Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by AsenRG

You're referring to a kind of Frei Kriegspiel, right?
I'd say it's transferable. You just need to have a Referee that's ready to adopt it and can do the heavy lifting.

Well, I honestly don't know. The Gary Con game was billed as an RPG, using EPT as the rules, and I ran it like I normally do - and have been doing for the last thirty-some years. The players were astonished, from the looks on their faces; they'd never seen anything like this, I gathered. I had learned these things from the Big Three:

Phil: Know your period, know your material, know your world-setting;
Gary: Know your game, know your mechanics, know how to prepare the battlefield;
Dave: Know your limitations, know your table talk, and know how to pace the game.

From all three: Keep the game moving along at a sharp pace - don't get bogged down in detail or mechanics.

I don't know if that would transfer or not...

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Wait, now, you (and OG) were referring to Courtrai, 1302, right?
Then I don't know how it's relevant, because troops there had pikes, and terrain advantage (all the stuff I was thinking of, except lassos and trenches, in fact). And you said this makes them heavier troops, so it's no longer relevant.

Well, I am speaking from the standpoint of game design. Courtrai is a data point, along with many other period battles, that gives us an idea of how the battle field actually 'worked'. Hastings, Towton, Nicopolis, Acre, Delhi, etc. also provide those data points for establishing what seems to work and what does not. From there, you can build your 'bell curve' for inherent military probabilities - troop training, armor, weapons, morale, supply, terrain, weather, time of day, and other items all add their own factors / modifiers to the situation.

For me, this is a big part of game theory - the number-crunching that goes on 'behind the scenes' to establish what is likely to happen on the battlefield. Sure, there are always going to be rare exceptions - heroic last stands, surprise coups, unexpected delays, and surprise failures. These can all be accounted for in the numbers - at the opposite ends of the bell curve, if you will.

I've noticed, over the years, that I do thing kind of thing more or less instinctively - I suspect OG does it as well, as we both come out of the same cultural background in our gaming. Going back and describing the process is the hard part, I think!

Originally Posted by AsenRG

What would be the results of trying to cast in a polymorphed form? Do they depend on gestures so much, or can it be circumvented with sufficient concentration?
And I think the glass blower part was to be expected.

'Ritual' spells were a disaster; the compromised DEX scores were abysmal. 'Psychic' spells usually went off all right, but as these are the less effective ones in melees having the Blue Fish as a magic-user was simply asking for trouble. And, since Eyloa was a pretty snarky player most of the time, one could not suggest that he should just chill out and watch the world go by from his bowl.

It made life very interesting, until we could get him changed bak. He was still as annoying as ever, but at least he could cast spells.

It was a nice little castle, too. I later added a nice glass fish to his shrine in his temple in Khirgar, too...

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Yeah, I get the love for props.
I just don't have the physical space to store them. What can I say?

Don't feel that you need to apologize! Props are not vital for games; they are just another tool for the GM, like miniatures.

I'm lucky that I have the space, and a very understanding spouse; we've also been in this same house for the past 25 years, and that stability also heps as well.

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Ok, now I'm totally putting a god in some setting where the temple has waiting lists for people willing to be sacrificed!


You should ask questions, too!

Monty Python's "Life of Brian". There's a waiting list.

And yes, feel free to ask questions!!!

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Wait, now, you (and OG) were referring to Courtrai, 1302, right?
Then I don't know how it's relevant, because troops there had pikes, and terrain advantage (all the stuff I was thinking of, except lassos and trenches, in fact). And you said this makes them heavier troops, so it's no longer relevant.

In some abstract rules sets, including CHAINMAIL 1:20, troop types deal more with capability than equipment.

E.G.

"Swiss/Landsknechte attacking in close formation ( 5 x 2 figures minimum) fight as Armored Foot, with extra die for weapons. For every two men so attacking an additional "mass shock" die is added. When defending in close order (1" or less apart), with pole arms facing the enemy, they are treated as Heavy Foot. If attacked in flank or rear, or when in open order, they are treated as Light Foot."

CHAINMAIL 3rd edition P. 40

Originally Posted by AsenRG

You would have done very well in my games, I suspect! Well, at least I can tell that attitude reminds of some of my more successful players.


I get Gygax's logic, though I don't necessarily agree on the alignment point.
Still, what's actually unclear here is, why did those guys hassle you for being an "Evil High Priest"?
I mean, that describes pretty well at least one of my characters in historical games (inspired by Aramis, I must admit).


I've always called someone that can do that "a good GM". Sure, you get better with experience in running games, but experience helps in everything!
(Knowing how to pace the game and preparing the battlefield are the things I have most issues with, personally).


Ahem, I've always followed more or less the same approach - collect data points, analyze probabilities, translate into mechanics. Except I was using it for GMing purposes.
After all, if I need to make a ruling for a game, it better be a good ruling!


OK, maybe you should tell us that story. How did you manage to make him a god?


Well, we don't even live on the same continent. As a general rule, houses tend to be smaller here, from what I can tell.


I admit to my deliberate, almost complete ignorance of Monty Python.
Then again, it really helps my GMing, which is why I'm taking care to maintain it! See, if I don't recognize an OOC pun, I can't get distracted by it and tend to just assume it's a not really successful attempt at a joke.
Some months of this treatment, and people just stop making Monthy Python references - which, from what I hear, is something of an achievement!

1. Thank you! I think you would have fit right in at Coffman Union, too!

2. Well, it's the 'Evil' part; in the original D&D gameplay in the late 1970's 'Evil' characters were all pretty much cardboard cut-out NPCs and considered fair game for PCs, who were all - almost by definition - The Good Guys. Here I am, playing an Evil High Priest, doing all the nasty stuff reviled in D&D; human sacrifice, hanging out with courtesans, blasting people into oblivion, leading armies of Evil across the land, etc. (The usual things a ranking Priest of Vimuhla does in his day job; I was also an errand boy for the Imperium in my spare time.) This always caused a ruckus at Gen Con, as players' brains just stopped when the subject came up in conversation - it was one of the things that got Tekumel the reputation that it seems to have.

Phil pointed out in an interview once that all of the religions of the Five Empires are 'evil', in comparison to Western Christianity, especially as is often practiced here in the upper Midwest. Culturally, Tekumel's religions are much closer theologically and ethically to non-Western ones, which should be no surprise given Phil's cultural background. (See also The Great Satanic D&D Scare; I had to live through that.) Tekumel, Phil once said, is Mughal India and not Victorian England - hence the issues that quite a few people had with my PC.

3. Agreed; my point, exactly.

4. I didn't make him a god; the locals took one look at the talking fish and got the idea by themselves on what was a spectactular dice roll by Phil for their reactions to this rather unusual happening in the marketplace in the city of Khirgar. It was a wonder, as people said at the time, and an obvious manifestation of the divine. (Rather like the events in "Life of Brian", where things go badly for a Zealot resistance fighter while being chased by the Romans, actually.) There is still a little shrine to The Blue Fish in Khirgar, just of the Street of The Blue Fish which happens to be behind the Gate of The Blue Fish (you can see a pattern, here), where devotees of the Temple of Ksarul go to ask for The Blue Fish's help and ask him to use his influence with the Doomed Prince of the Blue Room. On what, I have no idea; I just make a donation to help with the up-keep of the shrine. They do sell little blue ceramic amulets there, which are supposed to protect one from drowning.

5. Yes; my UK friends have made a cult of garden sheds, as a result.

6. The Pythons are one of those things we here in the US gaming scene grew up with, like the Tom Baker 'Dr. Who" episodes. (like the Sisterhood of Karn: "Sacred Flame! Sacred Fire!" You can guess who showed up very shortly at the Temple of Vimuhla with their chanting...) They are a handy source of surreal comic relief when the dice call for such...

Originally Posted by Old Geezer

In some abstract rules sets, including CHAINMAIL 1:20, troop types deal more with capability than equipment.

E.G.

"Swiss/Landsknechte attacking in close formation ( 5 x 2 figures minimum) fight as Armored Foot, with extra die for weapons. For every two men so attacking an additional "mass shock" die is added. When defending in close order (1" or less apart), with pole arms facing the enemy, they are treated as Heavy Foot. If attacked in flank or rear, or when in open order, they are treated as Light Foot."

CHAINMAIL 3rd edition P. 40

And there you go!