Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Chirine, can I ask you about something that was prompting lots of drama on another forum? At one point we even mentioned Gary Gygax, but the opinions about his opinion of the practice differed.

So, it was a discussion about illusionism. The way we were using it, it means "the GM changing stuff behind the scenes to achieve a desired result with the illusion that said result is due to PCs' choices". [example snipped]

So, is that something you could see either Dave Arnesson, Gary Gygax, or MAR Barker using? Would any of them recommend it to other GMs as a best practice?

Im my experience, no. The play style for referees / GMs with them was 'what you see is what you get', and 'the dice don't lie'. They set up the scenario, and we had to make of it what we could - they didn't manipulate things behind the scenes in the kind of situation that you describe. I think they all went for consistency - we normally went into the 'dungeon' / 'underworld' on multiple trips, and we'd have caught the changes between adventures.

Dave once said to me that the challenge for him was rolling with whatever the players could come up with. Phil was very, very consistent over the years, and we could go back to a location literally five real-time years later and find the same details present.

I don;t think any of them would recommend it as a way to run things - it gets too hard to keep track of, and too hard to keep consistent. I don't use it myself; I prefer other ways to increase the illusion of reality for my players.

Does that help?

Originally Posted by TristramEvans

Your descriptions sound very similar to the sort of gaming I've "discovered/fallen into" in the last few years. I also have very little interest in a lot of new RPGs and find myself more and more distanced from the hobby as its represented online/in rpg forums. The focus on rules minutia holds little interest for me, as does the strict division of gaming styles. For years I GMed a very lose historical occult investigation style game, where I pretty much abandoned any rulebooks in favour of a very quick and intuitive framework of a system I stole from a game from the early 80s, and generally just made rulings on the fly as they fit the situation. I heavily experimented with different forms of play (one game took place on a submarine, and I ended up separating the players into different rooms with the lights off, only able to communicate via walkie-talkies), one game was nothing more than a dinner party where everyone remained "in-character" for the proceedings. But the breaking point for me was getting back into miniature wargames a few years back, wherein I rediscovered my love, not just of painting minis, but also building scenery and creating elaborate gameboards. As simple PvP wargames bored me quickly, I began coming up with more and more elaborate narrative scenarios, and elements of RPGs began bleeding in. I became fascinated with that gray area where wargames and rpgs meet, and the different manner games could be combined into an overall experience. I brought in elements from Diplomacy, constructed overarching campaign rules that dealt with things like resources and troop training/replenishment, and came across some great naval battle rules that led to several months of high seas adventures, switching between ship to ship combat and regular combat rules for boarding parties. As time goes on, the term "gaming" for me has started to become an all-encompassing creative thing that doesn't really match any singular modern definitions of rpgs/larps/wargames etc. I for one would love to hear more about how the old Tekumel games were run, particularly more specifics on what you looked for in players and what it meant to "get" Tekumel, or more specifically, the style of gaming you're describing. I find it hard these days to get new players who are on board with this sort of free-wheeling creative approach, especially those indoctrinated by the last 20 years of very specific ideas of what an RPG is and the "importance of rules".

Yes, what you said. This is a very good description of the kind of play style we had, and a very good set of examples of the kind of thing we did in our games 'back in the day'. Let me address your question about our Tekumel gaming in my follow-up post, if I may...

Originally Posted by TristramEvans

[snipped to extract text] I for one would love to hear more about how the old Tekumel games were run, particularly more specifics on what you looked for in players and what it meant to "get" Tekumel, or more specifically, the style of gaming you're describing. I find it hard these days to get new players who are on board with this sort of free-wheeling creative approach, especially those indoctrinated by the last 20 years of very specific ideas of what an RPG is and the "importance of rules".

What we looked for in both Phil's and my game groups were people who were interested in the world-setting, and not so much in the rules mechanics. Phil's original group, which kept going as the Monday night group after we split up, tended to be much more interested in the 'game aspects' and less in the 'cultural aspects' of Phil's world. This is very well documented in Fine's book, "Shared Fantasy"; we're 'the geek group'. We wanted to explore Tekumel, and have adventures along the way. I did the same thing in my two Tekumel campaigns, and 'screened' players for this attitude / viewpoint.

The other major factor was personal compatibility - we played out at Phil's for the better part of fifteen years, with about 75% of the group being always the same people. Phil didn't hand out XP, in our group; we went up in rank and station by hard work, a little bribery of the right NPCs, and sheer ability to survive whatever he could throw at us. We worked together, and always made sure that while we might have different goals, there was always something in if for everyone.

As an example of 'getting' Tekumel, at one point the Monday players tried to have one of our players arrested and imprisioned. (Kathy Marshall, Princess Vrisa Vishetru of Saa Alliqui). The messenger gave me the verbal orders, and I sent him back to get written orders as per proper Imperial protocols. Phil gave me some grief about this, and I gave him precedents from one of his own books. He went off and had a two-week pout, as I was entirely within my rights as an Imperial official, and came back with a beautifully done Tsolyani document - the proper arrest warrant. I read it, approved it, and then chewed him out, telling him that if he'd gotten his paperwork right the first time we'd have saved two weeks of annoyance. I then handed the warrant to Kathy, who gave me a 'come-hither look' and asked "Your tent or mine?" Phil nearly swallowed his cigar, in his astonishment.

He stared at me for a few minutes, and then gave me one of the very best accolades I have ever gotten: "Chirine, you've gone native."

What I'd done was what I think people call 'immersion', nowadays; I was being my Tsolyani alter ego, and playing the role to the hilt. Kathy did the same as Vrisa, and so did the rest of the group. We took on our roles, every Thursday, and we played them as if they were real people. We learned the cultures of Tekumel, and we moved within them like fish in the sea...

I've seen people 'get' Gloriantha, as well as other world-settings as well; it's possible to do...

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

He stared at me for a few minutes, and then gave me one of the very best accolades I have ever gotten: "Chirine, you've gone native."

What I'd done was what I think people call 'immersion', nowadays; I was being my Tsolyani alter ego, and playing the role to the hilt. Kathy did the same as Vrisa, and so did the rest of the group. We took on our roles, every Thursday, and we played them as if they were real people. We learned the cultures of Tekumel, and we moved within them like fish in the sea...

I've seen people 'get' Gloriantha, as well as other world-settings as well; it's possible to do...

Working with and within the setting is great fun! I love it when my players do that.

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Let me check for confirmation. By giving her the hard-to-obtain official order instead of acting on it, did it allow her to destroy it, thus preventing her own arrest, or otherwise act against the people that wanted her arrested?
It's a nice story even if I've misnuderstood.

By showing her the warrant, she was apprised of the reason why I was arresting her. She handed it back to me, and i handed it back to my adjutant for the files. Since we were very old friends and comrades, she was delighted to have me arrest her - hence the "Your tent or mine?" comment. So, she was throughly arrested, moved in with me and the wife, and we then nailed the nitwits who came up with the idea later on.

Later in the same story arc, she 'escaped', in order to get on with her own mission. We all stood around and said "Gosh! We're baffled! How could this have happened? We must launch an investigation! Etc., etc., etc."

Having her under arrest also meant that her room and board didn't come out of her money pouch; it was now Official Business, and we billed the Imperium for all her expenses - we actually made money off the affair, much to the Professor's annoyance!

Originally Posted by Bren

Working with and within the setting is great fun! I love it when my players do that.

Agreed, and very strongly at that! This is what we did as a matter of course, back then; GMs with campaigns that didn't allow for this kind of engagement just didn't last long, and their campaigns tended to die off in a few months a nobody could get interested in them.