> > Different *accustomed* play styles, yes. Which is why I'm trying
> to find
> > out how this one works, and how the rules support it. (Badly, from
> > what's been said so far).
Jeff:
> Actually, I've found that the approach I described works just fine.
> I have few complaints.
But you say you don't use the "saga system", which seems to be intended for just this purpose? What was your reasoning for that? I know others have said it's "broken" - in what way, in your view?
> Usually I ask the players to describe what skills they use to
> survive on a daily basis. Are you working the fields,
> weaving cloth, herding cattle, hunting, serving on the clan
> council, or what? I then hand out a few directed points to
> be spent on those skills.
Sounds reasonable, and easy enough to put into practice.
> These things are used as well. Maybe that is the difference
> between a "Humakti campaign" and an "Orlanthi campaign".
I was also thinking of the game I ran based around new adults in the Marshedge clan. Apart from things like initiation quests, playing time was generally spent *away* from the clan. We visited Duck Point and Runegate, we "did" the Rainbow Mounds, we went cattle-raiding.
>It is important that my players are part of a wider community -
> the Orlmath clan, the Colymar tribe, the Kingdom of Sartar.
Mine are beautifully xenophobic. They're part of their bloodline, then their clan, and for or against a few other clans. They know they're technically part of a tribe, but don't much care about it. Kingdom? Oh yeah...
This is something I'd intended to develop with time, though. They were very young when we last saw them. I'll have to convert them from HW to HQ when we restart anyway, I'll bring them up to the level of a standard PC at the same time, probably with extra points to spend for the in-game stuff they've done since generation. They had lower than standard keywords when generated, as I recall.
Powered by hypermail