Barf Forth Apocalyptica
the swamp provides => AW:Dark Age => Topic started by: kkibrick on March 05, 2014, 11:44:33 AM
-
So a Common Topic on this so far is history versus fantasy. I realized after reading everything that this game could be played on earth as in our earth, in a viking setting, or arthurian setting very easily. One catch though is the Dragon Herald. The Troll Killer exists because we always had in our past "giants" David and Goliath, "Cyclops" Odysseus, even witches "Circe and Morigan le Fay". Monsters could exist they are just our imaginative comprehension of real scary things. However, the one the doesn't fit much is the Dragon Herald. It implies that Dragons exist. Big giant unsustainable magical monsters, and pull us out of the more realistic harshness of the dark ages.
Historically those times were considered an apocalypse because from the fall of Rome when some people went back and saw aqueducts they had no clue what these things were. Priests were considered truly godlike because they could actually read. Diseases were fought with ridiculous magic rituals that might have killed more then helped, and disease and plague were rampant. Famine was constant, and the threat of the outside was everywhere from the bitter cold, to the lack of food. In England they fought murderous Man Monsters (Vikings/Celts/Saxons/Picts) that Could attack at any moment. In Eurasia they fought Centaurs "Mongol and Arabic horsemen". Our world in the Dark Age was a land of Apocalypse, and I worry that the Dragon Herald removes our world from that and makes it a world of fantasy not darkness.
That said I think the class is cool, and was seeking for advice how to reskin it a little bit so it doesn't have to explicitly involve dragons. To me the Dragon Herald is like the mad profit, or the witch advisor to a king. They are the truth seer that nobody wants to like, but has to deal with "Beware the Ides of March, the Furies, Circe, etc.". I want peoples advice on the following. So seriously please help me and provide other examples. My thoughts to make it more realistic is keep it exactly the same, but instead of "Awaken Dragons" as XP moves maybe instead they "Create prophesies" or "Change fate". Make them more broadly mystical instead of specifically with dragons. Any other ideas? I'd love to hear. These are my thoughts though. Further if you want more examples of Mad Profits that remind me of a Dragon herald see the following:
-John of Leiden/ Munster Rebellion for mad prophets (listen to this for more http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive/Show-48---Prophets-of-Doom/Luther-Reformation-history)
-This one for good dark age lore ( http://www.dancarlin.com//disp.php/hharchive/Show-41---Thor*s-Angels/Dark%20ages-medieval-antiquity)
-This one for plague and death in the ancient time (http://dancarlin.com/dccart/index.php?main_page=product_music_info&cPath=1&products_id=139)
Though you'd have to buy it. I'm obsessed with Hardcore History, and I plan on using some of themes in my game of it.
-
I am not sure the dragon has to be an actual dragon. It could be largely metaphoric, as implied here: "Clothe it in storms, earthquakes, floods, wild fires, poisoned fields, rotten woods."
-
That could work, and is what I'm implying. I just feel the word dragon is out of place. If you are going to use metaphorical nature of outside unexplained forces. Why give it a name that so consistently pops up in the modern culture minds as an actual dragon.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y_Ddraig_Goch
Or it could be a metaphor for a sort of crypto-nationalism. That's certainly how it's used in, say, GoT. A War Herald is a vassal or a mercenary, fighting out of loyalty or for coin. An Outlaw Heir has no beef with the system, he just want his stuff back. The Dragon Herald is the only playbook right now that comes with a creed, a promise of power and change through a thing that "has always been here, but sleeping."
-
That is an accurate description and what I want out of it. So should dragons still be the name, or should it be something else?
-
Dragon has a good and nice ring to it. I like the image it conveys. Dragons are also pretty universal in legends all over the world.
-
I think the Dragon is a good name, poetic and exact at the same time.
For the ideas what it could be if not "real dragon"...
-Dragon of [cheap] Steel
-Dragon of Steam Power
-Dragon of sleeping [buried] Plague
-Dragon of normally docile natives, talked into frenzy for Revenge
-etc
-
Couldn't it be the word prophecy instead. A prophecy is always doomed, and it doesn't use a word that has another connotation?
-
The dragon isn't the prophecy. The dragon is the thing prophesied. It says the MC can bring in a dragon if he wants, late in the game, even if there isn't a Dragon Herald. I don't really see how the term "Dragon" is any more setting specific than "The Empire of Eagles"?
-
I use this thread for another question about the DragonHerald
Inviolate: the dragons in the Earth give you 2 Armor, even when you wear none.
Is it a plain +2 Armor? Does "the dragons in the Earth" means something more?
-
fealoro:
My familiarity with Apocalypse World tells me that it's 2 armour flat (if you have 0 physical armour, you get 2 armour. If you have 1, you get 2. If you get 3 physical armour, then you keep the 3), not +2. "Dragons in the earth" doesn't mean anything aside from provide a kind of thin layer of fictional plausibility to the move, as far as I can tell. It'd probably still work when all of the dragons are out of the earth.
kkibrick:
As far as I can tell, DA 'herald' playbooks are not about seeing the truth or the terrible future, they're about bringing it about. The War Herald wages war, the Dragon Herald brings forth dragons. So dragons and prophecies call forth two different aesthetic promises:
Dragons: you will be terrible and powerful and terrified of the power that you wield.
Prophecies: you will be terrible and powerless and terrified of the truth that you see.
I would be down for a game with or about prophecies anytime, but I'm not sure an AW-engine game works that well when they're the core focus of the playbook - as far as I can tell, the game is always a little bit of a power fantasy in that you are always the unquestionably cool guys that the story's all about, and all of the non-trivial limits to the things you can do come from having to deal with the other unquestionably cool guys. Which is not nothing, of course - but I can't ever see an AW-engine game being about true things you know but are powerless to stop.
But the terrible consequences of power? Rock right on.
-
When the dragons of the earth give your player 2 armor, that's a great time to ask them what that means. Maybe they're like, "oh, the earth moves to protect me, like walls of stone" or maybe they're like "oh, I'm just lucky, I guess." Then you know what they think is cool and what they're after.
-
Dragon Herald is not harmed by dragons. It does not seem obvious to me that he'll be able to 'wield' them, though it is possible for him, given enough work. Dragons have to recognize him as equal - but they do not have to obey to him just because he's DH. Say, Bilbo in Desolation of Smaug is not harmed by dragon. But he does seem quite powerless to stop him from destroying lake town
-
Sure! I mean, I doubt Bilbo is a Dragon Herald exactly, but my wording isn't that great either. "Unleash" rather than "wield" the power would probably make more sense? I feel like the more general point about dealing with an active force versus dealing with a future event (what does the prophet do when the prophecy comes true, by the way, aside some form of "You should've listened!") fitting in better within an AW framework still stands, though. At least, I think it does?
-
...as far as I can tell, the game is always a little bit of a power fantasy in that you are always the unquestionably cool guys that the story's all about, and all of the non-trivial limits to the things you can do come from having to deal with the other unquestionably cool guys.
This is kind of off-topic, but both Murderous Ghosts and Dark World (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?665682-Anyone-have-Dark-World-by-Graham-Walmsley-(AW-Hack)) are apocalypse engine games that involve powerless main characters. I think I agree with what you're saying, though, but I'd add the caveat that any apocalypse engine game that uses playbooks is going to be about power fantasy, as one of their purposes is to give the PC cool stuff he can do, that other people can't.
I also agree with you about prophecies, but I think it's not that it's hard to make an AW game in which true prophecies are a large part of the game, but that it's hard to make a Story Now game in which true prophecies are a large part of the game, because choices and uncertain outcomes are important to making Story Now work.
-
I'm ok with forcing prophecies and wielding great power. I meant prophecy in the way that it will come true. I sort have always interpreted many soothesayers as prophecies are inescapable and make them happen. That's fine. It's just the term dragon. If we agree it's the control of terrible power, and its herald. Maybe we just change the name herald to something like, Herald of Chaos, Herald of destruction, Herald of the Apocalypse. Something that doesn't straight make our minds jump to this is daenerys from Game of Thrones and you are going to use actual dragons to cause this. You don't need to have giant dragon beasts to make a land scary adn awful and I feel the naem dragon herald just is to blatant about the type of destruction. Thoughts on names like Herald of Destruction and Herald of the Apocalypse?
-
"Doom" is the word I'd use, if I were to change it. Herald of Doom, Doom-Bearer, something like that.
-Vincent
-
I can accept herald of doom,or doom herald. I like the word disaster, apocalypse, destruction something longer then just doom, but Doom will work much better then Dragon.
-
This is kind of off-topic, but both Murderous Ghosts and Dark World (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?665682-Anyone-have-Dark-World-by-Graham-Walmsley-(AW-Hack)) are apocalypse engine games that involve powerless main characters. I think I agree with what you're saying, though, but I'd add the caveat that any apocalypse engine game that uses playbooks is going to be about power fantasy, as one of their purposes is to give the PC cool stuff he can do, that other people can't.
That's a great caveat, thank you. I did have a moment of "am I talking out of my ass here?" when my mind wandered to Murderous Ghosts, but I felt like there's still something to the general thrust of the statement and so kind of wanted to leave it stand alone instead of enmeshing it in a thousand caveats (like, making sure that no one thinks that I consider calling AW a 'power fantasy' a negative pejorative, explaining why not, saying how big of a deal I think having to deal with other cool guys as part of a power fantasy actually is...), but that would have probably made it an unintelligible mess.
I also agree with you about prophecies, but I think it's not that it's hard to make an AW game in which true prophecies are a large part of the game, but that it's hard to make a Story Now game in which true prophecies are a large part of the game, because choices and uncertain outcomes are important to making Story Now work.
I don't think that's true exactly! You'd have to drill down deeper into what makes stories about prophecies tick, but you could do it. For example, Ben Robbins' Kingdoms have a character-class that is pretty much defined by having full knowledge of a world-defining event but no power to change it, which could very well support something prophecy-like. But I guess this is beside the point.
I'm a little bit struggling with the Dragon Herald, to be honest. This might just belie my lack of knowledge, of course, but while I can think of multiple characters 'out there in the wild' that are War Heralds, Outlaw Heirs, Wicker-Wises or Troll Killers, when I think of Dragon Herald, the only image that comes up vividly is Daenerys. Maybe also Arthur or Merlin if I squint? I like the playbook and am sure I could play it, but I don't feel 'free' around it, if that makes any sense. Like I'll always be making stuff up on my own rather than being able to borrow things from my memory when I get stuck.
-
I quite like the Dragon Herald, especially once I read the MC section about how the Dragon cannot harm her. She's, like, the only chance humanity has at dealing with this ferocious force of nature. That's her bargaining chip and it's her seat of power. Wars are the affairs of men; the Dragon could end it all.
-
I have nothing against what you say Scrape, but could you agree that the term dragon could be replaced with doom or destruction. They can still be immune to it, but it doesn't have the dragon connotation.
-
Kkibrick, I'm not clear. Are you asking me to change the Dragon-Herald, or are you working on making a playbook of your own?
If the former, thanks for the suggestion.
If the latter, you don't need anyone else to buy in before you create it. Create it and see what people think of it then.
-Vincent
-
No, I love everything about the Dragon Herald, it's the name "Dragon". The class is spectacularly well written, and I love it's story changing ideas in awakening. I just think the word "dragon" is to specific a connotation of doom compared to the word doom, destruction or its ilk. Your game could be made its semantics and I should really stop talking about it, but the word I feel evokes the idea of Giant creatures, when you don't need those to have destruction, and doom.
-
I've gone too much rant by this point and I apologize, I am ending my own contribution to this topic :P
-
No, I love everything about the Dragon Herald, it's the name "Dragon". The class is spectacularly well written, and I love it's story changing ideas in awakening. I just think the word "dragon" is to specific a connotation of doom compared to the word doom, destruction or its ilk. Your game could be made its semantics and I should really stop talking about it, but the word I feel evokes the idea of Giant creatures, when you don't need those to have destruction, and doom.
I think that the idea behind the dragon-herald is that they are the heralds for supernatural forces beyond humanity. It isn't "dragon" in the traditional sense of lizardy flying creatures that hock fire-loogies, but "dragon" as in a living force of destruction that wreaks havoc upon the world. It has a different meaning in this game, just as the word "troll" has been expanded to reference other lesser monstrosities.
So your setting might have completely different dragons from mine. Your dragon might be a leviathan, consumer of worlds looking to turn whole kingdoms into something it can digest; it might be the first lich, who births the undead hordes that march in its wake; it might be the world serpent, hunting the land for the last roots of the World Tree; it could be Satan him-fucking-self, come to bring the war of angels to the land of mortals.
The dragon isn't just doom. It is a living embodiment of doom, an incarnation of its coming. To let it live is to let the doom be wrought. To slay it is to give the world reprieve.
-
Hmmm, I read that playbook as very much saying "there is a literal dragon, and it will treat you as an equal." There's no reason you couldn't slightly tweak the playbook to be about any other doom, though: a plague or anything. I bet it would rule! But it'd be different for sure. This playbook promises a big-ass dragon to me, real and deadly.
-
Hmmm, I read that playbook as very much saying "there is a literal dragon, and it will treat you as an equal." There's no reason you couldn't slightly tweak the playbook to be about any other doom, though: a plague or anything. I bet it would rule! But it'd be different for sure. This playbook promises a big-ass dragon to me, real and deadly.
As it should. It just doesn't have to be a flying lizard-esque dragon. It has to be huge, it has to have a vast and patient hunger, and has to distort the environment to reflect its nature. All other aspects are up to you to define, and nothing in any of that inherently screams flying lizard.