Busting Rocks - Stone Age Science Fiction/Fantasy RPG

[hej]

Note that clarifications to this ideas in this thread and its comments are posted in a new thread,
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ge-Science-Fiction-Fantasy-RPG-clarifications
Please, make further comments there.

Hi.
I am working on Busting Rocks. It is a game set in the neolithic times, with concommittant restrictions on technology and knowledge. Before I proceed further with it, I'd like to get some feedback on my site's structure and content. The rules I will post as blog entries which can receive comments. Hopefully, this will be a collaborative project, but for now, it's just me and one other gamer.
Also, I like to gather some basic ideas from the community here. I'm trying to keep the system as simple as possible. I can think of several ideas to codify (e.g. experience, attacking, and defending). What do you think are the core elements to flesh out? How should I prioritize them. Also, which do you prefer, tables or formulas?

--hej
Busting RocksThis game reflects archeological and linguistic evidence about the Stone Age at a particular time and location. Truth is elusive. Knowledge is sparse. Magic is, as now, about deception. Characters can not write. Nor can they count. Religion does not exist. Neither does morality. Conscience does, though, and can assist or impede characters' acting in their best interests.

 

[Bill Reich]

I think anatomically modern humans could count. Hell, crows can count. Evidence for some ritual, which seems likely to have been religious predates anatomically modern humans. Don't sell their intelligence short. They did not have most of the huge knowledge base that we have accumulated. Their ability to process knowledge may have been just as good as ours.

-------------
Bill Reich
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/

 

[hej]

I believe you misunderstand the word 'count' -- and confuse it with grouping. Certainly, humans could form groups of items, e.g. a pair, but these were not abstractions, i.e. not numbers. Certainly, crows are smart enough to form groups too, though I see no evidence that they understand abstractions (numbers) distinct from the items they group. Experiments with ALEX the parrot showed that he /could/ count up to six, but keep in mind, he was extensively taught by a handler that already knew these abstractions, and his education took over a decade.
I am not selling intelligence short. Rather, I am saying mankind was ignorant. So, sure, I agree with you that mankind's ability to process knowledge was just as good, but there was very little to process (as you state).
As for religion, I am not saying that there are no beliefs. Rather, religion does not appear in the earliest evidence of writing. They are mostly economic records -- and much later, law. If such an important institution as religion existed, it would have been written down, dontcha think?
What is odd is, tainted by knowledge, trying to understand the primitive mind -- and all its barrenness. Aye, there's the rub.

 

[Arilyn]

I believe they had religion, just not organized religion as we know it. They would have had questions, and a desire to figure out their world. Some experts believed they practiced a form of shamanism. Of course, others disagree. I think barren minds is selling our ancestors short. They lacked our technology, of curse, and did not have as much human history and culture to draw on, but think of all the skills and knowledge needed to survive in Neolithic times. Think of the complex social bonds needed to keep their tribes together. They had a rich artistic tradition, as well, and it is pretty accepted that trade between people's was common.
As for morality? Evidence exists that the beginnings of morality exist in other mammals, such as chimps, dogs, etc. Our ancestors would have needed it to keep their tribes running smoothly. Remember, if you plucked a Neolithic baby from the past and raised her here, she would be no different from the rest of us.

You have a good idea for a game, but I suggest you broaden your research on the Neolithic.

As for game design choices, I would avoid tables. Keep the formulas very simple, so that you have an elegant, smoothly running system.

All the best.

 

[hej]

1. "I believe they had religion, just not organized religion as we know it."
As for religion, I am not saying that there are no beliefs or customs. Rather, religion does not appear in the earliest evidence of writing. They are mostly economic records -- and much later, law. If such an important institution as religion existed, it would have been written down, dontcha think?

2. "I think barren minds is selling our ancestors short." You can read and write and count. They could not, and they did not have to do so. Try spending a few days without even thoughts of letters and numbers. Tough to do!

3. "but think of all the skills and knowledge needed to survive in Neolithic times." Sure, they had skills, but they also had an average age at death of 20-30 tops.

4. "it is pretty accepted that trade between people's was common."
I agree wholeheartedly. It's structure and full extent, though, is unknown to us and is largely unknowable because Neolithic people could not write until the Sumerians and Egyptians had well established civilizations.

5. "As for morality? Evidence exists that the beginnings of morality exist in other mammals, such as chimps, dogs, etc."
You have confused morality with conscience. We treat children who commit horrific crimes very differently than adults who do the same because we do not see children as moral agents.

6. "Our ancestors would have needed it to keep their tribes running smoothly."
If you have anthropological studies or evidence to back up your claim, I am eager to see it. I have found the other mechanisms to keep tribes cohesive.

7. "Remember, if you plucked a Neolithic baby from the past and raised her here, she would be no different from the rest of us."
Possibly, perhaps even likely, but certainly she would have experiences like you and me -- not like Neolithic peoples.

8. You have a good idea for a game, but I suggest you broaden your research on the Neolithic.
Thank you for your suggestion. I am always open to finding new evidence and correcting any mistakes I may have made.

9. "As for game design choices, I would avoid tables. Keep the formulas very simple, so that you have an elegant, smoothly running system."
Thanks for your input. I do prefer simplicity when possibly, and I'm happy to hear a voice of concurrence.

I wish you the best, too.

 

[Bill Reich]

Age of death averages have always been driven by infant mortality. People often made forty and those who did had a good shot at fifty.
And I think formulas are the way to go also.

 

[hej]

Someone else called me on an important error of mine. Suffice to say, life expectancy has often been almost as short as in the Neolithic, so I must defend my positions with other evidence.

Thank you for your input on formulas.

 

[Venley]

They could certainly count in the Neolithic. People have been making lunar calendars as far back as the Paleolithic. And even mapping.

Likewise formalised burial ritual and (likely shamanistic) religious beliefs.

Also a vast amount of practical knowledge about the world around them, lost to most modern people.

Grandparents would have been around passing on inherited knowledge to the group, even if any one individual may not have had grandparents.

And trading from eg. Baltic to Britain, albeit likely in stages and quite possibly via gift ritual rather than modern-style economics.

If you want anything realistic rather than a purely fantasy game then please do not shortchange the intelligence and knowledge of our ancestors.

Barren minds certainly not; I expect a lot of storytelling and dancing to go along with the music and art that we know about, eg. Dreamtime.


You think of them as ignorant. Almost all of us, if transported back in time, would be regarded by them as supremely ignorant.
Brain sizes have decreased over time as we have domesticated ourselves; quite possibly their average intelligence was actually higher than ours.

 

[Venley]

As for writing religion down. Why?
Some religion is esoteric, gnostic, secret so perhaps it would have been sacrilegious to write down. Or perhaps just too complex for the first symbols.
Certainly writing developed out of bean-counting. But there are early myths written down by the 3rd millenium BC. And those bean-counters were often working within religious hierarchies.

 

[hej]

You are confusing accounting with counting. A calendar can be an accounting just as is a tally stick or a knotted rope. Both can provide excellent accuracy.

You are confusing ritual and custom with religion. I am not saying that there are no beliefs. Rather, religion does not appear in the earliest evidence of writing. They are mostly economic records -- and much later, law. If such an important institution as religion existed, it would have been written down, dontcha think?
What is odd is, tainted by knowledge, trying to understand the primitive mind -- and all its barrenness. Aye, there's the rub.

"Grandparents would have been around passing on inherited knowledge to the group, even if any one individual may not have had grandparents."
Sure. Just not particularly sophisticated knowledge.

I will bypass the rest of your lambaste with a simple question. Can you explain to me the mechanism by which numbers emerged?
I am not asking for a belief. I am asking for the theory. I know it. If you do, please, do share. If not, please pipe down.