>In many cases I feel the divide between theoretical & Roleplay
>Glorantha is getting greater as the years go on. Newcomers to the
>game have got to be shown that it's the game that's important not the
>background in every detail. Some of the best scenarios I've run
>recently were in the HQ book we even had the fish rain in the
>Lismelder lands. I'm not sure that fits in with the "real"
>background, but it was fun.
>
>(Discuss:-)
I don't see it as a divide between "theoretical" and "roleplay" Glorantha. Most Gloranthaphiles seem quite willing to discuss obscure details of Heortling law one minute and play in a game which fudges that and half a dozen other things the next. The problem newcomers seem to have is that they see a book like Thunder Rebels going into far more detail of a single culture than most RPGs. They then assume that the whole world has been worked out to that level of detail. Then they get a shock to find that the part that attracts them is covered in half a page of a single publication and rather than three scenario books there are no scenarios at all.
My personal interest is towards social interactions and how the societies work. There are umpteen RPGs for beating up the bad guys and saving the world. Glorantha has the background and HQ the rule system to roleplay the rest of human behaviour. As a result I start asking questions about how the economy functions so I can get a grasp of how a major event affects people in terms of being able to work and support themselves. Not really any different to discussions on the relative combat effectiveness of Tarshite axes and Sartarite swords.
-- Donald Oddy http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail