Difference?

[doc]

So what's the difference between the original EPT, and Swords & Glory, the second game based on Barker's world?

Doc

[James Maliszewski]

There are a lot of difference, starting with the game mechanics, which are completely different. Swords & Glory is a very complex game, as much a product of its time as EPT is, although its time is the early 80s rather than the early 70s, with all that implies.

The setting of S&G is also more complex. Gone, for example, are "good" and "evil," replaced by "stability" and "change," which are somewhat akin to Law and Chaos but not quite as abstract, because they have a stronger societal context. There's also vast amounts of detail on Tékumel and its societies, things that are at most hinted at in EPT get pages of material. It's not for nothing that, whether you use the game system or not, the S&G setting information remains the gold standard for Tékumel fans.

As much as I love Tékumel, I honestly prefer EPT's presentation of it. It may be less "true" to Barker's vision of the place, but it's much more accessible. EPT's version is more a pulp science fantasy world (which it is), whereas S&G's is an exercise in fantasy sociology, ethnology, and linguistics. It's an amazing, beautiful work without equal -- and I don't feel like I should go mucking it up with my silly little adventures. EPT, on the other hand, is perfectly suited to rousing, exotic adventures akin to Burroughs and his imitators.

That's my take on it anyway.

[greentongue]

This time it is my turn to say, "Well said."

If I just want to have fun, I want to play EPT. If I was to simulate or reenact, I want one of the newer rule releases.
=

[doc]

Very good to know I've found a site that is selling copies of all of the different Tekumel games and supplements and I was curious as to which one I wanted to pick up (I knew I was going to stay away from the Guardians of Order version). Looks like the original EPT is the one that I'm gonna stick with, as was my first inclination.

Doc

[bert]

Doc, you might consider some of the Gadarasiyal (3rd incarnation of Tekumel) solo books as well, they do show how Barkers own adventures went and give a lot of flavour of the setting.

[Epengar]

Also Swords & Glory was never completely published. Only the first two of three volumes made it into print, and the second one only barely. Volume 1, the Tekumel Sourcebook, is all setting info, no rules, and that's the "gold standard" that James referred to. It had a decent print run and has been reprinted. Volume 2 has the chargen, combat rules, and spells, and only had a very small original print run, though has since been reprinted. Volume 3, with monsters, treasures, and rules for the GM, has never been printed. Much of what was supposed to go in it appeared in the next version of Tekumel rules, Gardasiyal.

[James Maliszewski]

Gardásiyal is a sort of "Swords & Glory Lite" in that its rules are a pared down version of S&G's. They're still needlessly complex IMO and suffer many of S&G's mechanical problems, including a lack of clarity. It's a pity because the solo adventures that are part of this series are excellent and do a fine job of initiating newcomers into Tékumel. Likewise, the Bestiary is very nice, since it includes illustrations for most, if not all, of the weird creatures that inhabit the setting. All in all, another mixed bag of a game.

I still think EPT is the most playable of the lot and certainly the least intimidating.

[bert]

Least intimidating, I suppose so, but I don't think the GoO Tekumel game is at all bad. What are people's objections to it?

[greentongue]

bert said:

Least intimidating, I suppose so, but I don't think the GoO Tekumel game is at all bad. What are people's objections to it?

My "objection" is not to the game itself, it is to the upfront requirements to playing, let alone running it.

Truth be told, what I like about EPT is the fact that it is a Sci-Fantasy setting with most of the foundation laid, that I can lump together all the great ideas I have accumulated and they fit right in.

The later versions move away from that and focus on Prof. Barker's highly detailed world.
While I am impressed by the work that he has lavished on it, it is less useful to me personally the more it becomes his vision.
=

[James Maliszewski]

greentongue said:

The later versions move away from that and focus on Prof. Barker's highly detailed world.
While I am impressed by the work that he has lavished on it, it is less useful to me personally the more it becomes his vision.
=

That's pretty much my view too. At a certain point, some game settings develop to the where they cease to be fun, flexible backdrops for gaming and they become exercises in world building. Nothing wrong with world building; I love to do it myself. However, such settings eventually become both inaccessible to non-fanatical gamers and confining creatively. Tékumel passed that point long ago and I'd wager that 90% or more of its extant fans don't actually play in the setting at all, but simply love its complexity and depth.

There's a reason why old school gamers prefer settings like the Wilderlands or Gygax-era Greyhawk: they're broad canvasses onto which we can paint our own pictures without fear of having to read mounds of books or some player being able to quote supplement X, Y, or Z telling us that our interpretation of the setting is "wrong."

Again, I have nothing against detailed settings as such, but, as vehicles for gaming, I prefer broad strokes and minimalist detail to other alternatives.

[badger2305]

I hear you. It's probably the biggest objection I had to the Third Imperium in Traveller - I started playing in August of 1977, and therefore had quite some time of playing in non-GDW house campaigns, and designing my own. So when the Third Imperium came along, with its gradual accretion of setting material and (eventually) debates and arguments about different aspects of that setting, I grew increasingly disenchanted with it all. So now I have the same reaction to the LBBs of Classic Traveller than I do to OD&D - get back to basics and play the game I want to play.

Mind you, with Tekumel, having played for a long time with Prof. Barker, I'm one of those "fanatic gamers" that has no perspective on it. I've often said that I can run a Tekumel game with no books whatsoever - and have - and made it enjoyable for the players. But it's because of that immersion, which I intellectually understand isn't as available to others (inside, I keep saying, "darn it! It's a cool setting! Here, lemme show you!").

[James Maliszewski]

badger2305 said:

I hear you. It's probably the biggest objection I had to the Third Imperium in Traveller - I started playing in August of 1977, and therefore had quite some time of playing in non-GDW house campaigns, and designing my own. So when the Third Imperium came along, with its gradual accretion of setting material and (eventually) debates and arguments about different aspects of that setting, I grew increasingly disenchanted with it all. So now I have the same reaction to the LBBs of Classic Traveller than I do to OD&D - get back to basics and play the game I want to play.

As a long-time Traveller player and fan of the Third Imperium setting, I completely agree with you. Traveller simultaneously reached its zenith and nadir in the years immediately leading up to the release of MegaTraveller. I say it's a zenith, because it was at that time that the Third Imperium setting became so detailed that, as a work of science fiction world building, it had no equal in the hobby. I say nadir, because this same phenomenon drove away fans who still clung to the notion that Traveller was a generic SF RPG (albeit ones with idiosyncratic -- yet still generic -- assumptions). From that point on, Traveller's direction as a game line was dictated by and catering to the hardcore fanbase. It's an object lesson on what not to do.

All that aside, I do love Tékumel and Barker's vision of it; I simply could not imagine GMing a game based on "real" Tékumel nor could I find many players who'd be interested in my doing so. Pulp science fantasy Tékumel on the other hand? I have a feeling I could win people over to that comparatively easily.

[crimhthanthegreat]

badger2305 said:

I hear you. It's probably the biggest objection I had to the Third Imperium in Traveller - I started playing in August of 1977, and therefore had quite some time of playing in non-GDW house campaigns, and designing my own. So when the Third Imperium came along, with its gradual accretion of setting material and (eventually) debates and arguments about different aspects of that setting, I grew increasingly disenchanted with it all. So now I have the same reaction to the LBBs of Classic Traveller than I do to OD&D - get back to basics and play the game I want to play.

Mind you, with Tekumel, having played for a long time with Prof. Barker, I'm one of those "fanatic gamers" that has no perspective on it. I've often said that I can run a Tekumel game with no books whatsoever - and have - and made it enjoyable for the players. But it's because of that immersion, which I intellectually understand isn't as available to others (inside, I keep saying, "darn it! It's a cool setting! Here, lemme show you!").

If I am going to read a series of novels or a novel, I love to have a well-detailed source book for the background. Given a choice I would have read the Silmarillion before the LotR. That's just me, but for gaming I want something that I can easily make my own and not look back.

[crimhthanthegreat]

jamesm said:

badger2305 said:

I hear you. It's probably the biggest objection I had to the Third Imperium in Traveller - I started playing in August of 1977, and therefore had quite some time of playing in non-GDW house campaigns, and designing my own. So when the Third Imperium came along, with its gradual accretion of setting material and (eventually) debates and arguments about different aspects of that setting, I grew increasingly disenchanted with it all. So now I have the same reaction to the LBBs of Classic Traveller than I do to OD&D - get back to basics and play the game I want to play.

As a long-time Traveller player and fan of the Third Imperium setting, I completely agree with you. Traveller simultaneously reached its zenith and nadir in the years immediately leading up to the release of MegaTraveller. I say it's a zenith, because it was at that time that the Third Imperium setting became so detailed that, as a work of science fiction world building, it had no equal in the hobby. I say nadir, because this same phenomenon drove away fans who still clung to the notion that Traveller was a generic SF RPG (albeit ones with idiosyncratic -- yet still generic -- assumptions). From that point on, Traveller's direction as a game line was dictated by and catering to the hardcore fanbase. It's an object lesson on what not to do.

All that aside, I do love Tékumel and Barker's vision of it; I simply could not imagine GMing a game based on "real" Tékumel nor could I find many players who'd be interested in my doing so. Pulp science fantasy Tékumel on the other hand? I have a feeling I could win people over to that comparatively easily.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. For gaming give me pulp, it is easier to digest.

[coffee]

I gotta say, I'm in agreement with what's being said here.

I don't know beans about the Empire of the Petal Throne, but I also didn't know beans about Traveller. I got the second edition of the boxed set, which came out in 80 but still didn't mention the Third Imperium. So my game was sufficiently different from everybody else's that people didn't like it. They brought too much baggage to the game.

Anyway, I don't know from Petal Throne, but I love the idea. And I'm enjoying the game going on in its own forum here (yay!). But don't expect me to join in anytime soon; it's still too different for me.

I guess I'm just inEPT.

[greentongue]

coffee said:

I gotta say, I'm in agreement with what's being said here.

I don't know beans about the Empire of the Petal Throne, but I also didn't know beans about Traveller. I got the second edition of the boxed set, which came out in 80 but still didn't mention the Third Imperium. So my game was sufficiently different from everybody else's that people didn't like it. They brought too much baggage to the game.

[/i]

Anyway, I don't know from Petal Throne, but I love the idea. And I'm enjoying the game going on in its own forum here (yay!). But don't expect me to join in anytime soon; it's still too different for me.

I guess I'm just inEPT.[/quote]
This is certainly a problem with OEPT. A lot of the people that have an initial interest in playing are seeped in the vast information provided in later versions. This makes it hard for people new to the setting to fit in and feel comfortable.

It is a form of "Feature Creep" experienced by older games, especially this one. In my opionion it alienates potential new players and helps to prevent a resurgence of OEPT.

I hope to keep my game to a "Pulp" level of detail so that most anyone would feel comfortable playing in OEPT.

The idea being to introduce the setting, and system, to people that feel "it is just too weird," such that they are tempted to reconsider playing it.
=

[coffee]

greentongue said:

I hope to keep my game to a "Pulp" level of detail so that most anyone would feel comfortable playing in OEPT.

The idea being to introduce the setting, and system, to people that feel "it is just too weird," such that they are tempted to reconsider playing it.
=

And I appreciate it, even though I'm not playing. I'm enjoying reading it, though.

[alvahardison]

Just read through all the posts and after giving it some thought, I'd have to say that the EPT rules were pulpy and that along with the setting and the maps was one of the things that attracted me to it. I would be very easy to combine the background of the S&G sourcebook with the EPT rules coupling that with the series of Armies books, the histories of the legions, and the Book of Ebon bindings. The easy rules of EPT are one of the selling points as one would be able to get into the world without having to constantly worry about getting the right rule for the right occasion.

[geoffrey]

jamesm said:

As much as I love Tékumel, I honestly prefer EPT's presentation of it. It may be less "true" to Barker's vision of the place, but it's much more accessible. EPT's version is more a pulp science fantasy world (which it is), whereas S&G's is an exercise in fantasy sociology, ethnology, and linguistics. It's an amazing, beautiful work without equal -- and I don't feel like I should go mucking it up with my silly little adventures. EPT, on the other hand, is perfectly suited to rousing, exotic adventures akin to Burroughs and his imitators.

Very well put.

[casey777]

While I am coming to appreciate EPT more and more everytime I read it I politely beg to differ in this regard:

The Tekumel Sourcebook (S&G vol. 1) is *chock* full of gonzo weirdness and adventure seeds esp. in conjunction with the map set which is the standard for the setting. A lot of the gonzo is in there and a lot of that wasn't mentioned in EPT. Just looking at the place names alone can spark off a campaign! It can be very hard to find just through a skim through, esp. if you have the single volume version, though OTOH that version has a *very* handy index available. Also a lot of the more mundane detail is present as flavor only, "There are so many styles of pottery such as (three colorfully names styles, perhaps an evocatively named character or locale) but there are too many to detail here in this volume" which can spark ideas without overwhelming the reader.

The fully searchable, OCR'd, indexed PDF of the Tekumel Sourcebook (which is based on the more illustrated & more readable 3 volume version) should be very much worth getting. It's not a book to be read cover to cover. It's a resource to be dipped from as needed.

I understand vol. 2 was the first appearance of the full spell system though I suspect there are cheaper ways to get just that (from the next game's spell book?). The rules though are clunky (& incomplete with vol. 3 never being done) and I say this as someone who occasionally digs more detailed rules. T:EPT or GURPS Tekumel does a better job of detailed rules and both are also very tweakable.