Well, i was rereading the section on the history of xanar Shardfinder, and the bit where he imprisoned the Great Betrayer under the Sea of Fallen Gods got me thinking....

The Great Betrayer=Cthulhu!

I'm an old fan of Lovecraft, and try to work something Cthuloid into all my games, and here's the perfect opportunity! >:-)

While you're here, check this out: http://www.underwhelmed.org/?date=2002-08-14

That would make life for the Thayrist interesting, seeing how they worship a god the Church of Three views as Great Betrayer, and they claim that Xanar is actually the Betrayer. The world of Wyrth 1500 years ago must have been a messed up place.

Back to your point though, considering there is a lot of hints in the suggesting of old,d efeated gods, demons not-quite locked in other dimensions, and other nasty things, I think someone could put some Lovecraft flavoring in TROS without too much trouble. Considering my quiet obsession with the Thayr religion, I'm definitely curious to see how you run with all that.

My only suggestion: SOMETHING is under the deserts of Fahal. And up in Odeon.

My only suggestion: SOMETHING is under the deserts of Fahal. And up in Odeon.

dear goodness, you guys MUST buy of beasts and men, Ithink Brian put a little something in there just for you folks....... boy will that supplement be a goodie.

Hehehe.....interesting! I had planned on events leading the players to these particular areas at some point anyway. Thanks! :-)

If you want some more direction read the sections on Xanar/his Church, Thayrism, Odeon, Fahal, and the moons. Plenty of storylines should pop into your head that are if not Lovecraft, at least Umberto Eco in style (a la Name of the Rose or Foucault's Pendulum). Everything from hollow Earth to secret lairs of the Thayrists to the Fahal being an immortal demigod pop up. Nevermind trying to expand the link between The Riddle itself and Thayrism. Knowledge that will make characters go mad is lurking behind many pages...

So does this mean that TROS needs insanity rules :0

Insanity rules?

Well, yes it does, but that's a tale for another day...

I've never thought much of insanity rules in most games that I've run across them in. I think that insanity is best served through roleplay, and should mostly be left alone by the mechanics.

Although, with TRoS, a few well thought out SAs and flaws could take care of insanity nicely.

Drive: Attain the throne, at whatever cost (megalomania)

Haunted

These two alone bring MacBeth clearly to mind...

insanity= flaws+ role playing

Ashren Va'Hale wrote: dear goodness, you guys MUST buy of beasts and men, Ithink Brian put a little something in there just for you folks....... boy will that supplement be a goodie.

I think that Sorcerer can inform TROS more than CoC for sanity rules. Sanity in CoC (IIRC) is attacked the more the PCs deal with something unnatural. For Sorcerer, on the other hand, humanity in Sorcerer is something the character puts in risk by his actions (summoning a demon, ritually killing someone), not what he sees (an unspeakable creature that should not be). I think Sorcerer's concept of humanity lends itself better to TROS' SA system than does CoC sanity system (or Unknown Armies) because of the focus specifically on what the character does. Spiritual Attributes do not increase or decrease because what a character sees, but from what he does. I'm not sure new rules per se are necessary to make TROS more horror friendly. If any were, I think it'd have to be how to kick the PC's spiritual attributes into a realm of obsession.

TROS really doesn't have that sanity mechanics have (such as CoC and Unknown Armies) is that PCs aren't required to 'freak out' somehow if put in a traumatizing situation. By required I mean in a very narrow, what-the-rules-say-must-happen kind of way. A good roleplayer with a TROS character may find many reasons to flip out, but the rules don't state that upon seeing ____, the PC will huddle in a corner.

The entire 'freak out' effect I think would take more new rules and IMHO move farther away from TROS' central issue of choice. The point of SAs is that characters make their own choices and have to live with them, and I don't think that’s very compatible with rules that stun, panic, or enrage characters in ways that dictate actions.

Of course, I'm kind of hoping someone proves me wrong on this, effectively marrying the choice and losing the ability to make choices would be very, very interesting. :-)

Wolfen wrote: Insanity rules?

Well, yes it does, but that's a tale for another day...

I've never thought much of insanity rules in most games that I've run across them in. I think that insanity is best served through roleplay, and should mostly be left alone by the mechanics.

Although, with TRoS, a few well thought out SAs and flaws could take care of insanity nicely.

Drive: Attain the throne, at whatever cost (megalomania)

Haunted

These two alone bring MacBeth clearly to mind...

Noon wrote:

Wolfen wrote: Insanity rules?

Well, yes it does, but that's a tale for another day...

I've never thought much of insanity rules in most games that I've run across them in. I think that insanity is best served through roleplay, and should mostly be left alone by the mechanics.

Although, with TRoS, a few well thought out SAs and flaws could take care of insanity nicely.

Drive: Attain the throne, at whatever cost (megalomania)

Haunted

These two alone bring MacBeth clearly to mind...

IA's?

Insanity Attributes? I think it'd be more fun to have them along side your normal SA's like drive and everything...preferably they would sometimes conflict with your SA's! How they get implimented...ah, stuff that, I'll just enjoy the idea for now! :)

Insanity Attributes....hmmmm.

I'm ambivalent of the topic for now.

Heh.. and what he's talking about makes Cthulhu look like a pansy :-)