Re: [ImmoderateHeroQuest] Putting the 'Anal' into Analogies

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_gdI82wXa-IVz4KJUWYHRmUlHn66e129PO6k3kbdviv-ls5Kdq0sj5d4vWdgD7>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:21:50 +0000 (GMT)


Stu:
> Personally, I'd be somewhat happy if the concept of
> analogies was
> ditched at times. Glorantha is not so poorly drawn
> that we're
> clutching at straws to characterise it; nor is it a
> world devoid of
> pretty open and clearly-stated philosophical
> conflicts, that thus
> leaves us clueless as to what is going on (Grotarons
> aside).

yes, but... (HQ rules)

an analogy is a bit like a keyword. If a new player says "who're these Lunars, then?" you don't say "read ILH!", you say "a bit like the Romans in Britain." "Oh, right", they say, and go on to more important things, like cattle raiding.

And until you need details, that'll do. Regular soldiers, wear red cloaks, refer to the officer as "centurion", and that's all you need to know. Yes, we all know it's hopelessly oversimplified, but it conveys all required information in minimal time and effort.

Cliches and stereotypes - same thing. They're keywords. Yes, there's always variation on the theme, but to pick a non-random example, if we introduce a keyword of "Storm-finder General" with a note "based on the Witchfinder keyword" we all know where we are and have a pretty good idea what changes to make.                                   



Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com            

Powered by hypermail