GM Responsibility Toward the Conan RPG

[Strom]

Okay, we have some really sensitive members who were offended by my comment in another thread that there is a responsibility to GM's to run the Conan RPG in the style of the REH Conan stories, emulating the distinct environment of action Howard provided.

First, there is no Gaming Police - so do not run home with that crap in your pants.

Second - Obviously, anyone can play any game any way they want to. My argument is they could play that same game in the any other RPG rule set or setting. No distinction.

My case:

The physical map of the Hyborian Age setting - and all the countries with it - does not make the Conan RPG since it can be played in other settings.

Robert E. Howard created the world Conan lives in to be an extremely dangerous place that only contains a facade of civilization. In truth, beneath the surface of civilization, corruptness rules the day.

No matter the scenario you run - wheeling and dealing politics, merchant haggling, going for a stroll down a busy street, drinking at the fountain with your lover - at some point that facade fades and the real world will crash down upon your heads like Gorm destroying the Hyborians. There can be no such scenario - in true REH form and thus by distinction the Conan RPG - that does not try to kill you or destroy you because of some reason that has to do with the seven cardinal sins. A GM that does not follow this mantra, is being untruthful to the essence of the Conan RPG and really could be playing any other setting with no distinction between them.

If you are a GM and running such a nice adventure with much haggling, political maneuvering, friends visiting, trading, etc. etc. - and it looks like a beautiful adventure in GreyHawk - then it probably is, except for the names of the setting.

When you throw in the mechanics of the Conan RPG - that only reinforces my simple allegation. The biggest difference with the Conan RPG and other D20 settings/games are the combat mechanics. Other than that, the rules almost mirror (outside sorcery - which, correctly btw, the Conan RPG has little non-evil design) the 3.5 rules set.

There are numerous reasons to play the Conan RPG. But really, if you are playing an adventure with the Conan RPG then there are rules established by Robert E. Howard - none of them include the absence of physical threats.

I am not saying non-violent gaming sessions are not fun or just as enjoyable. I am saying that, there is a responsibility of the GM to understand the setting and make decisions based on character actions that reflect that setting. The PC's could try to avoid the threat in a non-physical way but Howard tells us that the world is ruled by the sword arm of the PC's/NPC's and GM's have a responsibility to emulate that with the Conan RPG.

What say you, without the gaming police rhetoric?

 

[Tegman]

I love the Conan setting and as a GM I try my best to describe the world that my players adventure in, as 'Conanish' as possibly.

I have may other rpgs and could GM any of them if I want to play another setting, but in my opinion, Conan is Conan, and not D&D etc.

To play Conan in any other way would not be as fun, Robert E Howards world is grim and I think that the game should reflect that, but everyone is entitled to play their game as they want to.

This is just what I think and my players like it, all other games we play are more like 'all other games out there'. Conan is grim and gritty and it's a fun game to GM

 

[Halfbat]

Couldn't agree more. Sometimes the players can get a bit startled when some real Howaradish Conan bad guy comes in - they are just soooo nasty sometimes. I upset a player with the antics of a BBEG Sorcerer (he was in a tight spot so grabbed a nearby stable lad to sacrifice for Magic Points). On the verge of backing down _I_ was jumped on by the _other_ players who said "No, no. That's what Conan bad guys are _like_".

You're quite right. There is an edge to Howard's world so that, imho, Conan PCs should never quite get complacent or really rely on their "allies". Conan made a lot of honour code choices and was an honourable barbarian in a cynical world.

 

[Damien]

I mostly agree, but I do think it depends. A GM's first responsibility is always -fun-. If the players think it's fun to have a session once in awhile where they're politically maneuvering without physical threats involved, the GM should be receptive to that.

In the end, is Hyboria really that much more dangerous than Faerun (for example)? The latter has gargantuan, evil dragons flying around everywhere, and the space between every single town is brimming with nasty things that want to kill you for no apparent reason. But just like with that world, Hyboria has its other side.

When your players are low level, and thus haven't likely earned the attention of a super-baddy just yet, they could certainly go places without being assaulted. I'm not the type of GM that would say "the town guard attacks you, because you know. . it's Hyboria." While I certainly want my Conan games to be hard-hitting, deadly affairs, I also like the idea of exploring the stuff that Howard didn't. Howard's stories were about Conan, and Conan got into all kinds of trouble, plenty of time putting himself willingly (or at least knowingly) into such situations. A thief scaling an evil tower can't really say he's surprised when danger is around the corner.

But Howard's stories were set in a world, not just against a collection of enemies. And if everyone constantly faced dizzying terrors and angry armed men, no one would survive for the world to even function. If just existing is good enough reason for there to be a blood bath waiting around every corner, then how do merchants, nobles, and serfs even live long enough to have kids and so make the world populated for the next generation?

I'm not saying you're wrong, only that it isn't necessarily an all-or-nothing type of thing. For me, it's about what kind of game the players want. If they want to do it in R.E.H. style where one adventure isn't necessarily connected to the last and any 'downtime' or non-life-threatening event is glossed over, then they'll certainly be playing a game where their lives are almost constantly in danger.

If, however, they want to play a full campaign from beginning to end, with only small amounts of time glossed over (like "purchasing weapons" or "whoring and drinking"), then they'll find a setting where they aren't constantly in danger of being mauled by a group of angry, armed men.

Of course, once they earn the enmity of a couple of powerful people. . . they're going to find those safe havens and quieter sessions far fewer and far between.

 

[Evil_Trevor]

Any G.M. running a game, and that is all it is, a game, has a few 'responsibilities' first and foremost to the players, to give them the chance to have an enjoyable experience portraying the characters and following, interacting with, and if at all possible leading both the plot and the story. To that end it is the G.M. that sets the tone and character of the setting and if you choose to play Conan than that is exactly what you should get.

That isn't to say that every encounter should be a brutal, bloody or horror filled event. There is room for many different groups of players and styles of games each to their own and good luck to them.

 

[malkiedawn]

To turn the question round a bit, as a player I have certsin expectations when I play a roleplaying game. One of these would be that each individual game should have it's own flavour, or why not have just one roleplaying game - we could call it 'Generic' RPG, set in the land of Anywhere.
When I play Conan, I expect my actions and characterisation to take place in a dark world where consequences hurt. When I play Dark Sun, I have a back up character ready. When I play DnD, I expect my actions to have few consequences 'cos magic will take care of all that nasty stuff. When I play Rulequest I expect to be incompetent.
When I play Cthulhu - oh forget that one, its one I run - cue insane laughter.
So, I like my Conan dark and grisly, the magic should be evil and consequences should be bloody.
If you want to play it any other way, that's fine. But don't call me, I'll call you.
:wink:

 

[Valaryc]

sorry Strom but i think it's pathetic. i usually like your posts and your kind of view!

i agree that Howard created a special kind of fantasy setting and that the Conan RPG tries to be a mirror of his work! everybody that buys Conan stuff spends a lot of money so you can expect he/she/it likes Howards work (otherwise he would just buy another Deedleedee sourcebook)!

but....

there is NO RESPONSIBILITY to "emulate" anything ! page 8 of the Corebook:

"The first and most important rule of Conan RPG is that if you dont like it, change it. GMs and players should work together to create involving, exciting and, above all else, fun stories"

i think it's a bit "too far" to see any responsibility in a rpg...ok...any other than the responsibility to create fun for everybody involved in your group.

what is your responsibility playing CoC ? going mad like the author? throw your miserable life against some old ones with no chance of success? every gaming sesssion a new character because your old pc is dead and/or insane ? because you have the responsibility to emulate lovecraftian style?

you could stretch this kind of argument for every RPG with a little "special" background...StarWars characters without only good/evil but some "grey"? Vampire the Masquerade without a character that hates is unlife? Sabbat Vampires that are no murdering machines but intelligent & faithfull people? Legend of the five rings with "Samurais" that show fear ?

perhaps there are many gaming styles that are not "typical" for these or that RPG...but if they are fun for everybody involved....thats the only "true style" it needs.

as i said....you're right with your general view how a Conan RPG SHOULD be...but there is no responsibility (beside to create fun)...and you can play Conan in any way it COULD be!

this is no offense ! i just think you are a little to "enthusiastic" with your view

 

[Strom]

Interesting posts by all. Evil Trevor stated my position much more elegantly then I did - if you play Conan then Conan is what you should get. Everyone's view on what Conan looks like to them may differ but the world of Conan and all that comes with it, is what distinguishes itself from the numerous other gaming systems out there.

Good to see you again on the boards Damien - where ya been?

Now to my good friend Valaryc!

sorry Strom but i think it's pathetic. i usually like your posts and your kind of view!

Simply put - regardless of how your players like to play the GM has the responsibility to create the adventure to match the setting - not the setting to match the players. Otherwise, any game could be anything - yet people buy games for what the game IS. Why play Conan instead of D & D? Why play Conan instead of Runequest? Why do Runequest players want a Hyborian Age translation - not to play Runequest! But to play Conan!

It's not pathetic - it's what most of us are doing every session and probably not even thinking about it.

i agree that Howard created a special kind of fantasy setting and that the Conan RPG tries to be a mirror of his work! everybody that buys Conan stuff spends a lot of money so you can expect he/she/it likes Howards work (otherwise he would just buy another Deedleedee sourcebook)!

Bingo! We are on the same track.

there is NO RESPONSIBILITY to "emulate" anything ! page 8 of the Corebook:

"The first and most important rule of Conan RPG is that if you dont like it, change it. GMs and players should work together to create involving, exciting and, above all else, fun stories"

Every RPG book said that! Everyone. Why? Because they know that every rule can not be agreed upon 100% by everyone. Why get all upset? Change the rule. Fun stories - yes. But look at the cover of the book - it says Conan RPG. Fun stories within the established game - which is written, executed and played to emulate the Howard stories.

i think it's a bit "too far" to see any responsibility in a rpg...ok...any other than the responsibility to create fun for everybody involved in your group.

The players are not in the dark about what type of game it is - they know the game is Conan. Why would they expect things to be the same as some other setting? Again, if you want Conan then you should get Conan.

what is your responsibility playing CoC ? going mad like the author? throw your miserable life against some old ones with no chance of success? every gaming sesssion a new character because your old pc is dead and/or insane ? because you have the responsibility to emulate lovecraftian style?

The responsibility playing CoC is the same concept I'm explaining with Conan. It's not hard - the PC's should expect a game thta emulates the stories of HP Lovecraft.

you could stretch this kind of argument for every RPG with a little "special" background...StarWars characters without only good/evil but some "grey"? Vampire the Masquerade without a character that hates is unlife? Sabbat Vampires that are no murdering machines but intelligent & faithfull people? Legend of the five rings with "Samurais" that show fear ?

Not following your logic. I'm saying there is no stretching - the bible of gaming has been written for the Conan RPG and it is the REH stories. Your the one who thinks it would be okay to change a "special" background, in other stories. My answer would be - why play that specific game then?

perhaps there are many gaming styles that are not "typical" for these or that RPG...but if they are fun for everybody involved....thats the only "true style" it needs.

True. Of course. I am saying that as a GM if the players do something - anything - then their response should be in line with the essence of the game. Even if the PC's want to just yap with the guvna's daughter then something should happen as a result of that in line with the game.

as i said....you're right with your general view how a Conan RPG SHOULD be...but there is no responsibility (beside to create fun)...and you can play Conan in any way it COULD be!

this is no offense ! i just think you are a little to "enthusiastic" with your view

:lol:


No offense at all. But when you go to the Butcher's next time and select some ribeye and he gives you a shoulder cut - methinks you will want what you expected and demand the ribeye every time you ask for it. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Ichabod]

Simply put - regardless of how your players like to play the GM has the responsibility to create the adventure to match the setting - not the setting to match the players. Otherwise, any game could be anything - yet people buy games for what the game IS. Why play Conan instead of D & D? Why play Conan instead of Runequest? Why do Runequest players want a Hyborian Age translation - not to play Runequest! But to play Conan!

Why play Conan instead of D&D?

Because D&D is silly. D&D spawned (or did most of the work of spawning) its own fantasy genre, one where magic is ubiquitous and necessary to successful adventuring, where races run around with alignments, where every fantasy creature exists, etc.

You could house rule D&D to get what you want or you could use a different system. Conan is a D&D variant that is more appealing to people like me who would rather try to capture some element of fantasy fiction than worry about how many plusses my gear has. Maybe someone with limited options or who wanted a quick and dirty option wanted a d20 variant that was more attribute and skill based. Characters in Conan have far, far greater skill ranks in general than D&D characters, which can be reflected in social skills, knowledge skills, and whatever else that has nothing to do with grim and violent.

Sure, there may be other far better choices of systems, but maybe Conan was the most convenient one and maybe that the world of Conan draws a lot from our world in terms of races of humanity is a reason to choose it over something else.

I've started working on trying to de-Rokugan the L5R system. Why? Because I've enjoyed playing under the L5R mechanics (more so than 7th Sea, BTW). It may not work, but I really dislike rolling dice in d20, World of Darkness, and a number of other popular games where I enjoy rolling dice in L5R. I don't dislike the pseudo-Japanese genre, but some of it I'm not fond of to where I'd rather play a regular game in some other genre. I've done some translating of my Conan character to Legend of the Cinq Rings to try to get a sense of power levels and flavor. What I'd really like to do is have an Eternal Champion game in a system I preferred. People like Conan for its quick and brutal combat ... something L5R is pretty good at. If you take the Maho magic system, you get not too far from Conan.

I'm just contributing to something I see as pointless, debating the validity of people having fun, but you seemed to equate genre with system, where I constantly want to graft genres I prefer on systems meant for something else. As to posting adventures that people don't find interesting, there's always plenty of stuff on forums I don't want to read.

 

[Damien]

Good to see you again on the boards Damien - where ya been?

Thanks. You too, man. It seems lately whenever I have a chance to get on the computer - I'm doing reviews. I regularly have five or six new products in my e-mail from Gaming Report, so that has taken up a lot of my time (and I'm still falling behind!).



Ichabod: I don't think King is saying you can't use the Conan rule system for non-Hyborian games. I think he's saying that if you are going to use Hyboria, the best use for it as as it was written. But you could make a good argument that players and GM can use Hyboria however they like. You could certainly choose to make your own 'alternate Hyboria' if that's something you'd enjoy doing. I doubt King is saying you -cannot- do it. Rather, I'd say he's referring more to GMs that tell their players it's a Conan game, and then run it like it's something else entirely.

 

[bjorntfh]

One thing to note though: for some reason many GMs take offense to players playing their sorcerers as the Conan sorcerers: psychotic madmen (or women) who are unhinged by power.

I always found it ironic that it's okay for an NPC sorcerer to take permanent sorcery, craft abberation and craft life and make an army of hideous minion things, but the minute a PC does it it's not okay anymore.

If your enemies are allowed to randomly kill NPC children for power there should be no inherent reason the players cannot do it as well. Maybe they're trying to maintain the illusion of civilization, but if they're not they shouldn't be penalized for it.

 

[Damien]

That's why, as a general rule, I don't allow sorcerers in my games at all (as PCs). The entire feel of the sorcerer in Hyboria is kind of contrary to the heroes. Conan wouldn't travel with someone who, at the first sign of danger, grabbed the nearest serving girl and slit her throat. It's a matter of making sure your party is made up of character concepts that blend together well enough, at least, to function.

If you've got the nasty sorcerer type PC, you have to make sure the other PCs are pretty nasty and evil as well. If you do have a sorcerer in a normal (read: good/semi-good) group, then that sorcerer has to understand that he can't just kill children and women on a whim - because if he does, his fellow adventurers are likely to kill him outright.

So I get why GMs cry foul at this kind of behaviour. While it may be correct for the setting, it's very bad for cohesiveness of the group, and therefore the overall abiltiy of the GM to hold the narrative together. That concern is always paramount even over setting concerns.

 

[Krushnak]

One thing to note though: for some reason many GMs take offense to players playing their sorcerers as the Conan sorcerers: psychotic madmen (or women) who are unhinged by power.

I always found it ironic that it's okay for an NPC sorcerer to take permanent sorcery, craft abberation and craft life and make an army of hideous minion things, but the minute a PC does it it's not okay anymore.

i GM the conan game for my group and i wouldnt take offense to a player doing that. some of the other players might if they hadnt realised he was a sorceror or made conflicting characters because of code and/or religion then thats for them to settle themselves. however most folk in hyborian lands dont take kindly to witches and sorcerors so they have to know the risk they are getting into.

the players in my game have done some very heroic deeds, but being merciless soldiers and pirates they've commited a few attrocities aswell. just like conan did. there is no good alignment and thats the way i like it.

i know as a player theres nothing more frustrating then just being out and out penalised for trying to play an 'evil' or morally void character *glares at the star wars d20 dark side source book*

and yeah if you play conan d20 and it's set in Hyboria, i expect to play in Hyboria.

 

[tneva82]

Simply put - regardless of how your players like to play the GM has the responsibility to create the adventure to match the setting

And your black and white image is only appropriate view on conan setting?

Fact: Only minority characters in conan world would be viable fighters...Atleast 90%+ likely aren't.

it says Conan RPG

And there are more ways than one to play it. No need to take black and white view on it.

The players are not in the dark about what type of game it is - they know the game is Conan.

They know the game is conan. Which still leaves infinite number of possibilities on type of game.

Why would they expect things to be the same as some other setting? Again, if you want Conan then you should get Conan.

Yup. Good thing conan game contains infinite possibilities on type of campaign...

Not following your logic. I'm saying there is no stretching - the bible of gaming

False. There is no such bible. There is no right or wrong way to play ít.

 

[weasel_fierce]

If anything, I'd say its the players that have a responsibility to get in trouble

A good rule of thumb in sword&sorcery stuff is that 75% of the trouble someone gets in, are self-inflicted

 

[Hervé]

Well, when I choose a setting, I try to stay as close as possible of the spirit of the author. I would not use any stuff that would hurt my vision of the world, like elves in Hyboria or something... It does not mean I'd use only REH stories as an inspiration. Pastiches and other gaming material can work perfectly too.

For the rules, it's an entirely diffrent matter. For me, rules are a support to the setting, not the contrary. I feel free to discard any rule I don't like or even change completly the system. I think you can play Conan without using the D20 system (after all TSR and GURPS made different systems for the hyborian world).

Of course everyone is free to scale the game to his own need, but when I play Conan, I try to stick as much as possible to the REH spirit (or at least the vision I have of it), not to a silly set of rules.

Conan's world is dark and gritty, where civilisation is on the verge of collapsing and where horrors from a forgotten past still lurk. It's an harsh world where there's little place for tenderness. People die (including PCs) and there are no such things as good aligned clerics to resurect them up or godlike gandalf like wizards riding dragons to save the day.
In hyboria, you can only trust your swordarm, and sometimes that is barely enough...

 

[Damien]

On the other hand, if you overplay the 'Hyboria is dangerous and teetering on the edge of barbarism' concept, your game becomes trite and silly. Your players will start to wonder -- if the world is this dangerous for someone who walks out of a town or happens to glance at the wrong noble the wrong way, how in the Hell is this world still populated?

If people were in as much danger as it's being played up as, Hyboria would be a barren wasteland without any people - they'd all be dead. The 'spirit' of Hyboria should not be stringently defined as 'how Conan lived.' Because that's basically what people are saying when they say the 'REH spirit.' Consider other of REH's Hyborian characters. Prospero, for instance, How many evil, psychotic Lovecraftian demonic things did he fight in his lifetime? More than Conan, or less than Conan?

What about guy #2 in a tavern in Stygia? What's his story? Is he guaranteed to face immeasurable horrors and gore just because he exists in the Hyborian world?

REH's stories focus on Conan being Conan. But there's an army of minor characters and 'presumed characters' (people that must exist but are never mentioned, that is) that are living out their lives as well.

Actually, I'd say that an entire campaign of political intrigue with minimal horrors is still keeping with Howard's intent. After all, doesn't he often describe the political house of cards of most Hyborian nations? He does. So isn't playing out those maneuverings keeping with how he described the setting? I think so.

To me, keeping with the setting and how Howard designed it does not necessarily mean keeping with the type of events that typified Conan's life story.

An entire campaign of Freebooters raiding merchant ships is just as much Hyborian as freebooters suddenly fighting a tentacled horror off the coast of a mist-shrouded island. The latter is more Conanish, the former is just Hyborian. And you can have plenty of Hyborian adventures without emulating the Conan stories. But that emulation is generally more fun.

 

[rgrove0172]

Just my $.02 but I think the difference lies in the perception of the game at the onset, when first reading the title. Many games are "system intensive" in that the heart of the game are the rules, the melieu is up to the GM and players. D&D strikes me as this way, and many others, as they have such a wide variety of possibilities as to let the gaming group go any direction they wish. Other games are more "Genre Intensive" or specific to a particular work of fiction or specific setting. I think it logical that when playing one of these most would expect it to resemble the genre it depicts.(If I join a group playing Star Trek, Id expect something that approximates the TV shows and movies Ive seen) Granted, the GM can do whatever he wants but I would have to agree that if you deviate from the accepted norm for that genre, then you really need to explain it to the players and have effectively left that game behind for some new mutation.(Oh, in YOUR Star Trek they use swords and wear Space Armor... uh, ok.) Now let me say again, THATS FINE if thats what you want to do - but I would agree that your only using the system at that point and could be playing any number of other games just as well.

 

[Hervé]

Damien wrote:

The 'spirit' of Hyboria should not be stringently defined as 'how Conan lived.' Because that's basically what people are saying when they say the 'REH spirit.' Consider other of REH's Hyborian characters.

Hello Damien,
I quite agree with you, but I believe characters in a Conan campaign should not be average commoners, but larger than life, just like the standard Howardian hero. It doesn't prevent from playing adventures without any supernatural elements or intrigue based. Actually, many REH stories do not include supernatural elements (although most Conan stories do).

In my point of view, Hyboria is not a nice place to live. It's a harsh world, where the strong take the weak. Of course, there still can be characters born with a silver spoon in hand (the Noble class is perfect for this) that never get a hint of what's waiting outside. But when they go adventuring they are quickly confronted to what I would call "Hyborian reality". Murilo, in "The God in the Bowl" is an exemple of such character.

If Conan himself appear rather optimistic (especially for a cimmerian), I really think that REH intented to give a very pessimistic tone to Hyboria, a world ravaged by successive cataclysms, haunted by ancient evil and doomed to a near end. That's how I feel it, that how I play my game.

 

[slaughterj]

An entire campaign of Freebooters raiding merchant ships is just as much Hyborian as freebooters suddenly fighting a tentacled horror off the coast of a mist-shrouded island. The latter is more Conanish, the former is just Hyborian. And you can have plenty of Hyborian adventures without emulating the Conan stories. But that emulation is generally more fun.

I disagree. Without elements of the fantastic / supernature / magic / weird, you are not playing a Conan-Hyborian campaign. You might be playing in the world, but not as it is envisioned for the heroic Conan types. Maybe we are just talking semantics here though.