[Sorcerer] Also spielte Zarathustra, thoughts
Ron Edwards:
It might interest you to know that Sorcerer is written explicitly from a particular slant on existential philosophy. That slant is best understood not through technical philosophy itself but through literature and film, which as I see it have been as solid a medium for that philosophy as any treatise, or perhaps more so. To the extent that any technical philosophical writings were involved, the only ones I'd point to would be Schopenhauer and Camus.
The slant I'm talking about has two parts: first, the experience of alienation, and I want to stress the experience, as opposed to analysis or especially as opposed to any conclusive analysis; and second, the experience (ditto) of doubt and frustration that even free will itself, upon inspection, is subject to the same disappointments and "cosmic silence" as rational/cosmic guidance.
I'm not sure whether any philosophical writings and treatises ever dared step far into that latter topic, aside from the religious context of predestination. Most existential philosophy that I've read is very firmly rooted in the Romantics and would not dream of violating the sacred (and I do mean that term) Self as a concept. I think Nietzsche's work displays this feature quite prominently. The two I mentioned came the closest, again, in my reading-experience anyway. But literature and later film, on the other hand, has a long tradition all the way back in our oldest still-recorded legendry of questioning whether the self, whether in action or even at the very heart of the concept of personhood, exists, or if it exists in a technical sense, really matters. The Epic of Gilgamesh is about nothing else but, as far as I'm concerned, and it sure as hell offers no comfort about it.
So certain older works, but especially literature and film of a certain edgy, romantic-but-bitter, heroic-but-grim, tragic-but-struggle-on quality all feed into Sorcerer quite directly. It so happens that I outlined it just the other day to add to the annotations for the anniversary edition, and the major elements include:
- pre-modern literature such as Medea and Doctor Faustus
- early twentieth-century pulp-intellectual stories, including Howard, C.A. Smith, and the best of Lovecraft (and the material for The Sorcerer's Soul fits square here as well)
- the sixties' revival of such things in a more acid-drenched, countercultural sense, for example Moorcock and Wagner
- the eighties' retro- and relatively punky revival of such things as found in the diverse work of Salmonson, Vachss, Jeter, Garton, and others; and especially in comics like Grimjack and the early Hellblazer
- and in parallel to the above, a trip through slightly marginal U.S. film such as Exorcist III and Twin Peaks, and in non-U.S. film through directors like Argento and Almodovar, Hong Kong films like The Bride with White Hair and A Better Tomorrow, and some older Japanese films like Onibaba.
It makes a little more sense in my diagram with circles and arrows, but I hope that the list conveys my point regarding the experiences of alienation both from the cosmos and from the self. Perhaps it's also worth pointing out that I have little interest in and consulted no sources from the occult traditions or fashions.
All this is to say that referencing Nietzsche, particularly based on a solid reading and not the stupid caricature of the man and his work that persisted in English-speaking circles until Kaufmann's translations, poses interesting problems. Given all that I wrote above, I think that I'd turn more toward the experiential, responsive, and above all simultaneously enraged-plus-humorous aspects of the work, and less toward developed models of either society or humanity.
Thanks for bringing this up. It's interesting.
Best, Ron
Ron Edwards:
And back to the practicalities of the game itself:
Quote
how much do you think GM should have ready before the play-group is even formed? Is there a correct answer, or is it just up to how much GM wants to produce his nifty vision and sell it to potential players? Or if he just wants to get to play and is cool with everything, tries to find some cool guys and see what everyone can cook up together?
That's definitely something I'm already working on articulating for the annotations. The answer is actually present in the core book but only through example and inference. It shows up a little bit more in the supplements, but unfortunately only in the context of advanced techniques like the scenario/adventures for Sorcerer & Sword, the relationship maps for The Sorcerer's Soul, and the applied player-gender rules in Sex & Sorcery.
The answer is that the organizer of the game, who usually turns out to be the GM in play, in practice, but is not theoretically necessarily so, should provide a leading vision as a working, jumping-off point for everyone else. The extent of detail involved can't be pre-set but I do think that the distinction between an inspirational starting-point and a finished portrait of "what we're here to do" is very important - in other words, the former is necessary and the latter is a disaster. As I've been trying to demonstrate here for years, I think a document in the form of physical handouts is the best medium. When dealing with people who don't know the game, such a handout may well summarize some of the rules procedures, like the sorcerous rituals or the Humanity checks and gains. But with or without such things, the document must definitely provide the look-and-feel for play and especially sorcery which provokes the jolt or basis for the shudder which inspired it in the organizer, in hopes that it will be felt in some way by the others who read it. I tend to do it partly through references and quotes, but imagery is often crucial as well, in the sense of the Color-first concepts I've been working out for the past year or two. Also, I think the Humanity definition for the upcoming game lies in practice more in the response to these precise features, and less in a bloodless and legalistic verbal paragraph.
I'll post an example when I have access to the relevant documents, on Monday.
This material undergoes a profound development through the medium of character and demon creation, and then takes on its first practical fictional shape in the form of the player-character diagrams. I can't stress enough that all GM work prior to the diagrams is preliminary and developmental and inspirational, and should be presented in that way, as well as being open to feedback and modification. However, regarding that last point, I have found that a fully consensual committee approach isn't as functional as one person taking the lead, at least in terms of opening the dialogue and arriving at an emotional grounding for the conversation.
Let me know if that helps!
Best, Ron
Jaakko Koivula:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on July 22, 2011, 11:06:50 PM
It might interest you to know that Sorcerer is written explicitly from a particular slant on existential philosophy. That slant is best understood not through technical philosophy itself but through literature and film, which as I see it have been as solid a medium for that philosophy as any treatise, or perhaps more so. To the extent that any technical philosophical writings were involved, the only ones I'd point to would be Schopenhauer and Camus.
The slant I'm talking about has two parts: first, the experience of alienation, and I want to stress the experience, as opposed to analysis or especially as opposed to any conclusive analysis; and second, the experience (ditto) of doubt and frustration that even free will itself, upon inspection, is subject to the same disappointments and "cosmic silence" as rational/cosmic guidance.
That is interesting and also makes complete sense. Also, it reminds me of the thread here earlier about horror, role-playing and Sorcerer. I had a hunch from the beginning that Sorcerer could be utterly horrible for some reason and after discussion ended up with: "Sorcerer played correctly might be described as an existential moral horror game, maybe?".
Let me rephrase your first post for myself to make sure: Philosophy is all nice and posh, but you practically need something else (film, literature, RPG) to really experience that feeling about emptiness, alienation and meaningless. Nietzsche/Sartre/etc. might write about looking into the abyss, but nothing in their work is yet making you look into it yet.
In light of this, using Sorcerer to simulate some heavy philosophical system would be like using it backwards. Like backing towards the emptiness and being analytical about it, when you could be staring ahead and trying to experience it first-hand. I'm not sure if I can explain this very well, but I think you'll get what I'm aiming for.
That also means, that the more bombastic and outrageous (i.e. fun) Nietzsche could well be used as great material for a game, but doing a philosophical nietzsche-pastiche isn't what Sorcerer was written for.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on July 22, 2011, 11:24:30 PM
I can't stress enough that all GM work prior to the diagrams is preliminary and developmental and inspirational, and should be presented in that way, as well as being open to feedback and modification. However, regarding that last point, I have found that a fully consensual committee approach isn't as functional as one person taking the lead, at least in terms of opening the dialogue and arriving at an emotional grounding for the conversation.
This bit and the whole second post is very helpful. For some reason I was fumbling between "I build this game and find the right players to play it." and "I need to find players and then we collectively put together the right game for everyone of us" -methods and this helps. Both of course could theoretically be done, but the middle-road propably makes it much easier to actually get to play one day! The hand-outs etc. are also a great idea. It's great to be excited about your idea, but even better if you have something concrete to prove it to others and for them to get excited over also it. Thank you!
Ron Edwards:
Hi,
Your re-phrasings go further than what I wrote, which was more about literary inspiration with the aim of playing a role-playing game and less about philosophical anthems or directives outside that aim. I have no idea, at broadest level, whether reading a novel or playing Sorcerer is more jarring or effective than reading, say, Nietzsche's The Genealogy of Morals (one of my favorite titles by him). I'm not saying this to object or to tell you you're wrong, but merely to distinguish what I wrote from what you wrote. You're taking it farther down a certain road, that's all.
It may also help to consider that although I'm always telling people to define Humanity prior to play, it is perhaps better to say, provisionally label it prior to play, with only a couple of examples of what seems to you, as upcoming GM, as situations meriting a gain roll or a check. The full, developed definition or application for that particular game really takes its shape through the crucible of play, as you (as GM) find your feet regarding what strikes you as heinous or its opposite (I hesitate to use the word "virtuous" in modern speech). That crucible sometimes includes false starts and omissions, especially the latter, that is, simply forgetting to call for a Humanity roll of some kind in the moment. That's correctable by doing it later. My point is that your standards for Humanity rolls of either kind are going to be your standards, and not those of either group consensus or some kind of pre-game legal contract. So you can open the door to them during preparation (and communication with others), but not know them in full.
Best, Ron
Jaakko Koivula:
Fair enough! I see that I took it rather far, true. I guess the whole philosophy vs. art -debate could be quite a big thing to just solve in a couple of forum posts, heh. Heavily interesting questions though, might have to look into these at some point, out of academic curiosity.
The humanity suggestion also sounds reasonable and usable. I think I now have three interested players together, so I'll be kicking some sort of Sorcerer campaign going soon. Your answers and this forum in general are awesome help and great inspiration for prepping a game. Cheers!
-Jaakko
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page