|
|
|
Prodigal
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:19 PM
Posts: 650,
Visits: 4,626
|
|
theshoveller (1/14/2010)
But you can have a shared concept that doesn't fit neatly into one of the five cultures that exists in rules terms, while still possibly remaining true to the spirit of the setting. Slaves, mercenaries/auxiliaries, ex-pats and so on.
Absolutely - you could. and some of those concepts would enhance the game by promoting conflict between cultures. But some wouldn't, and it's a slippery slope towards everyone being friends. So we've chosen to set the bar at single nation cultures, because we think that'll give the best game.
That said - Nation doesn't necessarily mean "place of birth", or upbringing, so a group made of slaves, mercenaries/auxiliaries, ex-pats, whatever is still perfectly feasible. Just that for whatever reason this group has come together under the banner of a Nation, to take their place in the Great Games under the banner of that Nation. And in rules terms, follow the rules for that Nation. We're hoping that there's a load of room for creativity here, and the constraint will be like Haiku and help make better group concepts that make a better game.
I hope this will be clearer in the rulebook, that edge conditions are covered by the FAQ, and the rationale is explained satisfactorily in the game design blog.
If not - poke us, and we'll try harder.
Does that make more sense?
+++++
Odyssey team. Someone kind once said I was designing the game experience. Flattery will get him far.
As with all PD matters, such positions are best sought direct from PD through the usual official channels. Accept no substitutes!
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:39 PM
Posts: 513,
Visits: 1,750
|
|
| Oh absolutely. The feedback from PD has been fantastic on this, actually.
-- -- --
Eos: Manius Shard. Green and gold shiny healy thing.
Shadow Wars: Johnny Hyper, Hack the Planet!
Odyssey: Was Prince Ramekhet IV, of the line of Nectanebo etc etc; now Quintus Antoninus, sentimental fool err... philosopher of Rome.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
theshoveller (1/14/2010)
But you can have a shared concept that doesn't fit neatly into one of the five cultures that exists in rules terms, while still possibly remaining true to the spirit of the setting. Slaves, mercenaries/auxiliaries, ex-pats and so on.
I don't think that makes sense - not just from a pragmatic sense that the organisers say it doesn't make sense with reference to the way the game is set out - I don't think it makes sense with respect to even a loose view of the setting. The setting historical period is when 'national' cultural identities are intentionally exclusive (before the Hellenistic kingdoms, before the Roman empire) and culture is a group phenomena (in the same way that it makes no sense to talk about one molecule of ice).
In that context, slaves don't carry their culture with them - slavery is the process of bringing someone under the aegis of your culture, regardless of where they came from.
Mercenaries/auxilliaries - remember that Rome "has yet to become a great imperial power. Rome now is thirsty, young and vigorous. Rome is on the rise, ready to break out of the Italian peninsula" - they don't have any non-Latin allies yet. Mercenaries exist but I don't know of any *multicultural* mercenary groups.
Ex-patriots are, well, *ex*-patriots. Odyssey groups are prestige groups representing their nations, not random associations of convenience. Herodotus fawned over the Egyptians - but it was Greece he went back to and wrote his histories for.
Did you have a specific example of a group of mixed (current) cultures that you think would fit with the setting?
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:49 AM
Posts: 2,787,
Visits: 5,084
|
|
Marios (1/14/2010)
I don't think it makes sense with respect to even a loose view of the setting. The setting historical period is when 'national' cultural identities are intentionally exclusive (before the Hellenistic kingdoms, before the Roman empire) and culture is a group phenomena (in the same way that it makes no sense to talk about one molecule of ice).
What is this history thing of which you speak? That's that thing in books and stuff right?
It's important to appreciate that Odyssey is not historically accurate. It has real gods and features magic and has other cool stuff that all the boring historians insist on leaving out of the actual history of the period. So calls to the "settings historical period" always have to be handled with care.
That said Odyssey is designed to strongly encourage the idea of unified groups and cultures. Any rules system in which Greeks are different to Romans at a mechanical level has an inherent bias towards multi-culturalism and so we have deliberately designed the rules to counter that effect.
I think the idea you claimed earlier is one of the best ones, the annual is a place for heroes of Rome to come and represent their great nation. Those heroes don't actually have to be born in Rome, their background and character is up to the player. I think Arnold Schwarzenegger is a great example here - Arnie is the prototypical all American action hero. He represents America, he's part of the ruling American class; in Odyssey terms he is quite clearly an "American Hero". The fact that he's not actually American and talks with a thick Austrian accent is completely irrelevant. And in Odyssey terms, Arnie, ticks "American" on the booking form and uses the American hero template, because he's an American hero.
Mercenaries/auxilliaries - remember that Rome "has yet to become a great imperial power. Rome now is thirsty, young and vigorous. Rome is on the rise, ready to break out of the Italian peninsula" - they don't have any non-Latin allies yet. Mercenaries exist but I don't know of any *multicultural* mercenary groups.
Ex-patriots are, well, *ex*-patriots. Odyssey groups are prestige groups representing their nations, not random associations of convenience. Herodotus fawned over the Egyptians - but it was Greece he went back to and wrote his histories for.
It's always very dangerous ground telling other people if their character idea does or does not fit the setting. It's a hugely subjective judgment and everyone has different ideas. Appeals to historical rectitude are not valid as mentioned, so you're left with "Well I don't like it" as a basis for criticism and it's difficult to get far beyond that.
While it's good for the game to have a clear central vision of what it's setting is and it helps if players try to build characters that embody that central concept, creating a character is, for me at least, one of the fundamental reasons I live roleplay. Its about the joy of creating a new persona and having as large a degree of creative freedom as you can allow within that remit of the central vision is a good thing.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:34 AM
Posts: 791,
Visits: 4,358
|
|
H (1/14/2010)
... the rationale is explained satisfactorily in the game design blog. There's a blog? Where? Or is it a post-release blog?
---------------
Masquerades & Massacres, "Jane Austen's Aliens"
A Tale of Romance, Politics, Magic, and Horrific Beasts.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:49 AM
Posts: 2,787,
Visits: 5,084
|
|
bunni (1/14/2010)
There's a blog? Where? Or is it a post-release blog?
Soon.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:34 PM
Posts: 267,
Visits: 2,477
|
|
This is LRP not reenactment a merc group within the system would be great.everything would b against them ,not ex having little campfire chats,the only thing keeping these dogs of war together would b gold
Go tell the Spartans,stranger passing by,that here,obedient to their laws we lie.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
Matt Pennington (1/14/2010)
What is this history thing of which you speak? That's that thing in books and stuff right?
Game > History, but in this case I don't think it's just an issue of Game Organisers Fiat - i.e. the setting/vague historical period is consistent with X, but the game mechanics only support Y - I don't think it works for either.
Matt Pennington (1/14/2010)
It's important to appreciate that Odyssey is not historically accurate. It has real gods and features magic and has other cool stuff that all the boring historians insist on leaving out of the actual history of the period. So calls to the "settings historical period" always have to be handled with care.
Yeah - sure, I'm not bothered about historical detail, just broad brushstroke stuff like whether we're thinking of the period when you have massive empires which forcibly mingle Greek/Egyptian/Roman/Persian/Carthaginian peoples together. By "setting's historical period" I'm thinking "the state of play before the post-Alexander states really smooshed people of different (game) Cultures together".
I don't think it matters if someone uses an iconic design of Roman shield which wasn't actually popularised until 30AD - I *do* think it matters if we disagree over whether Rome is an Empire containing multiple (game) cultures yet.
Matt Pennington (1/14/2010)
I think the idea you claimed earlier is one of the best ones, the annual is a place for heroes of Rome to come and represent their great nation.
I think I stole it from someone better informed.
Matt Pennington (1/14/2010)
It's always very dangerous ground telling other people if their character idea does or does not fit the setting. It's a hugely subjective judgment and everyone has different ideas. Appeals to historical rectitude are not valid as mentioned, so you're left with "Well I don't like it" as a basis for criticism and it's difficult to get far beyond that.
Well, the context is that someone has *asked* whether a 5 way mixed culture group would be acceptable - I think that's question as to whether it's (i) mechanically acceptable and (ii) setting acceptable. The organisers have said that it's not mechanically acceptable and that trumps setting acceptability fullstop, but I'm not convinced that's a mechanics 'bug' so much as a feature of the mechanics supporting the setting.
'But you can have a shared concept that doesn't fit neatly into one of the five cultures that exists in rules terms, while still possibly remaining true to the spirit of the setting'.
If we're taking culture to reflect the group you're representing (i.e. who will have produced your kit/cultural products - a group with 5 different cultures implying that they are representing some home community which contains all 5 cultures living side-by-side), then I find it hard to see how you could do that while remaining true to the spirit of the setting.
From the point of view of a player, I think it's very useful for organisers to clearly distinguish between Design Bugs and Design Features, since the latter gives you useful information on the game setting.
Matt Pennington (1/14/2010)
While it's good for the game to have a clear central vision of what it's setting is and it helps if players try to build characters that embody that central concept, creating a character is, for me at least, one of the fundamental reasons I live roleplay{Freudian slip?}. Its about the joy of creating a new persona and having as large a degree of creative freedom as you can allow within that remit of the central vision is a good thing.
I absolutely agree, which is why I think clear settings are good. It's like language - having a shared language doesn't impede creativity, it aids it! Like language, part of the pleasure is in developing and growing it, so I think it's important that supplying people with a shared language isn't confused with trying to supply them with all the words they might possibly need and how they are to be inflected.
Open settings seem like real world situations where you dump a load of adults together with no shared language - people manage, but their creative options are sorely limited.
Generally, what causes I think causes conflict is when people start with a character concept and then try to edit the setting to fit - "I really want to play a relaxed foreigner-loving Roman" "Oh, you want to play a weird philosopher who most Romans think is deranged and maybe a bit dangerous?" "No, I want to play a Roman who likes foreigners and who has grown up confident that most Romans would agree.". That's not an IC conflict, that's a conflict between two people playing two mutually exclusive games. It's not something for players to deal with - but I've never seen a good way for organisers to deal with it ("you can play a character who *believes* that" and "you can play a character from this part of the Wild Area part of the setting which is completely open" seem superficially like perfect solutions, but don't really seem to solve the underlying issue).
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
bedlum (1/14/2010)
This is LRP not reenactment
It's Odyssey, not LT.
bedlum (1/14/2010)
a merc group within the system would be great.
Several of the Cultures already *are* basically mercenary (Carthage/Greece). If you were take people from 5 different cultures and jam them into one group you'd have a group which no shared culture. Who would they be representing?
In Maelstrom, that's not an issue because it's set in a period of multiple identities where people have specifica National, Religious and Economic identities along which they can align - the Churches and Trade Houses are groups which transcend Nation. As far as I understand the Odyssey setting it seems very clear that there are is nothing that transcends Nation (other than NPC event-setting lynchpins!) - there are no Churches - there are National cults - there are no Tradehouses - there are National castes.
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Knight
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, August 27, 2010 10:52 AM
Posts: 65,
Visits: 167
|
|
While I guess you wouldn't have a starting group of mixed cultures I guess it's theoretically possible that once the game gets going some enterprising gladiator stable owner might put together a "super team" of cross culture fighters in the same way that modern football clubs buy in the best talent. so you could have a situation whereby A Greek, a roman and an Egyptian find themselves fighting beside each other even though their respective nations are hostile. Could create some very tense situations in and out of the arena.
Obviously the more academically minded people would come together to compare and contrast philosophy and some of the hostility could be put aside in the name of furthering the cause of enlightenment.
That said regardless of your culture everyone likes a piss up so even if the rules wont let you fight together you can still sample fermented vegetable products together.
____________________________________________________________________________________
See the blood flow washing dishes, up above my head
|
|
|
|