Greyhawk HERO

[Lord Liaden]

3 hours ago, assault said:

It only takes one vampire to wipe out an entire city.

 

Seriously? Not even Dracula ever tried to pull that off.

 

Humans have the numbers. They have the day. Once they realize what they're dealing with and mobilize, the vamp is toast.

[Doc Democracy]

32 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Seriously? Not even Dracula ever tried to pull that off.

 

Humans have the numbers. They have the day. Once they realize what they're dealing with and mobilize, the vamp is toast.

 

Never really had a game player playing a vampire.  A clever vampire could wipe out a city, probably easier than a village as cities do have infrastructure underground.  But would it?  Vampires are predators, intelligent predators.  They know they need a human population to prey upon.  They know they have vulnerabilities and they know rogue predators stimulate extreme, organised responses.

 

It is in a vampire's best interest to be in a position of power, preferably behind the scenes due to longevity.  It is in a vampire's best interest that the city regularly finds and deals with "the most recent vampire plaguing the city".  It is in a vampire's best interest to have as few competitors present in the city.

 

So, a vampire, in control, can expect a city to continue running.  A vampire out of control can be expected to be hunted down and dispatched. A vampire in control who is killed might result in a territory war, probably good for the city, OR an out of control vampire organisation which might spiral out of control as masses of new vampires rampage.  Which could result in a ruined city, people fleeing during the day and burning things in the night.

 

Now a haunted city, full of hungry vampires, holds a valuable artifact with which a brave adventurer, ready to combat these bloodsuckers, might enrich himself...

[Lord Liaden]

A handful of humans, guided by someone who understands vampires, wiped out Dracula and his brides. In a fantasy world dealing with vampires for a long time, I doubt expertise in that field would be difficult to find.

 

But I agree, a vampire-haunted city is an excellent place for adventure. In fact, Hero's Turakian Age setting has a whole kingdom, Dragosani, ruled by a vampire king, Sargath. Sargath is a usurper who snuck into the royal palace and murdered the ruling family, and has turned other nobles and soldiers into lesser vampires in thrall to him. But Sargath is also a wizard whose spells complement his vampire abilities and negate some of the typical vampire weaknesses; and he brought with him a host of various monstrous followers to back him up.

 

As for vampire Player Characters, I assure you, in both tabletop and computer RPGs that let you design your own character, PC vamps are as common as flies on a corpse.

Edited October 7, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[GDShore]

I have a couple of questions about the vampire. 1 - How often must they feed?  2 - What is required to create a "new" vampire? one bite? multiple bites? draining? blood sharing? What actually kills the vampire? I have either read or seen on film all of the above, How fast can an infestation of "vampire" spread? Is it arithmetic, geometric, or exponential? All of those questions have to be answered before one can determine how fast a city can be taken down. The larger the city the longer it might take, however people go missing in big cities all the time and no one notices. How many fighters could a "Medieval" city actually field? The imbalance of fighter to serf could be enormous, easily 1 to 5 or 8 or 20. (fighter to serf) How many in the city guard, how well trained, how well equipped, ??? I would hazard that the city guard stands at 1 per hundreds of citizens.  (the NYC police department is approximately 35000 the city population is + 8000000) Finally how do you kill a vampire? Does it require special weapons, protective gear, training? 

[Gauntlet]

6 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

Seriously? Not even Dracula ever tried to pull that off.

 

Humans have the numbers. They have the day. Once they realize what they're dealing with and mobilize, the vamp is toast.

 

And in addition, Vampires have a tendency to be smarter than the average human population. They do keep their numbers down so that there always is enough food. Should the human population go down or out, then vampires lose their food supply. While vampires may be evil, they want to torture humans, cause fear, and feed on them occasionally. That way they have both their food source and entertainment, but if the humans die out, both are lost. So vampires probably truly will work to keep the human population at a high level, despite the fact that some of them may hunt them. 

 

Plus, a human hunting a vampire is sport for the vampire. Think of the thrill of the chase and the enjoyment of feeding on that ridiculously stupid human after you feast upon their blood. 

[Lord Liaden]

I imagine the vampires who are not as smart as the average human population are killed relatively quickly.

 

But with the proliferation of vampires in popular culture has come diversity in their motivations and responses to their vampiric state. Some are as you say, monsters who relish the suffering of their prey, who want to cause fear and pain. Some may enjoy the the thrill of a challenging "hunt." They may view humans as inferior beings, like deer, or cattle. But others have been depicted as hating being vampires, feeling guilt over killing humans. They may try not to kill those that they prey on. They may even want to end their existence but lack the courage to do it themselves, and perhaps long for someone to destroy them. Still others may be quite unemotional and pragmatic about the situation, killing purely to survive, with an "us vs them" mentality. Some popular depictions of vampires allow them to subsist on the blood of animals, while others can only consume human blood. They may be able to subsist on stolen bottled blood, or must feed from a living being.

 

Of course for the average fantasy game, the monstrous type of vampire is usually the most appropriate. And as I don't want to turn the Greyhawk thread into the Vampire thread, I'm done with this subject. 🤐

Edited October 7, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Cloppy Clip]

Are you open to making any tweaks to the standard Greyhawk setting, Doc? GDShore's mention of city guard got me thinking about how, even though it's a standard fantasy trope by this point, it might get across the danger of the setting more if there weren't options for the villagers to turn to when something's afoot. From what I remember, medieval settlements relied on someone raising the hue and cry, after which everyone who heard it was expecting to chase after and capture the accused criminal. Failure to do so meant a fine for the settlement, but otherwise there was no official police force.

 

And if Greyhawk HERO works this way, then whenever a dragon comes and starts stealing sheep the villagers would have no police to turn to, leaving the job up to whichever brave adventurers happen to be passing by...

[Lord Liaden]

A number of nation entries in the Guide to Greyhawk mention militias, and in places where there's a frequent threat they're described as well trained and equipped, and ready to call up on short notice.

 

I get the impression that this is a world where the inhabitants anticipate danger arising anywhere, and who don't expect some outside authority to come rescue them.

Edited October 7, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[assault]

Briefly back to vampires: there's a fair chance that they are accompanied by plague rats. Plague may end up doing most of the killing. It also keeps the clerics busy, while obscuring the vampire's kills as just a few among many unrelated deaths.

[GDShore]

Quote

22 hours ago, Cloppy Clip said:

Are you open to making any tweaks to the standard Greyhawk setting, Doc? GDShore's mention of city guard got me thinking about how, even though it's a standard fantasy trope by this point, it might get across the danger of the setting more if there weren't options for the villagers to turn to when something's afoot. From what I remember, medieval settlements relied on someone raising the hue and cry, after which everyone who heard it was expecting to chase after and capture the accused criminal. Failure to do so meant a fine for the settlement, but otherwise there was no official police force.

 

In most feudal societies the aristocracy will deny the peasantry the right to own or bear arms whether European or Asian. (this is the basis of the American's second amendment) Virtually no training with arms was allowed the peasant or serf who vastly outnumbered their overlords, England was one of the exceptions requiring that the Yeomanry practice once a week with the bow. {England did not have the huge numbers of serf's that most of Europe did it had a much larger by % of free yeomanry} If a Vampire plague had struck in the Russia's where the peasantry were mostly serf's (+90%) it could be weeks maybe months before the authorities would even get a hint of something gone wrong, let alone acted upon. By the time a society of a feudal nature population dominated by serf's got an army on the march towards the infestation it might well be to large to deal with. I've been thinking on this, now, that the more backward a society was technologically and socially was the more vulnerable to such an infestation. A major campaign is waiting there for a band of intrepid adventurers to discover and then oppose such infestation in its infancy.

[Gauntlet]

18 minutes ago, GDShore said:

In most feudal societies the aristocracy will deny the peasantry the right to own or bear arms whether European or Asian. (this is the basis of the American's second amendment) Virtually no training with arms was allowed the peasant or serf who vastly outnumbered their overlords, England was one of the exceptions requiring that the Yeomanry practice once a week with the bow. {England did not have the huge numbers of serf's that most of Europe did it had a much larger by % of free yeomanry} If a Vampire plague had struck in the Russia's where the peasantry were mostly serf's (+90%) it could be weeks maybe months before the authorities would even get a hint of something gone wrong, let alone acted upon. By the time a society of a feudal nature population dominated by serf's got an army on the march towards the infestation it might well be to large to deal with. I've been thinking on this, now, that the more backward a society was technologically and socially was the more vulnerable to such an infestation. A major campaign is waiting there for a band of intrepid adventurers to discover and then oppose such infestation in its infancy.

 

But would you consider magic to have much of the same bonuses in a society as technology. Personally, I think that it would. Priests become doctors, and magic allows a lord to be able to communicate with parts of his realm that are many many days away within seconds rather than weeks or months. And of course magic may allow that lord to be able to get troops to different places quickly rather than taking weeks/months of travel time.

 

Of course, this definitely take the level of magic and the quantity majorly into effect. A place like the Conan world where magic is rather rare and limited on what it can do then magic will not be much of a factor in the lives of people. But should there be a high amount of magic, where you have them a definitely identifiable portion of society, then the changes they make definitely could be like technology.

[Lord Liaden]

1 hour ago, GDShore said:

In most feudal societies the aristocracy will deny the peasantry the right to own or bear arms whether European or Asian. (this is the basis of the American's second amendment) Virtually no training with arms was allowed the peasant or serf who vastly outnumbered their overlords, England was one of the exceptions requiring that the Yeomanry practice once a week with the bow. {England did not have the huge numbers of serf's that most of Europe did it had a much larger by % of free yeomanry}

 

Valid observations, but as I mentioned earlier in reference to the Greyhawk world, trained and armed militias seem to be common. Implicitly, freeholders make up a significantly larger part of the population than in most of medieval Europe. In fact, the realm of Perrenland appears to be entirely freeholders, divided into clans whose leaders elect a Voortman as the chief executive of the country.

 

It's possible that the many dangers of the Flanaess, both mundane and supernatural, have persuaded most of its inhabitants that cooperation in defense and an armed populace are essential to survival. More oppressive regimes, notably the Great Kingdom and its satellites, don't include mention of militias, placing more emphasis on standing armies including many mercenaries (which in some cases might just be another way of saying "professional soldiers").

Edited October 8, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[GDShore]

Quote

3 hours ago, Gauntlet said:

But would you consider magic to have much of the same bonuses in a society as technology. Personally, I think that it would.

AS would I. Also the amount and power of magic would, as well be a major factor. The problem though would be the repressive feudal culture, again using Russia as example, they had the ability and the coin to make improvements to the infrastructure and chose not to.

Quote

3 hours ago, Gauntlet said:

And of course magic may allow that lord to be able to get troops to different places quickly rather than taking weeks/months of travel time.

As late as WW II the road network in what was then the Soviet, was virtually non-existent. If the "Lord" does have good communications, but has not improved his major infrastructure he will find it hard to move troops on mass and moving in small units invite defeat in detail.

 

 

[GDShore]

Quote

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

the realm of Perrenland appears to be entirely freeholders, divided into clans whose leaders elect a Voortman as the chief executive of the country.

 

Yes, such a land though would be a less likely target for an empire building Vampire preciously because it is free. Freeman travel, mix with their neighbours hold markets and fairs (the purpose to allow their children to be exposed to more potential spouses). A Vampire attack on the village next would arouse all the villages in the region to the Vampires detriment. Not so in a land populated by serfs.

Quote

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

but as I mentioned earlier in reference to the Greyhawk world, trained and armed militias seem to be common. Implicitly, freeholders make up a significantly larger part of the population than in most of medieval Europe.

 

When I stopped playing D&D this had not happened, there had been no expansion on the bare map of Greyhawk. At the time that Champions 1e. came on the scene a friend and I were trying to build our own gaming system with occasional kibutz's from Wilf Backus, (Chivalry & Sorcery) Coincidently our working title was Advanced D & D. [advanced Dale and Doug] Historically many militia's were better trained and equipped than the armies around them, a lot of the "Free Cities" survived because of that fact and later fell or were absorbed because they let their defense lapse.

[Lord Liaden]

The D&D world settings are often criticized for having specific pantheons of gods for each of the official races. However, Greyhawk's setting of the Flanaess is notable for having gods associated with each of the major human ethnicities, as well. While some gods are noted as Commonly worshiped across the continent, and/or of uncertain ethnic extraction, the majority are either Baklunish, Flanae, Oeridian, or Suloise in origin. In nations where one ethnicity and culture predominates (listed in the Guide to Greyhawk), it's likely that the gods of that ethnicity are the dominant or even official faith, such as the Flanae gods in the Duchy of Tenh, the Baklunish deities for the Caliphate of Ekbir, Oeridian gods within the Great Kingdom, or those of the Suloise on the Spindrift Isles. That becomes even more to be expected in states where religion is an explicit component of the governing hierarchy, as in the Prelacy of Almor, the See of Medegia, the Theocracy of the Pale, and the Archclericy of Veluna.

 

Adherence to particular religions could be one more element making the various realms of the Flanaess distinct from each other.

Edited October 12, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Mr. R]

On 9/27/2023 at 5:25 AM, Lord Liaden said:

Personally, I agree that the prominence of nonhumans could and should be raised in this world. I always disliked that the population figures in the "gazeteers" for Greyhawk invariably quote numbers for humans first, even in the lands ruled by other races. Often the populations of "demihumans" are just noted as "few," "some," or "many." One trick I suggest, for lands which do list sizeable numbers of demihumans, is to reverse the population numbers for them and for humans, so the nonhumans are clearly the majority.

 

 

Just as an aside, IF you were to do this trick in Greyhawk, which countries would you do this too?

 

Also you mentioned many of the forest and hill and mountains that have sizable demihumans.  Which are MOST likely to have their own government?

 

Finally, as we know, the human cultures all have different pantheons.  Should the demihumans get the same treatment?  (Should the dwarves of the Hellfurnaces Mtns have the same gods that are worshipped in those viking analog lands all the way to the east?)

 

[Lord Liaden]

I find these questions quite intriguing.

 

For population totals reversal, I would focus on those states which are specified as being dominated by a demihuman race, with a ruler from that race, but which have mixed populations of other races which outnumber them, and particular races (almost always humans) whose numbers rival or even surpass those of the nominally dominant race. Realms in that category are, for the elves, the kingdom of Celene, the Duchy of Ulek, and the Highfolk of the Velverdyva River; and for the dwarves, the Principality of Ulek.

 

Several other areas are noted as being predominantly inhabited by demihumans, and are functionally independent realms beholden to no other nation. It would take little effort to define them as formal states with their own governments. These regions include Gamboge Forest, majority elvish but with large numbers of humans and gnomes; Celadon Forest, home to elves and treants (ents); the Kron Hills holding perhaps the largest population of gnomes; the Flinty Hills, with many gnomes and halflings; and the small mountain range of the Glorioles, whose dwarf inhabitants ally with the Iron League. There's also mention of tales of a small kingdom hidden within the Rakers mountain range, subject of fabulous stories but no verified facts. I'd see no problem in making it a kingdom of dwarves. Also note that the Greyhawk Guide relates rumors that the inhabitants of Gamboge Forest and the Flinty Hills, which are adjacent, aspire to unite their lands as a single mostly-demihuman nation.

 

As previously noted, the various gods worshiped by humans in the Flanaess mainly have identified roots in the several ethno-cultural human groups inhabiting the continent. However, the Greyhawk world's demihumans also have named ethnic groups differing from each other in physical appearance, just as humans do. Elves are the most diverse. There are high elves, grey elves, sylvan elves ([cough]Tolkien[cough]), the mysterious valley elves and snow elves, as well as the subterranean dark elves, or drow (more on them later). Dwarves are either mountain or hill dwarves; gnomes are surface dwellers, or the reclusive underground deep gnomes. Halflings are divided among lightfoots, stouts, or tallfellows (yeah, more Tolkien "homage").

 

It would not be unreasonable to assume that various gods making up the racial pantheons may each have originated with one of the "sub-races" of the demihumans. In places where they mingle they may have developed a collective worship, but in other places with populations of mostly one sub-race, particular gods may be exclusive. For example, it's more likely that the forest dwelling sylvan elves would revere Rillifane Rallathil, god of forests, over the lofty Corellon Larethian. OTOH some of the human gods are noted as also having followings among the demihumans. That could go both ways, with human devotees of some demihuman deities. In places where the races often meet, such as the Ulek states and the members of the Iron League, worship may frequently cross racial lines.

 

There's another possibility worth considering. The aforementioned drow have as their patron god the demon lord Lolth, Queen of Spiders. Other major demons are worshiped as gods by some races, such as Demogorgon for the ixitxachitl, and Yeenoghu for the gnolls. While in the Flanaess, the humans and humanoids of the Horned Society propitiate the arch-devils. So worship among any of the peoples of the Flanaess could also turn to other planar entities of godlike power than their traditional pantheons -- dragons, elementals, titans, planetars, modrons, slaadi, and so on.

[Doc Democracy]

One of the issues in D&D was when you diversified your clerics among gods, worshipping a lesser god restricted how powerful you could become.

 

If you were to HERO-ify Greyhawk, how would you distinguish between Orcs worshipping Gruumsh (major god) and those in the Horned Society that have turned to devil's etc?  What advantage might draw them there?

[Lord Liaden]

The Greyhawk Guide lists hobgoblins first among the humanoids serving the Horned Society, so I guess Maglubiyet would be the biggest loser there.   But most humanoids aren't clerics or shamans, so they wouldn't lose out from a deity swap.

 

What they would gain is unity. Rather than rival tribes, the humanoids would have the security of order, and the strength of larger numbers. They'd have organization and common purpose. They'd have support from the wider range of skills and abilities that D&D humans have access to. As the Guide says (boxed set edition, p. 25), "This association combines the masses of humanoid troops with the organization and powers of humans."

 

EDIT:  Personally, I think it would be fair to upgrade some of the entities from D&D's planar cosmology to Greater God status, given their power and spheres of influence, e.g. Asmodeus, Orcus, Bahamut, or Primus of the Modrons. The Forgotten Realms setting also outlines the four rulers of the Elemental Planes, Akadi, Grumbar, Istishia, and Kossuth. IIRC Tiamat, aka Takhisis, was elevated to Greater God for the Dragonlance setting game modules and novels.
 

Edited October 14, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Doc Democracy]

I think in Greyhawk HERO, if you worship an extra-planar being, then you should expect power to exercise on their behalf.  The question is whether there should be a difference between those who facilitate the worship of greater gods and those who facilitate the propitiation of arch-fiends.

 

We are not seeking to emulate D&D, though should be glancing there to see if system stuff was seeking to drive setting tropes.

[Gauntlet]

7 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

One of the issues in D&D was when you diversified your clerics among gods, worshipping a lesser god restricted how powerful you could become.

 

If you were to HERO-ify Greyhawk, how would you distinguish between Orcs worshipping Gruumsh (major god) and those in the Horned Society that have turned to devil's etc?  What advantage might draw them there?

 

I hated that and when I ran my games in Greyhawk, I ignored that limitation. Even a demi-god is so much more powerful than their clerics. You may state that there is a dungeon where the characters kill a goddess, but I stated that the characters obviously had assistance from another god or gods. Limiting the power level based on the diety (or devil, or angel) just doesn't work well.

[Doc Democracy]

14 minutes ago, Gauntlet said:

Limiting the power level based on the diety (or devil, or angel) just doesn't work well.

 

It can make narrative sense, why should a minor god be able to give more power and/or abilities than minor gods.  The question always, then, is why people worship those minor gods.

 

(I ignored the D&D rules too, but D&D is not as flexible as HERO and so I am I terested whether we can make the world more interesting by making clerics more different based on who they worship).

[Lord Liaden]

The way Hero Games has differentiated clerics in their fantasy settings, is to give each of them distinct abilities depending on what the god they worship is known to control or influence. Turakian Age priests learn spells of divine magic that are unique to their patron god. Altantean Age priests derive distinct special powers and skills related to the gods who receive their especial devotion. Mytho/theologically that makes sense. You didn't pray to Zeus to inspire you to create art or music, or to Ra to guard the souls of the dead on their way to the afterlife, or to Thor to make your fields fertile or your flocks increase.

 

That's one answer to your question as to why people worship those "minor gods" -- they can benefit you in areas that other gods don't. Another reason is, historically, individual gods don't exist in a vacuum. They're part of a whole religion created to explain the world and give its believers the feeling of being able to influence it by appealing to its gods. To be devoted to a religion means that all its gods, major or minor, good or evil, are included in that devotion. Obviously, though, particular gods have been more popular overall, or in individual areas. For example, the city-states of the Mesopotamians and the Greeks often had one god as their especial patron. OTOH gods of other faiths might be propitiated in particular areas or by distinct groups of people. The Romans were notable in this regard. They would usually, very pragmatically, offer sacrifice to the local gods of people they conquered to avoid offending them. Various gods from other faiths sometimes gained significant Roman followings, such as the cults of Isis, Mithras, and Astarte.

Edited October 14, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[Doc Democracy]

I do think that all clerics should be more powerful in their sacred grounds as well, possibly defences and additional offence possible.

[Lord Liaden]

9 hours ago, Doc Democracy said:

I think in Greyhawk HERO, if you worship an extra-planar being, then you should expect power to exercise on their behalf.  The question is whether there should be a difference between those who facilitate the worship of greater gods and those who facilitate the propitiation of arch-fiends.

 

We are not seeking to emulate D&D, though should be glancing there to see if system stuff was seeking to drive setting tropes.

 

Aside from the individual powers of the entities in question, there doesn't seem to be a major difference as to whether or not the being someone in the D&D worlds worships as a god, is technically some other type of being as well. Going back to the example of Lolth, she's explicitly a demon -- not even the strongest of her kind -- but she's worshiped as a god, has the standard D&D godly powers, can grant spells of divine magic to her priests, and the other trappings of gods in that game.

 

One system element that would seem to drive game tropes, is that all these god-class entities have game stats. They have Characteristics, Hit Points, level-based abilities. Implicitly, a large enough group of high-level mortal PCs should be able to fight them, even defeat them. In Hero terms, that puts these entities more in line with major Champions supervillains, than immortals who have transcended the mortal frame of reference.

 

That situation isn't devoid of precedents. In Greek or Norse or Celtic mythology, the greatest heroes could match some of the gods in a straight fight, particularly if they had the right tools and weapons. That also applies to modern sword-and-sorcery fiction by the likes of Howard or Lieber.