Comments on: Advanced Agon: Wrath of the Gods

By: Lucian Smith

Lucian Smith — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:07:18 +0000

Ah, OK, I understand the Hera challenge/quest more now. She could really make it a lose-lose if completing the quest would piss off your patron. I still think doing something mechanically with the negative end of the scale would be good, and if having a nemesis is good story-wise, the thing to do would be to let it be a bonus somewhere, possibly in addition to having a penalty elsewhere? A negative relationship with Hera gives you a bonus to your relationship with Athena, since they’re rivals, but Hera-followers get a bonus against you in conflicts, say.

But I do like the idea of your rule, and shall have to check out Agon!

By: ben robbins

ben robbins — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 06:25:33 +0000

Hmm, I don’t know the rules of Agon, but it seems to me that your new rule still has the problem of not mechanically affecting play as much as it cries out to be.

First off: Go check out Agon!

Second: You’re right — this rule is mostly for roleplaying and story continuity. The impact on the patron god is a small screw to put pressure on the heroes.

I would lean away from making an angry god a constant penalty. Story-wise having a major nemesis god is good and interesting — you want it in the game. If the mechanics requires heroes to placate them and “keep everyone happy” you lose conflict. There’s already a mechanic in Agon that punishes you for defying a god (spending Fate to refuse a quest) so this rule isn’t intended to conflict with that. Then when the Antagonist cruelly has your nemesis god show up and command you to do something you really don’t want to do you have to decide whether to buckle or defy and take the bullet.

And given the fiendish competitive streak Agon encourages I can already see the part where a hero _brags_ that he has Hera -11 while the guys only have Hera -7. Hera hates me the most! You can measure a man by his enemies, etc.

By: Lucian Smith

Lucian Smith — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:56:12 +0000

Hmm, I don’t know the rules of Agon, but it seems to me that your new rule still has the problem of not mechanically affecting play as much as it cries out to be. The positive end of things looks great–there’s the interplay of making sure your current patron is pleased, and the wonder if you should switch, etc. But on the negative side, there’s no mechanical effect of having ‘Hera -4′ vs. ‘Hera -27′.

Maybe your God-nemesis (the God you’ve ticked off the most) can interfere with your Sacrifice? Then start people off with one God at +2 and one God at -2, and instead of having the bonus be (patron – 2) you can have it be (patron – nemesis). But while you only change patrons through deliberate choice, your nemesis automatically switches to the God with the largest negative modifier.

Then the angry-Hera quest has some mechanical as well as roleplaying weight behind it.

By: John Harper

John Harper — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:48:03 +0000

I really like this mechanic. It’s simple, but adds a lot of goodness.

By: red_herring

red_herring — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 13:34:26 +0000

Great, Ben. Just posted both on the Forge page. My gaming group is caught up in the 4E fervor, but I expect to be running at least two Agon sessions for the extended group at GenCon–may be a perfect time for Sack of Lemotea.

Thanks

-phil

By: ben robbins

ben robbins — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:37:09 +0000

Fire away Phil! I’ve been meaning to post to the forum but hadn’t gotten around to it.

Sack of Lemotea has been on the backburner for a bit, but fear not, it’ll be ready to crush heroes before too much longer.

By: red_herring

red_herring — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 02:38:19 +0000

Great insights that will certainly improve play. I’d love to see this and your previous article on deeper quests posted on the Agon forum on the Forge. Would you mind if I posted the link? Also, any word on getting your Sack of Lemotia adventure to playtesters?

Thanks

-phil