Glorantha

[RMS]

I don't understand reading Glorantha and not playing it. (If I'm just going to read, I'll stick with the real world.)

You'll find there's quite a few people out there - myself included - that love to read RPG sourcebooks as if they were works of fiction. I can quite happily sit up till 3am leafing through a sourcebook for pretty much any game world.

I know you people are out there. In fact, I know lots of people that way. I will do that too, but I just don't do it with worlds that I'm not interested in running. I guess my take is that if I find it interesting enough to read, I want to run it or play in it.

What I actually have a hard time understanding is not sitting down and reading it. It's lacking the confidence (if that's the right word) to run a make believe world just because I haven't read everything about it. If I've read one book and like it, I'll run it and wing the rest of it. If I have more books, I'll read them and include what I like and don't like. With Glorantha, there's always players that have read more than me, but I don't care and they understand that it's my (our) take on the world.

 

[atgxtg]

I know you people are out there. In fact, I know lots of people that way. I will do that too, but I just don't do it with worlds that I'm not interested in running. I guess my take is that if I find it interesting enough to read, I want to run it or play in it.

I know that I've bought and read stuff that winds up being support material for another RPG. For instance Sekgoku is a great sourvcebook for a hisotircal Japanese campaign. It has lots of good stuff in it. I got to it a lot when running samurai campaigns. But, I have never ran it or played it.

What I actually have a hard time understanding is not sitting down and reading it. It's lacking the confidence (if that's the right word) to run a make believe world just because I haven't read everything about it. If I've read one book and like it, I'll run it and wing the rest of it. If I have more books, I'll read them and include what I like and don't like. With Glorantha, there's always players that have read more than me, but I don't care and they understand that it's my (our) take on the world.

Confidience is probably the right word, even if it doesn't sound very flattering. I''ve had this difficulty with certain games and settings. Basically it isn't a "read everything" problem, it is "read enough to get a good feel for how things are". Pendragon was expecially hard in this repsect. Depite years of gaming, I really didn't know very much about knights and how they lived and acted. Apparently neither did most other gamers-that is why there is so much "knightly" infomation in the game now.

I think this lack of confindence/caution comes from early GMing experience where people really ran something all screwed up becuase they didn't do enough preparation. I know I screwed up a few campaigns by being unprepared. I was too green back then to know I was unprepared until after I had messed stuff up and didn't know how to get out of it, but it is an experience I would not care to repeat. SO I try to get a certain familiarity/comfort level with the setting/game before I try to run it.

In a way it is ironic. One sign of a good GM is how well he can "wing it". A nother sign of a good GM is being prepared so that he doesn't have to "wing it".

 

[AKAramis]

I have no problems with Pendragon (I've a degree in History), and I've been Gregged a couple times in a dozen+ years.

But Pendragon is not "Uniquely Greg & Sandy" while Glorantha is.

My first encounter with RuneQuest was a big, colorful box at Game Keeper. It looked promising. It looked different. It said Chaosium, and I was familiar with ElfQuest and CoC, and liked the engine and the EQ setting. So I got it. I opened the box, and was instantly DISAPPOINTED. No, not in the game, but in the lack of heavier coverstock.

I got to reading it. I loved the added details. I immediately adopted spirit magic for humans in my EQ occasional sessions.

I read the Glorantha book. It was, well, interesting. Not enough to run it IMO. I got the character sheet pack. No new info, but really good sheets. At least, it was on sale since I'd bought the last boxed set at that GK store. Then I got Gods of Glorantha. And I realized... TOO ****ING MUCH TO MEMORIZE. Y'see, I was in high school, and finding too much to do... Running a game at lunch, daily, wargaming or occasionally RPGing at my friday night club at the Church. Occasional evening pickup games with the guys.

So, several years later, I found River of Cradles, like new, at a used book store. (Yes, even the comment cards.) And read it. And I thought, "THis is a cool world, but there's just way too much detail. I was a music major, running WEG SW 1E+Companion....and running also Shadowrun, and Traveller. (Yes, three games a week.)

When HQ came out, I got the core to read the rules. I loved the setting, but not for play; it's not my style of play. (Neither is CoC, but I've read a lot of CoC rulebooks...) The writing, however, is compelling, the setting intrigues me as a place.

I like my fantasy a little less gritty-yet-epic. I like my game worlds a little less developed.

The Fantasy Earth setting, however, fits my tastes nicely.

 

[soltakss]

I dislike playing in Glorantha... I always feel like anything I do will soon get "Gregged" by some other player reading something I don't have in MY collection.

I've been playing RQ/HQ/RQ in Glorantha since 1985 (sob!) and I've been Gregged so many times I've lost count. It doesn't matter.

If players say "Oh, that's not how things are" then give them the rule book and let them run the campaign. Or tell them that you don't play it like that. Or say "Thanks, I didn't know that" and ignore it or use it.

If you ran a Middle Earth game and someone said "But in Lost Tales 2 it says so and so" then you wouldn't scrap the campaign and do something else, would you? Glorantha is much like Middle Earth in that there is a core work or set of works with a lot of other stuff around it.

If the new/changed version has things I like then I'll use it, but not change things wholesale, just take a few things and introduce them gently.

If the new stuff is incompatible with my Glorantha then I'll ignore it. I've ignored a lot of things over the years.

For instance, I ran scenarios in Dorastor before Dorastor came out. I used the Broo legions and Ralzakark the Unicorn Emperor in my campaign but ignored a few minor things. I've generally ignored the "Heortlings are simple farmers who don't understand money" rubbish since it first came out. My Heortlings are far more worldly than that.

Take it as it comes. Use what you want, change what you want and add what you want. If Greg Stafford comes to your house and complains, offer him a cup of tea, sit down and talk about it. Somehow, I doubt that he will.

On the other hand, they are EXCELLENT reads, almost universally. Then again, I read history, often fairly dry history, for fun... so YMMVAPD.

Doesn't everyone? No? Oh, it's just us, then :-(

 

[soltakss]

Confidience is probably the right word, even if it doesn't sound very flattering. I''ve had this difficulty with certain games and settings. Basically it isn't a "read everything" problem, it is "read enough to get a good feel for how things are". Pendragon was expecially hard in this repsect. Depite years of gaming, I really didn't know very much about knights and how they lived and acted. Apparently neither did most other gamers-that is why there is so much "knightly" infomation in the game now.

When I started playing RQ, we did Apple Lane. So, we learnt that RQ had ducks and centaurs. Then we did Rainbow Mounds and found out about trolls, newtlings and rock lizards. As we went along, we found out about cults, read Cults of Prax, then found out about some chaos cults (the hard way) and read Cults of Terror. The GM didn't read everything, he read enough to make that part of the campaign work.

I think this lack of confindence/caution comes from early GMing experience where people really ran something all screwed up becuase they didn't do enough preparation. I know I screwed up a few campaigns by being unprepared. I was too green back then to know I was unprepared until after I had messed stuff up and didn't know how to get out of it, but it is an experience I would not care to repeat. SO I try to get a certain familiarity/comfort level with the setting/game before I try to run it.

But, how do you screw a campaign up by being unprepared? Did you have something that wasn't exactly the same as in the background? If so, what happened? Probably nothing. I've made huge mistakes in the past and tidied up around them with no problems.

In a way it is ironic. One sign of a good GM is how well he can "wing it". A nother sign of a good GM is being prepared so that he doesn't have to "wing it".

As an example, if I ran a Praxian Campaign, I would need to know the rough history (Prax was a lovely place, then chaos came and destroyed it. Waha came along and taught the Praxians to eat animals, but the Morokanth cheated. After the Godtime ended, Pavis came and built a city, but the Praxians and Trolls invaded it. Then the Sartarites came and the Lunars came about 10 years ago) the main deities (straight from Cults of Prax) and a map of the area. Everything else, and I mean everything, can be taken from that. Of course, looking at Pavis & Big Rubble/Borderlands/Sun County helps with background and extra scenarios, but you don't really need them.

If you want the full background for Pavis/Prax then you need Pavis & Big Rubble, Borderlands (the new compilation), Cult Compendium, Sun County, Shadows on the Borderlands, Strangers in Prax, The P&BR Companion Series and some issues of Tradetalk, Codex and Tales of the Reaching Moon. But, do you really need all that background? It's nice to have, but not essential.

 

[soltakss]

If you want the full background for Pavis/Prax then you need Pavis & Big Rubble, Borderlands (the new compilation), Cult Compendium, Sun County, Shadows on the Borderlands, Strangers in Prax, The P&BR Companion Series and some issues of Tradetalk, Codex and Tales of the Reaching Moon. But, do you really need all that background? It's nice to have, but not essential.

Actually, come to think of it, in Second Age Prax/Pavis, all that is irrelevant. The only thing published for Second Age Glorantha in Prax is Rough Guide to Pavis. So, everyone is starting from scratch.

Of the above, only Cult Compendium (possibly) and Pavis and Big Rubble might contain histories and cults that are similar to 2nd Age cults.

So, if you are playing Second Age Glorantha then you can write things up and play without being scared of the mass of Gloranthan background because there isn't any.

 

[TRose]

I use Greg Gorantha as a base as I love the way its written, but then I also change many things. For example i got rid of most the Immortal races in game( They are all now mortal) . After all ever look at what the Stats on a young(Say only 500 year old) iron dwarf should be? Or try to figure out how he should be armed after having that many years to get hold of weapons and magic items. Or worse a 1000 year old Brithini sorcerer. Might be great for a fantasy novel but does not work in game.
And as far as races go Best race in Gloranth is of course Human. Trolls( Dark and value trollkin only) are also a good race. Outside those two I limit my players to Ducks , Baboons, Newtlings, Morocanth and Pygmies( And Pygmies are human anyway , just short). that is still a pretty good selection to choose from anyway.

 

[Darran]

When I started playing RQ, we did Apple Lane. So, we learnt that RQ had ducks and centaurs. Then we did Rainbow Mounds and found out about trolls, newtlings and rock lizards. As we went along, we found out about cults, read Cults of Prax, then found out about some chaos cults (the hard way) and read Cults of Terror. The GM didn't read everything, he read enough to make that part of the campaign work.

This is the best way of doing it.

It reminds me of a quote from the Simpsons.

Marge "I think I'll become a piano teacher."
Lisa "But you do not play the piano mum"
Marge "All I have to be is one lesson ahead of the pupil, lisa. One lesson ahead."

:lol:

 

[Adept]

I use Greg Gorantha as a base as I love the way its written, but then I also change many things. For example i got rid of most the Immortal races in game( They are all now mortal) . After all ever look at what the Stats on a young(Say only 500 year old) iron dwarf should be?...

That is so weird...

Do you really think people live their lives like that? Do you think real people just accumulate skill year after year, becoming infinitely better? People accumulate enough skill for their job and interests, and that's it.

One just needs to decide a skill level you feel makes sense for the dwarves, elves and other creatures like that, and your problem is taken care of.

 

[mthomason]

Do you really think people live their lives like that? Do you think real people just accumulate skill year after year, becoming infinitely better? People accumulate enough skill for their job and interests, and that's it.

I've been thinking on this one, as well as the problems associated with a "100 cap".

One solution that I feel works well is to only allow improvement rolls to take skills to 100. Beyond that, you have to spend "downtime" on practicing or research to get those ever-more-difficult extra points. If you really want a skill of 120, thats twenty ever-growing-longer training sessions and not simply improvement rolls while adventuring.

 

[B_Steele]

One other thing to think about is the sheer power of Myth and Legend in Glorantha. If a GM doesn't like a particular thing or take on the 2nd Age in his or her campaign...maybe make it a point to have some gigantic quest to have had it changed. Or maybe THAT is what has happened when the history books suddenly read differently than what they did before...

Glorantha is malleable. That is why it is so wonderful a place to roleplay in and write for.

Speaking of which...back to work for me!

Bry

 

[mthomason]

Glorantha is malleable. That is why it is so wonderful a place to roleplay in and write for.

Speaking of which...back to work for me!

Back to digging your fingers into the clay that is Glorantha, eh?

I'm sure you'll sculpt something nice for us

 

[GbajiTheDeceiver]

If you want the full background for Pavis/Prax then you need Pavis & Big Rubble, Borderlands (the new compilation), Cult Compendium, Sun County, Shadows on the Borderlands, Strangers in Prax, The P&BR Companion Series and some issues of Tradetalk, Codex and Tales of the Reaching Moon. But, do you really need all that background? It's nice to have, but not essential.

You know, for me, that perfectly sums up the entire problem with Gloranthan material. Much as I love it, and much as I would read it for enjoyment, it's the way that related material is scattered to the 4 corners that frustrates the hell out of me. I'm sure that a similar exercise could be done with Dragon Pass, but you'd have to collate info from I don't know how many sources, including out of print stuff, various magazines, a board game, a computer game, and so on, spending a small fortune in the process. Only when you've done that will you stand a chance of getting the full picture.

The amount of detail doesn't bother me - I find that there's a lot of nice little quirky touches in Glorantha that are useful to have, and fun to spring on unsuspecting people.

 

[TRose]

Do you really think people live their lives like that? Do you think real people just accumulate skill year after year, becoming infinitely better? People accumulate enough skill for their job and interests, and that's it.

I've been thinking on this one, as well as the problems associated with a "100 cap".

Its not only the skill rols. It also the fact as years go by people tend to accumelate stuff. All most all of us over 40 have to do is look around our house and see al the junk we have gotten over just 20 years of living. so what sort of equipment to do you think an Iron Mostoli would have after 500 years? Under the old runequest systemof enchanting magic items , it would not be unthinkable for an Iron mostoli to have a suit of armor of over 20 points Same with a 500 year old sorcerer. chances are he would have enchantments all over his home, and have enchanted himself to a high level.

 

[AKAramis]

Soltakhs:

I won't run the LOTR setting, either, for the same reasons. I enjoy reading it, but the style and the probability that my players would not find it "fitting their view" of the setting is a real threat to success in campaigning.

Heck, I'm upset with a GM right now... His vision of the Buffyverse and mine are incompatible.

 

[simonh]

I won't run the LOTR setting, either, for the same reasons. I enjoy reading it, but the style and the probability that my players would not find it "fitting their view" of the setting is a real threat to success in campaigning.

I'm a big fan of a science fiction writer, Larry Niven. he's written dozens of novels and short stories set in the same 'known space' version of our past and future. Quite some time ago he had writer's block about it and couldn't think what more he could do in the same 'universe'. basicaly it's the same problem people have here with keepign up with the level of detail in Glorantha.

His response was to write Down In Flames - actualy just an outline and plot synopsis for a story that blew the lid off the entire universe an played around with everything. he nevcer actualy ended up writing DIF up properly, and he never used the ideas in it, but it basicaly worked. It allowed him to shrug off the hang-ups he'd accumulated about the existing canon and come to it afresh.

Heck, I'm upset with a GM right now... His vision of the Buffyverse and mine are incompatible.

But it's his game, and his 'version' of the Buffy universe. I'm sorry, but you just need to get over it and enjoy the game for what it is.

When it comes to Tolkien, there's no way I'd run a game in Middle Earth tip toeing around the existing canon characters and events as though it was sacred. I'd want to be able to play with all the toys - rings of power, maiar and balrogs, even simlarils perhaps. I have a plan. Suppose a group of adventurers happened to be near the Anduin, when they see a rider being ambushed by Orcs on the other side. He is driven into the river, but the adventurers rescue him. His name is Isildur.

Forget screwing waround in hobbit holes hiding from the plot. Get out there and have some fun!


Simon Hibbs

 

[mthomason]

But it's his game, and his 'version' of the Buffy universe. I'm sorry, but you just need to get over it and enjoy the game for what it is.

I'm not too sure on this one. Having your own take on something because you're not 100% familiar with the source material is one thing, but if the players don't like your "version" you can hardly force them to play. Messing with a fictional game world is inevitable - nobody's Glorantha can really be the same as anothers, but the level of details you can miss diminish as you reduce the area of play. Any messing with a game world that is based on another source of canon, especially one such as a TV or Movie-based one, is likely to upset "fans" of the original, and GMs really ought to consider their players needs a little more with this type of thing - if it is 100% what the GM wants and the players aren't liking it, the GM has to start asking themselves what they're going to change to ensure people come back the next week. Usually it's best to discuss any "vision concepts" like that as a group before beginning the campaign, to ensure the GM knows what their players want out of it as well.

 

[simonh]

I'm not too sure on this one. Having your own take on something because you're not 100% familiar with the source material is one thing, but if the players don't like your "version" you can hardly force them to play. ..

I'm not talking about forcing anyone to play. I'm all for mutualy agreeable compromises, and making sure players get what they need out of the game wherever possible, but a GM necesserily brings their personal creative vision to a game. You can't always expect a GM to develop and present a fun game according to someone else's creative agenda if it's one they personaly dislike. That will impact the quality of the game for everyone.

Simon Hibbs

 

[BClegg]

You know, for me, that perfectly sums up the entire problem with Gloranthan material. Much as I love it, and much as I would read it for enjoyment, it's the way that related material is scattered to the 4 corners that frustrates the hell out of me. I'm sure that a similar exercise could be done with Dragon Pass, but you'd have to collate info from I don't know how many sources, including out of print stuff, various magazines, a board game, a computer game, and so on, spending a small fortune in the process. Only when you've done that will you stand a chance of getting the full picture.

The amount of detail doesn't bother me - I find that there's a lot of nice little quirky touches in Glorantha that are useful to have, and fun to spring on unsuspecting people.

The scattered nature of the material is, for me, its greatest attraction. I can see your point, but I like the fact that there are multiple versions of the same story out there. And that the background is spread out over dozens of books/suppliments/articles/etc. It makes me feel like a Lhankor Mhy initiate searching through the stacks - getting bits of biased information from here and fragments from there and slowly putting together a picture of the whole.

Didn't the God-Learners try to create a monomyth to contain everything in one easily referenced place? Look what happened to them. Also, it is useful to remember that as a friend of his once told me "Greg is mad".

 

[AKAramis]

Heck, I'm upset with a GM right now... His vision of the Buffyverse and mine are incompatible.

But it's his game, and his 'version' of the Buffy universe. I'm sorry, but you just need to get over it and enjoy the game for what it is.

Bovine Excrement!

Let me put it another way... if I didn't mention "Slayers" nor "Buffyverse", one would be unlikely to realize that it WAS the Buffyverse....

We're not talking about minor stuff here... Something akin to Elves being in league with Sauron, or Mostali and Aldryami being allies long term on Glorantha. Judge Dredd letting a murderer off with a mild fine. Stuff that breaks verisimilitude.

Like having the Slayer's parents know more about the Occult than the Watcher, and the watcher is nearly maxed out and is a sorcerer!

At some point, in running in someone else's universe, you can cease to be "in that universe" because the fundamental tropes that define the setting are no longer true of the GM's view.

Glorantha is more mutable. Stuff based off TV or Novels, however, usually have much less "wiggle room."