I'm really looking to dig deep into how one could play campaign in Lyra's setting from His Dark Materials, if possible maintaining the themes and mechanics.
Monsters & Other Childish Things is a great suggestion for setting the human/deamon duo until you realize it isn't. For one thing it can't address unsettled demons nor does it help shape a game where the actions of one's deamon is symbolic of their social (or even intrapersonal) actions. Buffing the monsters down to mortal animal standards though is too easy.
Is there a good system for mimicing complicated political and social interactions, collecting favor and bits of gossip for instance, or "equipping" a character with ideals or pieces of identity (how they view themselves or where they fit in) that define the character and impact the game mechanically the same way equipping weapons and armor might in D&D.
If anyone's heard of any mechanics based on Jungian cognitive functions, systems where two players control a single character or closely linked duo (especially if those two characters have contrasting but complimenting traits), or a system in which an index of animal symbolism is used in a mechanically significant way I'd LOVE to see it.
Systems that encourage a PC to define their character's nature and identity and especially ones that somehow allow a player to struggle with their PC coming to grips with themselves would be of special interest.
It started with promise, like inklings of good ideas, but everything slowly snowballed into an such a... it's hard to describe. It's like the entire series was designed to make fantasy suck.
Like, you're looking at the programme before a play starts, and you see all of your favorite actors are going to appear on stage together.
All of your favorite parts of fantasy.
And then, as the play progresses, you realize it's not them, none of them, but understudies. And they're terrible.
They know all the lines, but the delivery is hollow, and they actually get worse as scenes become more demanding. The plot drags its feet so they linger on stage for so long in each scene that you start to feel irritated just looking at them, and everything is even more horrible because you find out later that the all the primary actors were ready and willing, it's just that the director decided they didn't match his vision.
That's what reading that series felt like. Like you're sitting through an awful play, hoping to catch a glimpse of your favorite actor, hoping he'll appear in one of the final scenes. You're sitting through all the slimy "unpleasantness" that's just a shade lighter than sickening so it's not enough to make you leave your seat, and then at the very end seeing that he too was replaced by a terrible understudy. The curtain drops, and you're left being frustrated with the knowledge that you could have left the show at any time.
Xavier Peterson
You're shite.
Tyler Brown
>the themes and mechanics Which would be? According to your post: > Identity relation to the self, through the deamon thing or not > Relation to others > ???
From what I remember, I liked the exploration part of it (I guess it could ties through the "traveling to discover yourself" idea?), different people with different culture that have their merits and flaws that you aren't going to solve right now, the fact that characters constantly need other people help, both in and out of combat as external perspectives are vital to plot developments. Also flawed people giving the best of themselves when it truly matter, feelings being the best and the worst...
Benjamin King
Man its been ages since I read those books, can somebody give me a tl;dr on how the animal companions worked?
Carter Nelson
I think the most disappointing part was God turning out to be basically retarded, and the 'super powerful angels' having the amazing power of 'being almost as strong as a living man'.
Like, what the fuck was all that? What kind of story was that? More, I'm bewildered by how the Church is supposed to have been 'defeated' with the conquest of Heaven, when it's spread among the infinite multiverse and doesn't get anything from God anyway.
It's just such a strangely-written story.
Nathan Perez
Everyone has an external representation of their soul called a daemon that takes the form of an animal. Prior to puberty your daemon can take any shape it wants but once you reach adulthood it takes a fixed form. This is supposed to represent your personality becoming more defined as you grow up; soldiers get dogs, individualistic people get cats etc.
Also due to this daemon literally being a part of you, it can only move a short distance away before you turn into a zombie-like state due to having part of your soul removed. I vaguely remember witches having a tradition where you forcible separate yourself from your daemon and something about them getting sick and dying if you stay too long in a world that isn't yours, but I might be wrong. It's been almost a decade since I read the books.
Luke Stewart
> People and their daemon must stay close or they die. > Witch have a very harsh initiation that allow them to avoid that limitation > Some methods described as particularly horrifying can sever the link between a man and his daemon, making him basically a zombie
Also: > It's a very strong taboo to touch another one daemon, it's basically like touching their soul. It also feel very very weird, to the point of often being incapacitating. > Killing a daemon kills its human and vice-versa > Even in combat, people with daemon tend to fight each other while their daemons have their own fight. Though shooting daemons is a thing and beings without daemons (like freaking bears) may not give a shit.
Luis Wilson
The third book was definitely the weakest, it was the longest and still felt rushed, it should have been split into two, the third book would have ended just after they free the dead from the underworld.
Also, does anyone else remember that weird two chapters with the quantum bomb thingy where they're going to kill Lyra using a lock of her hair which is somehow solved by shaving her bald with the Subtle Knife? Remember how that attempt, along with the fact that Lyra is bald for the rest of the book is never mentioned again?
Christian Foster
it can't be stressed enough how little bears give a shit about things
unless those things are Lee Scoresby
Lee Scoresby is the best
Jason Howard
They didn't shave her bald, they removed the part of her hair from where the lock of her hair was taken. Not that it makes much sense other than symbolic sense.
But mostly, those chapters weren't about Lyra, they were about her mother. Her new founded love lead her to take that lock of hair out of sheer uncharacteristic sentimentalism. Which will be stolen for the bomb. A fault that she would have to go out of her way to repair.
Levi Gutierrez
I just checked the book and you're right, thanks for clearing that up it was bothering me. Still feels like a weird few chapters, I can't help but feel he could have shown Merrisa's change of heart some other way than a plotline that's opened and closed within 40 pages
Parker Reed
>Still feels like a weird few chapters They are, but I guess the bad guys had to do something at some point. Well, they also sent that one "arrow of god" guy on that scientist girl tracks. I liked that part, even if it's another plot that happen completely outside of the main characters sight.
Tyler Diaz
Isn't this whole series unabashed atheist propaganda?
Owen Howard
Does an author filling their book with their own opinions count as propaganda?
Though, from what I remember, the third book does go from 'generic evil church' to 'let's fuck up the narrative because I'm really mad at Christianity'.
Hunter Collins
Never really saw it as atheist, it seems strongly deist to me. With the dust as a non-personified god. It also have that "fuck the scientific method" moment with the scientist women.
Henry Cruz
If the author doesn't even attempt subtlety, that is what propaganda is.
Nolan Young
The author uses a church (the "Magisterium") to imbody all negative aspects of society's control over the individual in recent English culture. While this was probably decidedly going to be controversial, it isn't a direct stand in for any religion (or even, quite possibly, even religion as a whole) the same way the apple in Adam and Eve wasn't actually about the dangers of eating fruit. The author is very hard on the pursuit of power for power's sake, the illusion many people have that even exceptionally competent people (or anyone) are infallible and won't eventually fuck up, the native ideals that youth and purity are somehow ideals and ESPECIALLY the belief that people needed to prevent themselves or others from changing. They counter-argued that everyone having the power to experience life and grow into who they're going to grow on their own authority is the best state of a human and that the best ambition is not to amass personal power from hiding information from others but was to increase society's goodness and EVERYONE'S agency through education and honesty. They speculate that the cultivation of wisdom is the defining factor of humanity and the sole reason for its existence.
The IRL Christian Church even makes an appearance in this book and they ain't The Magisterium.
An IRL noble does make an appearance however and they are a lying, thieving, foolish ass who concisely chooses to steal candy from babies and benefit from the fall of the greater good, as do all the upper class this book desu, so any claims that this book is against disproportionately huge amounts of arbitrarily assigned power is 100% valid.
Tbh if anyone thought the church in this book was supposed to be a representation of a real life religion then that would seem to be a bigger insult to that religion than anything in the book.
Ayden Nelson
>deistic principle >physical manifestations of the soul >atheistic
Joshua Russell
You're real good at using a whole lot of words to say nothing.
Jaxson Reed
People like to pretend Fearful Self-Hating Christian and Atheist are opposites. His story was pretty hard on religion and government as a source of oppression and censorship, though Christians as a democratic aren't very literate, are quick to anger, and are kinda used to people attacking them for no good reason and reasonably would be on the defensive preemptively. It's not surprising several church groups think the Magisterium was a metaphor for their religion particularly.
The book is kinda Anarchist, if anything, mostly it's just about not trusting any person, culture, or authorized to have your best interests in mind or be perfectly unfoolish.
Logan Mitchell
I, OP, agree with them though I hope would never make so long a statement about the series' merit in a conversation about gamifying the setting.
People should actually know what happened in the book before giving commentary desu.
Yeah, I like that too.
Bears are great. They're so metal. They also don't have souls, tragically, though I guess they just means they get to skip that whole world of the dead part.
AW world was a lot more fitting than I was expecting. I look forward to looking into FATE.
Jace Gutierrez
This post is getting kinda close to the bottom, eh? Anyone have more religious insecurity they wanna project onto this book?
Jace Bailey
agreed
William Hill
This. Thank you for explaining to me what I felt when I read that pile of crap. I feel better now.
Mason Walker
As a Gnostic these books are fun and therefore material enticements to seek pleasure through reading and so remain trapped in the earthly prison of the Demiurge rather than transcending and seeking the light of the Monad
Liam Watson
>If anyone's heard of any [...] systems where two players control a single character or closely linked duo (especially if those two characters have contrasting but complimenting traits)
I actually saw a post recently recommending Better Angels for just this purpose. I've never tried it so I'll just repost the original
>There are actually a couple of games which fold an element like this into their mechanics.
>Better Angels is a rather funny game where the PC's are quite ordinary, decent people possessed by demons who demand to be satisfied by acts of villainy, but offer power... So of course, the best way to satisfy the demons without hurting any body is by committing acts of over the top, impractical supervillainy.
>The interesting mechanic is that each player plays a demon in someone else's head. Each player makes the first half of their character, the human side, then passes their sheet to another member of the group who takes over creating their demon, which defines some more of their supernatural and wicked capabilities. In play, each player is playing both their character And the devil on the shoulder for that player. It's a little hard to do in practice, but it's rather fun once you get going.
Leo Russell
Wow, no wonder gnosticism didn't catch on. I mean, beside the killing and all.
Jose Thompson
missed the point
Blake James
That's because bear souls are their armor, and the whole point of armor is to be touched before you are.
Luke Sanders
I understood his meaning, if you don't that's on you.
Elijah Cox
thank you for your opinion. It's wrong, but its good that you're not letting your mental disabilities hold you back from participating in the discussion.
Asher Lee
I think you BOTH need to let other people think and enjoy things.
Even if their opinion is completely unbased (if they think it's bad because it's a girl story, or they aren't literate enough to understand it, or because it's, apparently, atheist propaganda) they're still untitled to say "it's not my cup of tea" even if that's only because they're too bias or stupid to actually see it for what it is and you gotta hear them out that it's not their cup of tea... even if they claim the problem is with the book and not themselves AND refuse to explain why
Meanwhile they poster, and everyone else really, ought to realize their opinions on the genius it shite of the novel's structure, when not irrelevant to figuring out what parts of the setting or story should be integrated into a game and how, should refrain from shoving their opinion into that discussion. This is tg, not b.
