I thought I'd come out of my convalescence to comment on something Boris recently wrote:
>The current rules for ritual magic leave a lot to be desired, IMO.
Agreed. Actually the whole concept of ritual magic in RQ 3 leaves a lot to be desired (except for pointless crap like Binding and Enchanting), but as the gamemaster (or would it be seminar leader? We Seattle Farmers are a pathetically academic lot:>) I really hate rules - particularly rules that get in the way of game fun.
>Primarily, the ability to duplicate what is described in the literature.
>For instance, in the recent adventure write up from the Seattle
>Farmers Commune (SFC for short), their characters' clan did the
>"Summons of Evil" ritual from KoS to bring some nasty broos to
>them. I don't know how they did this in their game, but I would
>have to resort to handwaving in mine. The rules as written imply
>that each ceremony would require a specific spell be known to do it.
>This is definitely the case with summon and command spells,
>which require a different spell for each type of thing summoned or
>commanded. So, would a "Summons of Evil Ritual" spell need to
>be known by someone in VarmandiClan? If a different spell is
>needed for each ritual, then how would a community ever attempt a
>new heroquest? Something could be specified clearly in myth, but
>if none of them know the divine spell, they can't do it. Nor can they
>sacrifice for "A spell that let's us do Myth X", unless they first go to
>a priest that knows "Myth X Ritual".
Exactly - this is one of the biggest problems with community magic - none of the game systems really do a good job of duplicating what is described in the literature. First thing is first, I don't have a Summons of Evil Ritual Spell. To be honest I don't have much of a game mechanic at all to handle clan heroquests/rituals (despite the fact that our intrepid band of farmers tend to view everything they do as something of a heroquest).
With the Summons of Evil, first the clan godi had to remember the story. Dave Pearton (who plays Heorl, a clan godi and lawspeaker) read it outloud to the group and the players tried to figure out how to duplicate it. Since I use Pendragon Pass (a great system for all of us "yo-ho-ho heroquesting GM's"), I had the players make a number of Religion Orlanth rolls and Ritual roll to get the thing under way. Since the clan priests/godi led the ritual - I figured that their Worship Orlanth rune magic would allow the magic to begin.
More important than what rune magic was involved was figuring out how to cast the thing - indeed that seems to always be the players biggest dilemna. On a related tangent, when the farmers quested (ie. traveled) to Kero Fin to seek her assistance, they borrowed from the Westfaring Myth. Who is Orlanth, who is Issaries, who is Lhankhor Mhy, etc.? The clan cast Illig the Shrewd (a prosperous cattle trader) as Issaries Pathfinder - only to discover that Illig is a terrible Pathfinder.
In the Summons of Evil ceremony, the clan dumped magic points (quite a few if I recall) in order to summon their foe. Too many magic points, and the clan was convinced they might just summon King Malan Mad-Blood and his best twelve huscarls (a bad thing for the Varmandi), too few magic points and they might summon a handful of trollkin.
Finally, the fact that this was a "heroquest" (whatever the hell that is) didn't improve their chances. The clan still needed to physically defeat thirteen broos!
When the players decided to reenact "Orlanth rescuing Ernalda" in order to break into Chief Orlev's Hall, they did this in order to know what they were supposed to do. The way I view culturall heroquesting is that these myths are cultural stories that describe a way of dealing with a particular situation. When my players justify their approach to a problem by saying "Didn't the great Heortling hero Aram travel to Kerofin to receive her Necklace - and wasn't that just a Westfaring? We'd like to travel to Kerofin to see if we can get the Goddess' blessing!", I let them do it and I try to structure their adventure into something similar (BUT NOT IDENTICAL) to the story they are trying to act out.
>I suppose it could be patterned instead after the Binding
>Enchantment spells, that allow a binding for any type of critter be
>made with the same spell, altering the casting each time an
>enchantment is done. Thus the "Summons of Evil", being myth of
>Orlanth, could be done as a variation of the Worship Orlanth Ritual
>spell. This fleshes out the Worship spells nicely, making them quite
>useful to have, but potentially makes them too powerful. I'm not sure
>I like this solution either.
If you just say that the Worship Orlanth Ritual (or the Worship [ ] Ritual) simply makes it possibly to begin walking in one's god's path, then I don't think it is too powerful.
In my own humble opinion, Heroquesting will never have a satisfactory rules mechanic - nor should it. I know this is frustrating to many players and GMs (hell, it annoyed me ever since I read in the back of RQ 2 that Heroquest rules will be coming out soon), but in my experience, heroquesting isn't a rules issue - its a story-line issue!
>So, would anyone from SFC like to comment on how they did it,
>mechanics wise? Or did you even worry about it?
Does this help? If anybody is interested, I'm glad to pontificate on the ways our ToDP campaign has dealt with heroquest/ mythic reenactment issues. Pam, David, Dave or Neil - anything you guys want to add?
Yours truly,
Jeff Richard
Powered by hypermail