Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/21/2020 in Blog Comments

  1. I have also used the idea that at the Wintering sites, Moot Sites, Trade Fairs, etc there are artefacts such as paintings depicting the events of the last year drawn on the Tribal totems, rock formations or even a permanent building that marks the site. The events are drawn in formalised Icons on the rocks, totems, building as well as recounted in the oral traditions. The ultimate accolade for the PCs is to be represented in the icons. They are also used as defensive structures. At the Battle of Beroia in 1091 the Pechenegs used the wagon laager as a rallying point, arrow depository and resupply and finally as a last defence. The Byzantines (being Byzantines) tricked the Pechenegs into accepting a favourable Treaty and then attacked suddenly. The Pechenegs fought as horse archers, firing waves of arrows at the Byzantines and even wounded the Emperor, John II Komnenos, before being forced back into their laager. The defences were only breached by the Varangian Guard armed with their 'Danish Axes' that were able to hack their way through the wagons and defeat the Pechenegs. The morale of the story is, if your a nomad, never trust those southern 'civilised' people... they have no honour Alex wrote: There is archaeological evidence to suggest that many nomadic tribes were accomplished at working copper, bronze, tin, silver, and gold It reminds me of the nomadic Greek tribes of metalworkers that tattooed a concentric ring on their foreheads that Robert Graves postulated gave rise to the legends of the Cyclops. The metalworkers being represented in iconography as a single eyed person metalsmith and misunderstood when the meanings of the icons were forgotten and taken as literal representations. Alex wrote: Bigotry is prevalent in many Civilised cultures, and often as Civilised cultures degenerate they turn to nationalism, populism and racism, painting a romanticised illusion of hearkening back to some "good old days" or "glorious Empires"....This is an ugly theme, one of the ugliest themes you will encounter - and it is included here only as a reminder that the real world is often a harsher place for footloose people than any fantasy world can ever be. As Alex rightly pointed out this is a common theme. "Civilised" commentators have left written records and rarely tried to understand the motivations and culture of others that they considered inferior and often only had oral records that are often lost in the mists of time. These commentators often characterised the nomads as "aimless wanderers, immoral, promiscuous and disease-ridden" peoples and rarely saw them as a civilising force but as wreckers, destroyers and peoples to be exterminated for the good of civilisation. The In-group/ Out-group scenario is as old as the human race and I have used it several times in play. I agree with Alex that it has the potential to be ugly, but don't believe it should be avoided. A clash of cultures is a good roleplaying scene and one were the PCs learn that using brute force rather than talking should teach them lessons on how to comport themselves. I like setting up scenes were the initial information is faulty and the PCs need to negotiate with both moral and cultural sensitivity. Great work Alex as always
    2 points
  2. This was the best AP summary I've read in a long time! An angry duck killing a Mary Sue character like Harrek is just awesome.
    2 points
  3. Third Eye Blue in Glorantha.
    1 point
  4. Don't forget rugs, carpets and cushions. They could have a lot of art, are portable and can be used to line tents, keeping the wind and cold out.
    1 point
  5. Re Point # 3 - my thought is to not trap characters in situations where they would have no hope of survival. Perhaps they may witness a major Mythos beastie devouring a group of cultists, rather than get caught in the frenzy themselves. Maybe some helpful police, etc, show up in time to help or get them out of harm's way during a major shootout with baddies. But also, I would factor in player choices. One GM I learned from when I was a young `un used to put it this way: "I won't go out of my way to kill you, but if you go storming a castle single-handed, naked and armed with only a butterknife, well....."
    1 point
  6. As a hypnotherapist who ran his own hypnotherapy biz for awhile, I find this pretty interesting. There are doubtless Ericksonian and NLP techniques that would work well in GMing. I'll have to think on this a bit myself. One thing I did at my most recent (first in a long time) session, was to have each player make a 10-30 second "elevator speech" about their character. Tell us something, anything - who are you? Naturally some struggled a bit and some spun a tale easily, but in the end everyone came up with something(s) and it seemed to help a lot in engaging them. You mention body language - definitely. Players leaning in to the table instead of reclining, excited, engaged demeanor, etc. All good thoughts
    1 point
  7. Interesting Alex I think I'd like to add another dimension to your thinking and include GMs.. without whom there would be no games to have a payoff As a player I think the payoff for me is designing and creating a character who has a specific personality recognisably different from those I've played before and with specific goals in mind. I think it's best to have short, medium and long term goals. The goals tend to be mundane in many ways (being able to talk to people without tripping over your tongue, getting married and having children, understanding different cultures, being able to forge end-user certificates for captured javelins, being more interested in the spirit world and neglecting physical things or possessions). I don't think I've set out with a character to gain power, wealth or fame. Some of my characters would die of embarrassment if they were recognised as a hero. The idea of 'superhero' characters that always wins is a bit redundant for me (well since I stopped playing D&D 30 years ago). I think for me it's actually roleplaying a character true to their personality and goals that brings the satisfaction, even if it is counter to 'winning'. Being able to navigate the scene or scenario brings payoff and solving or at least trying to achieve a solution is positive too. As a GM the payoff is designing and running a good session. That it engages the players, makes them consider choices and consequences, poses problems that have moral and 'real-life' consequences and the solutions do not necessarily benefit them. I also like to confuse them by presenting a seemingly simple event that has many layers that they may never understand because that is how things actually work. Leaving them uncertain and unsure gets them thinking and engaged. So as A GM the payoff for me is definitely engagement at an intellectual level that makes them think about what they are doing, wonder what is going on and create discussion and thought in between sessions where the players are trying to solve whatever situation they find themselves in. The payoff for me is that it is an immersive experience where there is actual engagement in roleplaying rather than mere process or playing similar characters. If I can engender thought, mystery, confusion, fear, wonder... then I think I have succeeded
    1 point
  8. Why did I start playing RPGs? Because Dave Rewhorn, a student when I was in my first year at University, said "Hey, I play a game where you can play other people on adventurers, want to give it a go?" Why did I love RuneQuest? Because I read Homer's Iliad when I was a kid and was transfixed by the battle scenes. When I played RQ it seemed as though those battle scenes had come to life. Also, I was brought up on swords and sorcery, swords and sandals and so on, which fits RQ perfectly. Why do I play RQ now? To build worlds, go on HeroQuests and be a Hero, or a Villain, I am not really fussed which, as long as it is big, bold and impressive.
    1 point
  9. the funny thing was that when this whole plot started, that player was the one most against doing this because he's a self-professed Gloranthan grognard. By the time we came to this bit, he was just champing at the bit, full-on-frothing-at-the-mouth-hungry to kill Harrek.
    1 point
  10. Never player Heroquest, so most of this is crazy wild stuff to me. Though I suspect it would be crazy and wild even if I had played HQ. Good on you for letting the players have their crazy shot. I will say that your Trickster seems to play their character wonderfully. Great job. Our RQ:G group has a Eurmali, first time in ages we've had one, and I gotta say, roleplaying wise, IMO, he's the Worst Trickster Ever. But, concerning how another player runs their PC, my opinion is really worth nothing.
    1 point
  11. 1 point
  12. Yes, it looks they are in for it now! 🙂 Big session, Big Events! And surely no one could have escaped...
    1 point
  13. YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO this rules!!! so hard!!!! hell yeah!!!!!!!
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...