Supplement "Wish List"
jburneko:
Quote from: Marshall Burns on September 07, 2010, 10:42:06 AM
I'm very enamored with the "book report in a hardcover" thing that you get in the core Sorcerer books.
ME TOO!
When I first started working on my Gothic stuff I realized my "primary" source of my love of D&D's Ravenloft. Sorcerer & Sword taught me that RPGs make TERRIBLE primary sources. I had read most of the sources for the knock-off villains found in Ravenloft. Dracula, Frankenstein, Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde and The Island of Dr. Maureau.
When I did proper research I was actually shocked to discover that with the exception of Frankenstein NONE of those are actually considered Gothic novels. It turns out that the faux-Victorian horror stuff most of pop culture refers to as "Gothic" isn't. The Gothic is a *Romance Era* art form and predates Victorian times significantly. The Gothic literary period is generally recognized to have begun with the publication of The Castle of Otronto in 1764 and ends with Melmoth the Wanderer in 1820 (Moorcock as sighted both of these as influences on Elric). Dracula wouldn't be published for another 70 years!
What I found was pretty lush and largely forgotten pulp-like tradition. Go read William Beckford's Vathek (1787). It's almost indistinguishable from most of the material found in Sorcerer & Sword. Hell, it features a scene in which the title character feeds an entire group of children to a demon.
What to see one of the most awesome and mysterious Kickers of all time? Read Anne Radcliffe's The Romance of the Forest (1791). It opens with a man named Pierre LaMotte fleeing with his family from Paris because of unpaid debts. Along the way he his kidnapped by bandits who make just one demand. They ask that LeMotte take a woman named Adelaide into his possession and make sure she doesn't come back. Weird right?
Mathew Lewis's The Monk (1791) Features a pure Faustian Sorcerer A plot and and a pretty gripping and heroic B plot.
That whole emo-angst ridden do-nothing goth-boy stuff? Yeah, not found in the actual tradition.
JEsse
Paiku:
Thanks Finarvyn for your thoughts on an Elric supplement. Also Marshall, I'm not sure if your comment about fandom emulation was directed at this, but it certainly applies.
What I'm creating now is primarily for my upcoming game, it won't be a complete treatment of the Elric Saga and it will be biased towards the kind of Sorcerer game that I want to play. I'll post it on The Forge for your reading enjoyment and for comments and feedback. Then we'll see how much interest there is in taking it further. As you said Finarvyn, it will probably never be more than a for-free product.
And: +1 in favour of the "book report" aspect of the supplements! Fascinating stuff that keeps me going back to the library (and the video store).
Ron Edwards:
Hey everyone,
I at least am getting a little confused about the discussion - is it about Adept Press supplements authored be me, like the existing three, or about supplemental material written and published by others? If it's both, then we should be specific about which is being mentioned for a particular point or wish-list, because they are very different entities.
The Adept Press supplements I've written have really, really specific goals, to develop emergent properties or particular applications of the rules. I hope I've succeeded in writing, not supplements in the ordinary RPG sense, but genuine books extending and developing the potential of the first. There's a little introductory text in each one outlining the principles and goals that guided me in writing. The whole series is also highly individualized, an expression of myself as a role-player, designer, and author. At present, I have no plans for writing another. A couple of ideas have occurred to me, but since writing a Sorcerer supplement is kind of a life-changing event, I don't have the energy or desire to detract from other stuff I'm doing.
Whereas others' material, originally called "mini-supplements" although that name no longer applies and should be junked, is totally open-ended. A person can write whatever he or she desires for Sorcerer material. I'm not even sure that thinking in terms of a wish-list makes sense to me, as it seems weird to function only as a consumer ... as I see it, if you'd like to see something as Sorcerer material, then the best thing to do is play it and then write it up as your own publication.
Best, Ron
jburneko:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on September 08, 2010, 08:54:11 AM
I'm not even sure that thinking in terms of a wish-list makes sense to me, as it seems weird to function only as a consumer ... as I see it, if you'd like to see something as Sorcerer material, then the best thing to do is play it and then write it up as your own publication.
That was my thought too. That's why I kind of introduced discussion about what personal work the current supplements have inspired me to go and do for my own play.
Jesse
Marshall Burns:
Quote from: jburneko on September 07, 2010, 04:17:29 PM
That whole emo-angst ridden do-nothing goth-boy stuff? Yeah, not found in the actual tradition.
Except Frankenstein :)
I swear, he has a nervous breakdown every other page.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page