Re: Looking for an unusual kind of game.

From: Christopher Graves <chrphrgrv_at_...>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:17:13 -0000


David,

I think I understand your point about game viability. I have honestly never run into back story being a huge problem in games of Runequest though I have to admit I am going to have to do some reevaluation of my perceptions of those games in light of this precept. And "semi-randomly and collaboratively" speaks volumes and I certainly understand getting out of one's own way.

I have to say that I don't understand the exact purpose of the categories, Flaws, Relationships, Personality, etc. I can imagine but from the little of HQ2 that I have read, mostly just character creation, I am not certain about the way these element interact as a whole. I have a vague appreciation that they are used to resolve situations that arise and are expanded on over time all in a narrative fashion. Its time for me to read a little more.

I get the impression that continues iteration of this character would not be appreciated here in this rules forum. So I think I will send you my next attempt directly to your e-mail.

> And while you have a fair amount of leeway, any resulting abilities
> should come from the description. If it's important enough to be
> shown in play, it should be there.

This much I understand.

> It can be tricky to have that many flaws -- the idea is they are
> purely negative. One fix is to move them out of the flaw category.
> Frex, Ko might be inspired by her drive for vengeance during a fight.

This also makes sense intuitively.

 Oh, I see you have it again under
> Personalities. Just pick one! If an ability increases, you don't want
> to have to track it in more than one place.
>

Also, makes sense. I think I may have had some indecision about where I should put it.

> Relationships: Why not have old man, mother, rustics, or the martial
> arts school? You wouldn't put points into them if they're no longer
> relevant, but they could come up again (what would happen if someone
> from the school were sent to hunt her down?).

Good point, all will be taken into account in rewrite
>

>
> How good is her ability to be a victim? That is, when would you roll
> with that ability to solve story challenges?

I wasn't looking at her being a victim as an ability but rather as a heading that certain abilities or flaws might arise from. Clearly, I'm throwing things together as a neophyte.

>
> If you consider Survivalist to be a keyword (I wouldn't, in that in
> the US at least it has connotations that don't seem to match the
> character) you probably don't also need Wilderness Survival.

I see her as coming from a surprising level of affluence, she reads widely and has a larger view of the world than would be expected. I think that wilderness survival is pretty universal. There are principles that translate into every version. Professional sherpu, Mongolian herders, Russian smugglers all make use of modern gear. The Rustic portion was meant to indicate that there is an added level of low tech hunter gatherer skills mixed in. Obviously I am not communicating this clearly enough.

And Self
> Educated doesn't seem like a keyword to me (shorthand for lots of
> specific abilities).

I could have put down wide read, but I felt she had done a little more than this implies.

>
> BTW, I found the shorter version of the character more interesting --

Agreed

> I notice she's now broke, which seems a far better drive than having
> $250K in the bank.
>

Agreed   

> David Dunham
> Glorantha/HQ/RQ page: www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html
>

Powered by hypermail