Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Chaosium Digest Volume 01 Number 08
Chaosium Digest Volume 1, Number 8
Date: Sunday, March 7, 1993
Number: 1 of 2
Contents:
Elric! and the Books (Liam Routt) ELRIC!
Pendragon Rule Modifications (Eric Rowe) PENDRAGON
Greg Stafford Interview (John Hughes) MISC
--------------------
From: lro@melb.bull.oz.au (Liam Routt)
Subject: Elric! and the Books
In-reply-to: V1.7 Comments on the Elric! Preview
System: Elric!
First of all, I should admit that I have only read one Elric related
book, "Stormbringer," and that I cannot remember it clearly enough to
make any statements about the genre. On the other hand, I talk
regularly with the editor for Stormbringer/Elric! and some of the
prime writers (in particular Richard Watts, who did a lot of work on
Sorcerers of Pan Tang and other recent books).
Despite Ken St. Andre's sterling work on Stormbringer, I get the
impression that the game really missed a lot of the world of Elric.
Those involved with writing material for the game have commented that
a lot of the material presented in the rules simply does not gel with
any kind of close reading of the books. I know that they have
approached the writing of the new rules with the aim of starting from
the books to a much greater extent. They have looked at the current
rules and their relation to the literature, and have attempted to
improve on it.
I guess it is important to indicate here that as far as I am aware,
the aim for the new Elric! rules was not to create a RQ-like game with
the same setting, but to create a better reflection of the Elric
world...
Here are some details on magic from a draft of the Elric! rules:
The first thing that I noticed is that there is a minimum POW 16
requirement for people to be able to use magic. From the way it is
written, that seems to indicate that with less than POW 16 one cannot
cast any magic at all... Given the chracter generation (which is
based on 2D6+6 rolls), that would mean that a large number of
characters would not be able to use any magic at all.
In the background section, each suggested occupation has been
described with a set of three possibly appropriate spells (the third
one of which seems to almost always be "another spell chosen as a
personal speciality"). They point out, however, that magic is seen as
a tie to the reign of the Melniboneans, and as such is a chaotic taint
that repulses much of society. You gain a Chaos point for each spell
you take in your background, and you should justify it. It seems
pretty clear that spells are not required, or even intended for use by
most characters.
Back to the Magic section. There are four types of magic described,
and hints that there could easily be other types of magic (for example
"to the East") that have not been detailed. The four types are:
spells, summonings, invocations and enchantments.
Spells are related to those times when minor magics are required that
do not call upon the powers of a greater being. There is a definite
similarity between them and the Battle Magic of RuneQuest. However
they do have a better set of atmospheric descriptions and uses, it
seems (Buzzard Eyes, Flames of Kakatal, Liken Shape, Rat Vision, are
some examples of names that are more interesting than Disruption,
Healing and Shield).
Summonings are powerful things, it would seem. The rules state that
such activities should be significant and potentially dangerous - the
rules are provided precisely so that people can play out the whole
process and by so doing enhance the flavour of the game. Preparing,
defining the demon, negotiating, binding, dismissing, rebinding, the
needs of demons, some breeds, abilities, elementals, beast lords, and
discussions of True Names and the like are all included. I do not
know to what extent these things differ from the Stormbringer rules,
but on a preliminary reading they seem to do a good job of describing
the whole process in a way that would be both playable and
atmospheric. This is not a minor part of the rules.
Invocations do not get as much space as the prior two types of magic
(at least not in this draft). The rules are described very much
through their relation to the stories; the times when Elric used
invocations rather than summoning are described, and the limits of
such invocations are indicated in an imprecise, andecdotal way. While
this does provide a handy framework, I expect that the final rules
will contain more system related details (like the POW cost and
chances of success). Still, in a relatively small space they have
succeeded, for me, in making invocations seem different and
interesting. They are like spells in that they are minor, and do not
call upon a creature to manifest itself, however their abilities are
more tied to the being invoked, and there is a direct link or tie that
is established to the being. That can be dangerous...
Enchantments are given even less space in this draft. Basically,
things can have powerful magics placed into them, freeing the user
from the knowledge of the magic. They indicate that enchanted items
should be one-of-a-kind things with special abilities. This differs
from the mass-production rules for enchanting that many games have
("Let's put another 2 points of armour and a fireblade in this..."),
but does move the burden onto the GameMaster or scenario writer.
There is also a section of rumored items that are not described in the
draft, but probably will be in the final manuscript (although the
items might be simply described in general, rather than with system
details).
Well, that's all that I can glean, with a cursory glance, from the
magic rules as described in this draft. I stress again that this
information is all from a draft, and has been (mis)interpreted by me.
I do not purport to know what I am talking about, or the intentions of
the designers here. But, if you have any other questions I can
certainly try to find the answers (or ask someone who would know)...
Just a final note. Even in draft form I am impressed by the game that
they are trying to create. From what I read of the Stormbringer rules,
the Elric rules are set to be a lot more closely tied to the stories
and to a certain sort of "mature" roleplaying. There is less of a
feel of cheap mechanics in the draft than I might have expected. Maybe
that is a function of the fairly terse presentation, or maybe it is an
indication of the overall feel of the game. They do not cop-out by
simply providing a heap of background and no system, but I think that
they avoid making they system a cheap excuse for not following the
tone of the books... But maybe I'm just talking through the purple
side of my brain!
Liam Routt
Darcsyde Productions
--------------------
From: Eric Rowe <rowe@soda.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Pendragon Rule Modifications
System: Pendragon
Here are the Pendragon rule changes for 3rd edition we are currently
using in our game as well as the reasons we made them. I don't know
which of these will be changed when 4th ed comes out. Hopefully, I
will also have a brief review of the upcoming magic system in a week
or two.
When taking damage (real or rebated) equal or greater than your size
while on a mount the roll required is Horsemanship or Dex, whichever
is least. Basically it just seemed silly that your horsemanship had
no affect on your ability to stay on a horse.
The effect of passions has been reduced to a success giving +5 and a
critical giving +10 to the applied trait or skill. We did this
because after the players lived for a while they would end up with
fairly high weapon skills and loyalty lords. As we often ran battles
for that lord, the players would constantly succeed in their passion
rolls then walk through each battle criticalling opponents every other
blow. It seemed a bit extreme. We try to have passion success and
criticals role-played out more than used just for the bonus.
All out defense and berserker attacks. In both cases we have reduced
the bonuses to +5 for the same reason we reduced passions. Too many
crits.
Fumbles no longer occur on a 20. They occur when a 1 is rolled
followed by another roll greater than 1/2 the skill in use. This
removed the problem we had with 20 being the 'magic number' wherein
suddenly not only could you never fail to get up your shield, but
also you could never fumble. The second roll basically means the
higher the skill, the less the chance of a fumble. This is oppossed
to the old system where the skill level had no effect until 20 when
all chance of a fumble suddenly disappeared. The logic falls apart
a bit at low skill levels like 1, but that has never bothered us the
way the 20 problem did.
When both parties in a combat critical the higher one is applied, but
only at the normal success level. Here, we disliked the fact you
could critically succeed, but if your opponent did even one better you
were dead meat. A critical should help your defense as well and this
change does that.
Optional lance rules: These are some rules we only use for special
jousts like tournament, not in regular battles and combats.
* If you just wish to remain on your horse you may elect not to attack
and concentrate on remaining mounted. The effect of this is to make
the damage needed to force a DEX roll go from equal to size to equal
to size times 1.5. Automatic falling then occurs at size times 3.
* Chest aiming. Instead of just trying to hit the shield and bump off
your opponent you are trying to seriously maim them. Reduce your
skill by 5, but if you win the dice resolution, they do not get their
shield even if they succeeded on their skill.
* Head aiming. For the really mean but skilled you can reduce your
skill by 10 and aim for the head. If the dice resolution is in your
favor not only does your opponent not get his shield, but must make a
roll to remain horsed if damage is less than his size. Damage equal
or greater than size means automatic falling.
Lastly, we always allow voluntary reduction in skill or number of dice
used before the roll is made in any skill.
Does anyone have any other modifications or comments on these?
eric
--------------------
From: jph613@cscgpo.anu.edu.au (John P Hughes)
Subject: Greg Stafford Interview
System: Misc
Greg Stafford visited Australia in October 1992, at the invitation of
Australian roleplayers. He attended the Necronomicon roleplaying
convention in Sydney, and spent time with roleplayers in Sydney,
Canberra and Melbourne. A fun time was had by all.
I did this interview with Greg in Canberra to further a phone
interview for the Australian Realms roleplaying magazine. A version
of the interview appeared in Australian Realms for December 1992. It
should be of interest to Net readers as it highlights some of Greg's
future directions.
John Hughes
john.hughes@anu.edu.au
Q: How have you enjoyed your trip to Australia so far?
Wonderful. I love to travel, especially to new and exotic places, and
to meet the people who play my games. Australia is quite exotic in
its flora and fauna, and there has been no shortage of fans. And I
certainly never thought that I could get so close to a kangaroo as I
did yesterday.
Q: Australians have developed new types of gaming, including freeforms
and multiforms [a variation on live action roleplaying]. Have you
played any, and what do you think?
I would agree that you've got something new here, and I think it is
wonderful. I played in a couple of multiform (systemless) games at
Necronomicon, and in an eighty-five person freeform in England a few
months ago [Home of the Bold, a RQ freeform depicting the fall of
Boldhome]. I think it is great. The games-without-rules type of
interaction is a great format for storytelling, which is the type of
roleplaying game I am exploring. It allows for a very wide range of
interaction which is not addressed in any of the rules-driven games.
Q: What is next for Chaosium?
We will continue to do what we have been doing, and will release a
number of modules and scenarios for Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon, and
for the Stormbringer universe. We plan to release a new edition of
the Stormbringer rules, too. We feel the old edition is very poorly
written and many of the concepts a bit outdated now. Parts of the
character generation are, ummm, difficult. It is full of RuneQuest
artefacts which are really not necessary. So in December or January
we will release Elric, the Roleplaying Game, which will fix all of
those problems.
We are also going to publish some books. The first will be King of
Sartar, five Gloranthan documents that I have been using as my source
material for RuneQuest and my new game. It contains almost everything
that I have compiled about the kingdom of Sartar and other Dragon Pass
lands and peoples. If it sells well, we will follow it with material
on the Lunar Empire, and then others.
We are also going to release a card game called CREDO. It is not
roleplaying, and I am not sure if it will even appeal to the usual
roleplaying market. Its subject is the early Christian church's
compilation of dogma to create the modern Christian faith. It is
historically accurate, which is to say, spiritually cynical, and so
provides great entertainment for the players.
Q: You mentioned your new game. Can you tell us more about it?
Sure. It starts with King of Sartar, which is the "historical
imperative" of Dragon Pass. This means that it relates the campaign
events and history, providing that the players do not do anything
major to change events. To compare it with Pendragon, The Boy King is
the historical imperative for King Arthur's reign.
Next, we hope to publish a new game system called The Epic System. At
the moment the candidate for this looks to be the submission by a man
named Greg Maples, who has been working on it for about eight years.
It is a Macro-system, unlike anything which has come before. It
allows the players to quantify and therefore recognise their
relationships with their society, gods, and cosmos. It is not
concerned with the minute details of an individual, like RuneQuest is.
Test-players have commented that it could be used with Call of Cthulhu
or even AD&D. It will certainly be compatible with RuneQuest, with
some adjustments.
Then I would like to publish Glorantha: the Game. This will use the
appropriate parts of The Epic System to allow players to engage in
mythical interactions with the world of Glorantha in a way which I
have been envisioning for years, but which has been unobtainable due
to lack of a proper game system for it. I wish it to be primarily a
storytelling game, with a strong game system hidden behind it to
support play, and be brought forward when necessary to resolve some
conflict. With those components, players should be able to engage in
the full glory and massive destruction of the Hero Wars, and create
their own version of Gloranthan history to suit themselves and their
players. And, of course, we will support it with scenarios and
background.
Q: What about RuneQuest?
I am pleased to say that RuneQuest is back on track. Avalon Hill and I
have worked out a new relationship which satisfies both of us, and
they have hired Ken Rolston to edit the line. Ken is an old RuneQuest
and Glorantha fan, and even contributed to RQ3. He has been a
successful scenario writer; he has published scenarios for Paranoia,
Ghostbusters, and AD&D, plus maybe some others. He is a professional,
with drive. He has already gotten Melbourne designer Michael
O'Brien's Sun County out, and has prepared River of Cradles for
release soon. Avalon Hill plans to release four supplements per year,
and I am confident that they will follow that schedule.
Q: What is your part in this?
We are responsible for approving or disapproving the submitted
material. We will also release a fair amount of RQ material which has
been written, but not published, such as the many cult write ups which
we have had sitting around for years.
Q: If someone has RQ material to submit, should they send it to you?
No, send it to Ken.
Q: What if they have questions concerning Glorantha? Should they ask you?
No. I am afraid that I can not spend my time answering individual
questions. I did it in the past and I never got any work done. If
someone has Gloranthan material and ideas, write it up and send it to
Ken. If he likes it, he will pass it on to me. I regret the
distancing that this makes between me and RQ writers, but I cannot
find a reasonable alternative which allows me to get my work done.
Q: I read in (another source) that you practice "neo-shamanism." Can
you explain this?
Sure. It has nothing to do with gaming. Neo-shamanism is a religious
practice which is commonly found around the world in primitive
cultures, generally to provide interaction with an animist universe.
Animism is the belief that everything is alive, and that much of
creation can be communicated with. It is very much a "green
religion," an ancient Gaia-theory without science trying to
rationalise it.
I have spent much of my life trying to figure out what was going on
around me, and discovered some time ago that not everyone saw things
the same way that I do. I have been searching for meaning for this,
and discovered that shamanic practices fulfil my needs. As a result,
I have dedicated a part of my life to this practice, and to teaching
it to others who ask. So I lead sweat-lodge ceremonies, which are an
ancient form of prayer-meeting, which is sort of like a sacred sauna,
and pilgrimages to sacred sites, and so on. I also am on the board of
Shamans Drum magazine, which is a professional journal which looks at
shamanic practices which still go on around the world.
Q: Does this affect your outlook on gaming?
Yes. It has provided me with the key to mythological understanding
which gives my Gloranthan material the flavour which it has. However,
the shamanic system in RQ is not really reflective of my practice,
though. That is a game system.
Q: If you could design a game on any subject, and were guaranteed a
market, what game would you like to do?
A very theoretical question. I guess it would be the Universal
Transformation Game, which would immediately provide the players with
the insights to bring some peace, contentment, and joy to the players
and inspire them to game master it with others. It would educate
people to their responsibilities in the world. It would appeal to
conservatives and Republicans and promote values that would end the
shameful and horrifying outlook of the American right-wing which
believes that greed, war, racism, and imperialism are acceptable ways
of life in the modern world.
Q: Can you be less theoretical??
Well, I'll tell you what, guarantee me the market and I will make the
game. But until then, I will continue to create fun and enjoyable
games that provoke such idealistic thoughts in those of us already in
the field, and which will allow me to feed and clothe my children.
Q: Is there some subject or genre which you would like to write?
OK, I'll stop fooling around for a second. I think I'd really like to
do a Middle Earth storytelling game.
Q: Is there any question which you would like to be asked but never are?
Yes. "How much would you like this cheque to be for?"
Q: I mean in a gaming interview?
No. You have already addressed some interesting issues which no one
else has.
--------------------
The Chaosium Digest is a Discussion Forum for Chaosium Games which do
not have another specific area for discussion. To submit an article,
mail to: appel@erzo.berkeley.edu
