02-21-2016, 07:30 AM
I can only speak for myself, but I can say a little about why I find Tekumel so intimidating.
While many of his words and language may be unique or obscure, Tolkien strikes a "everyman" vibe with me whereby if you mention elves and dwarves and hobbits I pretty much know what the are supposed to represent. Anyone who has read any of a long list of fantasy stories can jump into traditional D&D and almost right away have a feeling of knowing what is going on and what monsters are being encountered.
Barker's stuff is creative and imaginitive and just plain weird. I played in a campaign of EPT back in in the 1970's but never felt capable of running one even though the rules were very D&D-like. I read a lot of the old Tekumel articles in Strategic Review and Dragon and felt overwhelmed by the names and spellings of the places and characters. I own Man of Gold and Flamesong and could never get more than a chapter or so into either. The names, races, and so on, just never felt intuitive to me. I played in a couple of "play by post" Tekumel games but my feeling of comfort never quite built the way I had hoped. I still own my old TSR boxed set for EPT and dig it out occasionally when I want to get inspired for something unusual and non-traditional.
I am in awe of Tekumel but still not comfortable with it.
I guess that knowing that the Tekumel detail is out there makes me think that I ought to be familiar with it in the same way that knowing that Middle-earth is so complex makes me think that I ought to have a decent understanding of it if I want to run a game of that. But Tekumel is less intuitive so I never feel like I "get there" in my learning process.
Does that make any sense?
While many of his words and language may be unique or obscure, Tolkien strikes a "everyman" vibe with me whereby if you mention elves and dwarves and hobbits I pretty much know what the are supposed to represent. Anyone who has read any of a long list of fantasy stories can jump into traditional D&D and almost right away have a feeling of knowing what is going on and what monsters are being encountered.
Barker's stuff is creative and imaginitive and just plain weird. I played in a campaign of EPT back in in the 1970's but never felt capable of running one even though the rules were very D&D-like. I read a lot of the old Tekumel articles in Strategic Review and Dragon and felt overwhelmed by the names and spellings of the places and characters. I own Man of Gold and Flamesong and could never get more than a chapter or so into either. The names, races, and so on, just never felt intuitive to me. I played in a couple of "play by post" Tekumel games but my feeling of comfort never quite built the way I had hoped. I still own my old TSR boxed set for EPT and dig it out occasionally when I want to get inspired for something unusual and non-traditional.
I am in awe of Tekumel but still not comfortable with it.
I guess that knowing that the Tekumel detail is out there makes me think that I ought to be familiar with it in the same way that knowing that Middle-earth is so complex makes me think that I ought to have a decent understanding of it if I want to run a game of that. But Tekumel is less intuitive so I never feel like I "get there" in my learning process.
Does that make any sense?
Marv / Finarvyn
Member of The Regency Council
Visit my Blackmoor OD&D board
OD&D since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
- Dave Arneson
![[Image: Giladan.png]](http://rizak.info/PIX/Giladan.png)
Member of The Regency Council
Visit my Blackmoor OD&D board
OD&D since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
- Dave Arneson