In which case, evidence that it's easier to introduce one "new" player to a group that already knows, rather than entire group of "new" players, but we knew that already 8).
> >The basic startup premise I gave them was that they were all
> >oldish "not-adults" who were almost ready to pass through the
> >adulthood rites
>
> As has been discussed recently, this has significant cons (as
> well as the obvious "pro" that the heroes have a knowledge of
> Glorantha which is closer to the players'). But, it makes it
> real hard to pick a keyword, which is how I usually work up a
> character.
I agree, but the way I approached that problem was quite successful (or apparently so, anyway). The creation process got germinated by a player who *did* have a very firm idea about where he wanted his character to head (no problem with the desired keyword, there).
The bulk of the process was formed by the players fleshing out their immediate family, and bits of various character traits within their immediate family. This gave them enough of a ground to figoure out, in general, what keyword would be suitable for their character (one girl is an apprentice merchant, the other is a young apprentice steadwife).
In each case, I made it clear to the players that they were still at the 'learning' level, and that part of becoming an adult was learning how to do the vocations they had sort of chosen for themselves.
If one of them decides "no really, I don't want to do that, I want to do this", then, the way I see it, that'll just create more hooks to cure campaign meat upon (as it were).
> Ideally, whatever you end up starting with can start with
> simple contests (to help introduce the system) and work up to
> an extended contest.
That was also my intention; to stay away from extended contests except for very large, dramatic events (maybe not even one such contest per session): i.e. reserving them for "the big battle" or other crisis point within an adventure.
-- Viktor
Powered by hypermail