Jump to content
Tywyll

Road to Rune Lord (House Rule)

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Crel said:

Just wondering, what are these reasons? Knowing what you're avoiding might help in futzing with how this Road to Rune Mastery works.

There are a lot of reasons, but none of them have to do with the mechanics of the game. I hesitate to even mention these because I imagine I'm going to get a lot of grief, or people trying to talk me out of them, and frankly I am not interested. These aren't really up for discussion. 

They have always felt like cultural appropriation to me, even before I understood that concept. That makes me uncomfortable. Like if this was written by a bunch of indigenous people in an attempt to share their culture and beliefs through an rpg, that would be one thing. But it isn't. That's the primary reason.

Along those lines, since I have little knowledge of native tribal cultures, I don't really want to put them in my games (except in the broadest of strokes) because I don't want to rely on potentially harmful stereotypes in their portrayal. Of course any fantasy culture is going to be based on half-knowledge and stereotypes, but when I'm playing fantasy Europe/Mediterranean  I'm messing with my own ancestry so I don't have an issue with that.

While I find Glorantha fascinating, I don't actually set my games there. There are various reasons for that, but its incompleteness (in the sense that you can only really play on the low end of the power-scale officially) and the refusal to establish objective facts about the world and its overreliance on metaplot are all big turn offs as a place to run the game. On the other hand, it has one of, if not the, best religious magic systems and I love how everyone can use magic. So since I am using it to play in my home setting, and shamanism has never been a thing there, really. Druids are about as close as you come and they are basically just Earth worshippers. 

However, the new rules provide a cool suite of powers to a character type I will never use. That's why I want to repurpose them for my game. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

On the other hand, it has one of, if not the, best religious magic systems and I love how everyone can use magic. So since I am using it to play in my home setting, and shamanism has never been a thing there, really. Druids are about as close as you come and they are basically just Earth worshippers. 

So do you use the actual RQ cults then, or do you have your own? I've been reading prior posts as using the same cults in the Core (though probably with setting differences due to your remarks in passing about shamanism).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Crel said:

So do you use the actual RQ cults then, or do you have your own? I've been reading prior posts as using the same cults in the Core (though probably with setting differences due to your remarks in passing about shamanism).

For the time being, I have matched the cults to my setting's own gods. Since my setting only has 9 true gods, they have subcults (like Orlanth). So for example, three of my players worship the same god (the Lawful God of War) but mechanically one is in a Humakt style cult, one is Yelmalion, and one is Storm Bull. It's quick and dirty, and given more time I would probably build correct cults of the individual gods, but I really wanted to play with the system asap so...this was the compromise. Since only two players have ever played rq and for both it was a long time ago (during RQ3...I'm not even sure they played in Glorantha), this doesn't really cause any problems. Most of them have zero familiarity and no attachment to the core setting but they have played other games set in my world, so that is familiar to them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

While I find Glorantha fascinating, I don't actually set my games there.

[...]

However, the new rules provide a cool suite of powers to a character type I will never use. That's why I want to repurpose them for my game.

You should have said that earlier - at least I was arguing from "this doesn't fit Glorantha".

Personally, I don't worry much about cultural appropriation. It's not like it doesn't happen in the other direction, too.

Adapting RQ to other settings to make the magic fit is quite a different proposal than houserule one's Glorantha game.

 

1 hour ago, Tywyll said:

Like if this was written by a bunch of indigenous people in an attempt to share their culture and beliefs through an rpg, that would be one thing.

I am content with the knowledge that this was written by someone who was practicing those beliefs and who wouldn't treat them disrepectfully.

1 hour ago, Tywyll said:

its incompleteness (in the sense that you can only really play on the low end of the power-scale officially)

With the current bunch of rules. The other end of the power scale (the black of the Moldvay D&D boxes) hasn't been published yet, probably not written yet either.

 

1 hour ago, Tywyll said:

the refusal to establish objective facts about the world

If you mean clearly distinguishable and quantifiable deities, yes, that's a refusal. That is inherent in the mythology approach to the world building.

 

It took me about four years of playing RuneQuest before I played in Glorantha, back in those days when the first German language RQ was published (too little way too late). I am still happy with my Viking Age themed fantasy setting I created for my game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joerg said:

You should have said that earlier - at least I was arguing from "this doesn't fit Glorantha".

I've said it in other threads. But even if I were playing in Glorantha, I would probably still go down this route.

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

Personally, I don't worry much about cultural appropriation. It's not like it doesn't happen in the other direction, too.

Whataboutisms never ever justify anything.

Marginalized cultures are forced to adopt culturalisms of the dominant culture, so it isn't the same.

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

Adapting RQ to other settings to make the magic fit is quite a different proposal than houserule one's Glorantha game.

Sure...but not? If I were running Glorantha the metaplot could all die in a fire and I would have little interest in adhering to some kind of academic rigorous attempt at adhering to Greg's vision or whatever.  

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

 

I am content with the knowledge that this was written by someone who was practicing those beliefs and who wouldn't treat them disrepectfully.

That doesn't stop it from being appropriation. Intention doesn't absolve action.

 

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

With the current bunch of rules. The other end of the power scale (the black of the Moldvay D&D boxes) hasn't been published yet, probably not written yet either.

With none of the RQ rules have that end of the scale been written. It's been 40 years, I'm not interested in waiting any more. 

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

 

If you mean clearly distinguishable and quantifiable deities, yes, that's a refusal. That is inherent in the mythology approach to the world building.

Among other things. Refusing to detail historical events is another.

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

 

It took me about four years of playing RuneQuest before I played in Glorantha, back in those days when the first German language RQ was published (too little way too late). I am still happy with my Viking Age themed fantasy setting I created for my game.

 

Yeah, I started with RQ3 and generic fantasy earth so that was more my introduction to the rules and mechanics of the system. Wish I still had my RQ Ninja boxed set. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Tywyll said:

That doesn't stop it from being appropriation. Intention doesn't absolve action

I'm curious as to who's culture(s) you think are being appropriated, such that you feel differently towards medieval European... 

Animism and "shamanism" (generic word, (which was appropriated, I agree) in which people contacted the spirits of the world and went on spirit journeys) was practiced around the planet for tens of thousands of years... Including by your ancestors in Europe. "Your" people were practicing a form of animism in Europe until quite recently (even after medieval times), and some still do. (Fact: in 2004, the corpse of Peter Toma, was dug up from a grave in Romania and dealt with as a vampire... Ripped out the heart and burnt it. Apparently, not an unusual thing for that part of the world. Beliefs can stay with us for a very long time, and remain in "our" culture).

I do, fully, understand that you choose not to play in Glorantha (but missing out on the fantasy element of ducks, broos. Dragons, etc is sad - but your choice), but wonder why you're playing Runequest and not BRP, Mythras, etc instead???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

I'm curious as to who's culture(s) you think are being appropriated, such that you feel differently towards medieval European... 

Lets not go down that road. Not in this thread anyway, the OP already said it's not up for discussion, and I respect that.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I do, fully, understand that you choose not to play in Glorantha (but missing out on the fantasy element of ducks, broos. Dragons, etc is sad - but your choice), but wonder why you're playing Runequest and not BRP, Mythras, etc instead???

I'll address this comment alone. 

Ducks can die in a fire. I have zero interest in Daffy the Duck or Howard the Duck in my rpg. It was a ridiculous idea in the 70's hyuck hyuck phase of rpgs, and is ridiculous now (ymmv and all that).

Broos/Beastmen have always been a part of my setting, but that was via Warhammer (which I know took them from Glorantha) way back in the 90's, so no I'm not missing out there.

Dragons? Why would I be missing out on Dragons?

BRP doesn't have Battlemagic/Divine Magic (not inherently).

I don't like how the modern RQ systems have changed the POW economy, nor do I particularly like the Stat+stat for base skill system. It's not awful, just don't like it as much. I think RQ2 was pretty ace and I basically use RQG as supplementary material for RQ2. I do have some BRP influences though and use the BGB for some things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

Ducks can die in a fire. I have zero interest in Daffy the Duck or Howard the Duck in my rpg. It was a ridiculous idea in the 70's hyuck hyuck phase of rpgs, and is ridiculous now (ymmv and all that).

There is "YGMV" and all that, but I find that rather racist (in the literal sense, ducks being a very distinct race).

I say this because - anthropomorphic bulls (minotaurs) ok. Anthropomorphic goats, antelopes, etc (broos) ok. Anthropomorphic horses (centaur) ok. Even an Anthropomorphic octopus (walktapi) or pumpkin (Jack-o-bear) is ok.

But for some reason, an anthropomorphic bird (specifically a duck, although mythologically on earth there have been herons, cranes, owls, vultures, etc) is bad... I do not get that.

Perhaps ironically, this attitude is exactly the mentality many native Gloranthans have about the Duck race... 

(And, this should probably be in a different thread).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

There is "YGMV" and all that, but I find that rather racist (in the literal sense, ducks being a very distinct race).

I say this because - anthropomorphic bulls (minotaurs) ok. Anthropomorphic goats, antelopes, etc (broos) ok. Anthropomorphic horses (centaur) ok. Even an Anthropomorphic octopus (walktapi) or pumpkin (Jack-o-bear) is ok.

But for some reason, an anthropomorphic bird (specifically a duck, although mythologically on earth there have been herons, cranes, owls, vultures, etc) is bad... I do not get that.

Perhaps ironically, this attitude is exactly the mentality many native Gloranthans have about the Duck race... 

(And, this should probably be in a different thread).  

No, its because anthro ducks are silly cartoon characters. All of the other examples have some sort of real world mythological connections or at least a level of potential cool factor. You can't divorce ducks from Daffy and Howard, however. You can't pretend the source material and its connotations don't matter. Were it a cool race of owl-folk or crane people, I'd be totally down for that.

But it feels like they exist because someone wanted to play Howard the Duck or Daffy in the early wild and wooly days of rpgs where literally anything went (like, I've read about a guy playing a Balrog in an early campaign with Gygax because why not?). To me it breaks verisimilitude. While I enjoy humor in my games, I don't particularly want abject silliness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tywyll said:

You can't divorce ducks from Daffy and Howard

Yeah, I can. Easily. And so too do many people who play the game. 

And so too have the developers, and the storylines involving Ducks have zero hint of Daffy, Howard, etc (except one reference to Hueymakti). Decades ago, Ducks became a respectable, playable race that's not there for comic relief. 

If you see Ducks as "silly cartoon characters", that's purely 100% your vision that's not allowing them to be anything else (e.g., a 'real' person, like any other race on Glorantha).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

Yeah, I can. Easily. And so too do many people who play the game. 

And so too have the developers, and the storylines involving Ducks have zero hint of Daffy, Howard, etc (except one reference to Hueymakti). Decades ago, Ducks became a respectable, playable race that's not there for comic relief. 

If you see Ducks as "silly cartoon characters", that's purely 100% your vision that's not allowing them to be anything else (e.g., a 'real' person, like any other race on Glorantha).

Lol. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 1:37 AM, Shiningbrow said:

Yeah, I can. Easily. And so too do many people who play the game. 

And so too have the developers, and the storylines involving Ducks have zero hint of Daffy, Howard, etc (except one reference to Hueymakti). Decades ago, Ducks became a respectable, playable race that's not there for comic relief. 

If you see Ducks as "silly cartoon characters", that's purely 100% your vision that's not allowing them to be anything else (e.g., a 'real' person, like any other race on Glorantha).

Yup, I am totally alone in this opinion. 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tywyll said:

Yup, I am totally alone in this opinion. 🙄

Any others who have that opinion (and I know there are some (many?)) are also purely 100% of their vision. Just as your opinion doesn't affect their vision, and theirs doesn't affect yours... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Any others who have that opinion (and I know there are some (many?)) are also purely 100% of their vision. Just as your opinion doesn't affect their vision, and theirs doesn't affect yours... 

And neither does yours affect others? I don't see your point. The stuff that some of the writers have tried to put in to make the ducks more palatable obviously also doesn't affect other's vision. The fact will always remain it was a silly concept from the early days of roleplaying that got stuck in the setting. The old art style embraced its origin and made it less palatable to others and more palatable to those . The fact that, stuck with it, they've tried to retcon the race and make it more edgy or interesting or whatever, doesn't obscure what they were or where they came from.

Regardless, if you want to keep talking about ducks, please could you start another thread? This isn't a thread about ducks, nor is it a thread about what I do or don't like about Glorantha.

Edited by Tywyll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...