the Masons or he Rosy Cross. First, are you referring to the /actual/ Masons, or more the Pulpy version of them (IE, more akin to Umberto Eco's Mason's, or the Illumanati, etc- while I realize that UE isn't terribly pulpy in and of himself, the secret societies of Focault's Pendulum are a good model for pulpy SS IMO).

What that statement means is that the Society itself is really just a science club for grown up boys. It’s not especially secret, nor is it really a society (and it certainly doesn't have bizarre rituals or beliefs - as such). Thus they work in private - not in secret; they work for their own benefit ultimately as a sort of professional hobby, or extension of their professional careers as most of them are academics and intellectuals anyway.

>In RL, bastard that it is, most secret societies... aren't. Terribly secret, that is. People tend to either know or be able to learn /of/ them fairly easily, and to learn what they're doing and why they're doing it (at least in vague terms) with little more difficulty. But they are still /secret/, because some aspects of the society act to maintain their privacy from the outside world.

All this discussion is partly why I don’t want to incorporate real world secret societies at any great length. Groups such a those used by the writers of Indiana Jones or the mummy are ok, but I regard them more as cultists as those characters fulfil those sorts of roles by and large.

>*Metaplot: What you describeed was metaplot. Justifying all the Strange Supernatural Events down to a small set of actions is metaplot. Why not get rid of it and have 'we don't /know/ why Strange Supernatural Events are happening'- leave it undefined in the core setting. Then, adventures can be based around discovering that very thing- and possibly shutting it off or leaving it on or even making it bigger.

I like to have a rationale for the elements of the setting otherwise it becomes vague and pointless. It isn’t a metaplot because there is not ongoing storyline decided by me alone. There are just setting elements. If we take away everything but the strange supernatural happenings then the setting becomes redundant and the point of designing this game is lost for me. I think there is a difference between a metaplot, which is an ongoing thing that restricts the flow of information to the gm, and a structured setting. To me its no different than the backstory of Castle Falkenstein which says Second Compact - the default pc group - was set up to combat the unhealthy influence of the Unseelie on scientific and social progress. I don’t call that a metaplot.

>For your game, that's Imhotep. For mine, it's the King in Yellow. Or whatever. :) It's bad form (IMO) to write setting that you expect DMs to casually chunk. It leads to things like Nobilie-Mage, one of my more awful crossbred bastard children that plas far better than it has a right to. :)

I don’t expect players to ditch anything, you misinterpret me. However gm's invariably edit games and ideas for their own use and I have no problem with that, nor do I feel that I should worry about it. You cant please everyone. You cannot design a certain typ of game for people who are not really into that sort of thing just so they can have an easier time rewriting your ideas. You can bear them in mind, but that's it.

S

Hi S,

Perhaps some examples would help. Can you give me at least one example, preferably more, of the following? That is, role-playing game titles?

Very incomplete setting

Almost-complete setting

Just right: complete setting, not too much, not too little

Obsessively complete setting

Best,
Ron

what i need to know is how much setting is required. do people _need_ hundred of pages of discourse on life n the age of steam, theories on mysticsm and science as well as a compelte tour, maps, history and social study of the lands of the dead, all beautifully illustrated by the Artis OF The Moment.

as an aside i was tempted to base the culture of the lands of the dead on oriental culture and not 'faux-arabian'. its still a possibility, but with the stuff written for wraith, it kinda feels derivative; but it might work for a 'chinese sorcery' angle/fu manchu vibe. certainly i think chinese magic is very evocative.

s

at shis stage feedback is all i want, perhaps practical suggestions. you may or may not like the ideas.

while there needs to be more connection between the two worlds, that sort of thing i find a bit cheesy. im not keen on treading the boards with the usual horror ideas (its meant to be more wierd than horror - as if it were filmed in the 50's by ed wood).

good enad evil are more black and white than perhaps is realistic.

the setting has to be different - every 'product' (whether amatuer or otherwise) i think needs that edge to make it stand out feom the crowd.

its not a metaplot, its a reason why supernatural things are happening (at least in greater number). its ot good having the pcs invest one or 2 vague hauntings once a year. its supposed to be the same overall reason that Gozer and the apartment building served in ghostbusters.

darklite and imhotep are m,ajor npc villains but they dont restrict the gm, they are just liteal examples that cna be used to show how the setting works and what sort of villains are needed.

thats not right at all. the lands of the dead by and large dont use technology; darklite has introudced an unstable element to the scarab society which can be used as a weapon for evil, but its not about building massive steam powered weapons of destruction or soul sucking.

Roy wrote:
Ask yourself what your goals are for this game.

signoftheserpent wrote:
how does an rpg have a goal?

problem with magic is that it has been done and done and done.

this means the introduction of secret societies, however i do not want to get bogged down int eh havy duty politics and realim' of real world secret societies because i think the game would suffer.

gms can use them and pay lip service to them if they want, but i dont hink the game would benefit from having such things codified.

whats wrong with just using a flamethrowe, or gunpwoeder or whatever?

fear mechanics if done right can serve a useful purpose which is to strike fear into the hearts of players when they know their characters are facing real stress.

well ive necver read that, but does it have a setting that might require more description than usual (if its not set in the modern world with very few changes).

Just a quick note Roy- I, as a DM, have gotten fear from my PCs. It was their first experience with Call of Cthulu- a one shot, not lights, one candle per player. When they were rendered dead or insane, the candle was snuffed out.

The last player had a nightmare that night. Of a four armed, eight foot tall raven beaked god that /just wouldn't die/. The others were dead or mad by that point.

My job here is done. ;)

>The genres you mentioned are cheesy. Mars being the Land of the Dead is cheesy. The Royal Society for Extraordinary Phenomena is cheesy. As Drew so eloquently put it, it's time to "Embrace the Cheese". (That needs to be on a t-shirt, Drew!)

Yes they are cheesy, i'm not denying this, However I think there is a way of doing 'cheese' that doesn’t involve ruining the game by just pandering to really really hackneyed stereotypes. Most every game, for instance, has magic and monsters; the trick is to make it seem relevant, interesting and overall dynamic and exciting.

>You can downplay the pulp elements of your idea, but then I don't see any difference between your game and "Call of Cthulu" ... other than CoC is based on H.P. Lovecraft's well-written tales of otherworldly horror. That's a very strong point in its favor.

Well this setting has an entirely different cosmology (not least of all because anything done that even vaguely resembles lovecraft's ideas seems like a total rip-off).

It’s not really a question of downplaying pulp elements, rather than not using every pulp element just because I can unless it benefits the game.

>Do you mean that good and evil are more black and white in your game than in real life, or that the examples I gave showed good and evil as more black and white than you'd prefer in your game?

I mean the former, ultimately. Of course indidvuals can interpret the morality of the setting as they see fit, but I prefer the protagonists to have a default morality setting of clearly heroic. They are the good guys. I personally have had enough of angsty roleplaying. However the morality of the setting isn’t something that will be discussed a lot other than it will be defined by the setting being painted in broad, pulpy strokes and cut from a very dramatic cloth.

>So what's the edge for your game?

I couldn’t say right now, i’m still trying to cut the diamond from the rough. That said, it should have one, ultimately because otherwise it won’t really interest me that much. The games I like I like for a reason, that reason is their edge - at least as I see it; that edge appeals to me and its what satisfies me when I write ideas.

>If you find yourself struggling to condense your hook down to a single paragraph, it may be too complex of a hook.

Indeed.

>I consider that a metaplot because you are saying this is the official answer to why the supernatural things are happening and it will stay the official answer throughout all of my products.

It’s no different than saying that the hellmouth is the reason for all the weirdness in sunnydale in btvs. It’s not really any different than using a recurring villain, and even then individual gms aren’t going to have too tough a time changing things. It isn’t a metaplot because there is no ongoing story, at least defined by me. I haven’t planned on anything like that happening.

>I would rather see you offer several interesting situations that get a group's creative juices flowing so they can take your game concept and make it their own through actual play.

What you are looking for a is a generic horror game, like a gurps book or something. That’s not what this game is about or intended to be.

Its no different than the occult underground and the invisible clergy in unknown armies, 99% of which is predefined in the books - you work for Alex abel in he new inquisition, or, these are the major players in the occult world, and these are the members of the invisible clergy. However at the same time the game allows the gm to change any of this by not tying the players to a story or ongoing plot. That’s the difference.

I like games to have interesting npc's, especially as villains because not least of all it serves as a very practical template.

>If this is the case, then I'd suggest spending some time explaining what sort of villains work with your setting and how GMs can create their own villains using Edward Darklite and Imhotep as examples.

I like the idea of using such examples because it makes the player feel that they are reading something more than just an instruction manual, almost as if they were reading a story (in the sense that that’s what they will ultimately be doing with the book).

Darklite and imhotep (or whoever he becomes) are no different than perhaps cthulhu or nyarlothotep in the CoC setting, or the characters from the 'story' of Castle Falkenstein.

>This is one of the reasons why it's so hard to give any worthwhile feedback on your posts. You've obviously decided how much of each element you want in the game based on this comment, but you didn't communicate this in your original post.

Well maybe, but its nice to hear what other people thin, even if what they say is rejected. I like to hear different interpretations and ideas, even though I reserve the right to do what I want with my ideas. It’s not being ungrateful, and it’s not pointless to post ideas. All feedback is appreciated, no matter where it leads. I like discussion to be unrestricted so that ideas can be fully explored.

>Re-read my post again. I didn't ask what goal the RPG has, but instead what your goals are for your RPG. Those are two different things.

I don’t see the difference.

>And RPGs themselves can have goals. For example, Sorcerer's goal is the exploration of the premise "what will you do to get what you want?"

Is that a goal, or a theme? I.e., has the game failed, then, if players fully enjoy the game but don’t take it to that level and don’t explore those ideas? Is it less of a product in that case?

>And it does seem your RPG has a goal ... to stop the plans of whatever evil thing(s) lives in the Land of the Dead.

Well that’s what I would call a players goal - ultimately to battle the forces of evil.

>So has science fiction. So has horror. That is no reason not to include it if it makes your game interesting.

Yes but you have to start somewhere. This game doesn’t have to include magic as such, not to say that there is anything wrong with including, just that to do so would have to be done appropriately.

>Have you ever considered why magic has been done to death? Could it be because it's popular and people enjoy it?

Of course.

>You don't have to include real-world secret societies in order to use secret societies in your game. And you certainly don't have to delve into heavy politics in order to use them.

I’m just not sure that using lots of real world occultism is the right thing or this game; its not nephilim.

>Nothing. In fact, I believe I mentioned a flamethrower in my second post.

Your example seemed to suggest that you wanted more than a flamethrower - i.e. magic.

>I have been gaming a long time and I've never seen a GM or mechanics be able to strike fear into the hearts of players.

What i’m saying is that fear mechanics can be used to take control of potentially stupid situations. Every coc gm has, at some time, met some player who felt their character could waltz into the cultists lair, stare down cthulhu and be the last man standing. The sanity mechanics prevent that from happening and for a very good reason - in character, such a person would go nuts instantly (if he wasn’t killed first). Stupid players aside, this helps the player rationalise the game world by understanding that if he acts unrealistically, he will pay the price. It also helps enforce that reality.

>I have seen a player respond with a genuine emotional response through the GM's use of effective storytelling techniques, but never with fear. I personally don't feel it's possible to induce fear in a player without using some underhanded psychological techniques aimed at the player himself and not his character.

I am not interested in freaking out players or making people uncomfortable. But to treat the supernatural as something mundane is foolish. Using mechanics helps avoid that.

>I would rather see you describe fear effects in another way. For example, if you want the effect of an antagonist's fear ability to take the form of freezing the affected character in place, then just describe it as a Hold ability instead. You get the same basic result, but you let the player control his character's emotional reaction to the effect instead of forcing his character to be afraid. The character's emotional reaction is for the player to decide, not the GM.

Evocative description is down to the individual gm.

>Sorcerer doesn't have a setting per se. It has a premise that can be tailored to fit any setting you want. I personally have played it in several settings, ranging from fantasy to modern day. I know others have even used it in a sci-fi setting and post-apocalyptic fantasy.

Which is fine, but that isn’t the approach I want to take here.

S

Drew wrote:
My job here is done. ;)

Drew wrote:
Just a quick note Roy- I, as a DM, have gotten fear from my PCs. It was their first experience with Call of Cthulu- a one shot, not lights, one candle per player. When they were rendered dead or insane, the candle was snuffed out.

The last player had a nightmare that night.

However I think there is a way of doing 'cheese' that doesn’t involve ruining the game by just pandering to really really hackneyed stereotypes.

Well this setting has an entirely different cosmology (not least of all because anything done that even vaguely resembles lovecraft's ideas seems like a total rip-off).

It’s not really a question of downplaying pulp elements, rather than not using every pulp element just because I can unless it benefits the game.

but I prefer the protagonists to have a default morality setting of clearly heroic. They are the good guys. I personally have had enough of angsty roleplaying.

I couldn’t say right now, i’m still trying to cut the diamond from the rough. That said, it should have one, ultimately because otherwise it won’t really interest me that much.

What you are looking for a is a generic horror game, like a gurps book or something. That’s not what this game is about or intended to be.

All feedback is appreciated, no matter where it leads. I like discussion to be unrestricted so that ideas can be fully explored.

Well that’s what I would call a players goal - ultimately to battle the forces of evil.

if players fully enjoy the game but don’t take it to that level and don’t explore those ideas?

This game doesn’t have to include magic as such, not to say that there is anything wrong with including, just that to do so would have to be done appropriately.

Your example seemed to suggest that you wanted more than a flamethrower - i.e. magic.

What i’m saying is that fear mechanics can be used to take control of potentially stupid situations. Every coc gm has, at some time, met some player who felt their character could waltz into the cultists lair, stare down cthulhu and be the last man standing.

The sanity mechanics prevent that from happening and for a very good reason - in character, such a person would go nuts instantly (if he wasn’t killed first).

Stupid players aside, this helps the player rationalise the game world by understanding that if he acts unrealistically, he will pay the price.

Evocative description is down to the individual gm.

Which is fine, but that isn’t the approach I want to take here.

i think, ultimately, that this idea is best suited to a campaign or scenario for an existing game. the idea may well prove too restrictive for a stand alone game, and would lose out from the removal of ideas such oas the main protagonists.

still, its always nice to discuss these ideas.

martin

When you play it out, post it in the Actual Play forum. I'd like to see where it goes.

Roy