Yep.
>...While I'd
>love to have a way to model this with game mechanics in order to be able
>to create a believable relationship network of NPCs in a simulated
>background setting, I am unsure how to handle these flavours, and their
>effects on out of the scene events the outcome of which will affect player
>opportunities.
I must not be following. If, say, you have a relationship with a character that is "Ally of Ragnar" and somebody does something to harm you, Ragnar will come to your aid. If you have, instead, "Rival of Ragnar" then he might seek those out who are looking to harm you, and aid them instead. Pretty obvious. So what am I missing?
> > This is precisely where I wouldn't allow the ability to be in the
>keyword.
>
>Sorry, Hero Wars rules backslash... I meant at a lower level like the
>cultural keyword in HW, compared to occupation or cult keywords.
Either you or I are misremembering how HW works (lost my book long ago, and have forgotten much of it). Didn't the player choose which abilities to put at what levels from a set of levels in HW? In other words it's easy in HW, you just select which ability you think is more potent instead of the rules deciding for you. Both have their advantages.
>I chose the example because up to 1602, spending some time in a royal
>roadworking effort was as likely a background experience for your average
>Sartarite as campaigning experience.
I'd probably allow it in, then.
>Must be a re-discovery of medieval and classical conditions, then. A
>craftmaster able to afford a cook in his retinue (could be a wife
>unfamiliar with the craft, or a maidservant) would have his own table, but
>a lowly cobbler with only a tent on the market as his workshop and a
>tenement room somewhere else likely would heat with a brazier when
>absolutely necessary, and grab his food from the prepared food vendors
>that make up much of the city traffic.
This is correct. The shift in the last fifty years that has less people knowing how to cook is precisely because they've become more urban over the last century. That is, urban people in ancient cultures were a tiny fraction of the population. So, yes, most people knew how to cook. But that's because most people didn't live in cities. Those who did live in cities had even worse problems than we do today finding time to cook.
Cities both afford and demand specialization. Which leads to bakeries, amongst other things.
It's amazing sometimes to look at ancient Rome, and the similarites to modern cities. Not only did they eat "fast food" (and by that I mean pizza), the vast majority lived in four-storey tall apartment buildings.
I also agree with you that Rory's mini-keyword thing is an elegant solution to the "problems" we've been discussing.
In case the original poster of the keyword question is reading, we've delved into this subject very deeply here as we're wont to do. But realize that, in fact, none of us have any real trouble with much or any of this in actual play. We're talking some very small refinements of technique here. Messing with perfection, as it were (or, well, a very good design).
Mike
Powered by hypermail