Designing a team, the Scooby Way!
Lise Mendel
Follow ups set to .advocacy.
Here's one way to design a team of PCs (or NPCs) to work together,
concentrate on personality type and shared values.
For those of us who grew up in the 70's (or those who are into 'retro'):
Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
Scooby.
In smaller teams these functions can be doubled up, Fred-Velma,
Fred-Daphne, Daphne-Shaggy, Daphne-Scooby,Velma-Scooby and Shaggy-Scooby
are all viable examples. Fred-Shaggy, Fred-Scooby and Velma-Daphne are
not - they would be serving contradictory functions in the team. A team
with five or more characters should not have doubled functions.
Explanations follow, For clarity's sake, gender follows source
material, but any gender works for any team function:
Fred - Every team _must_ have a Fred. He's the team "straight man", and
is the foil for the rest of the team, who are somewhat screwball. It
would be quite possible to have a team dominated of Freds, if no-one in
the group is interested in role-playing. In practice this role is
usually filled by the token newbie or power gamer, but can be played by
a hard-core role-player looking for a challenge. He's usually the
leader of the group, but makes a good second in command, too. He
exemplifies the values of the team.
Daphne - She can be skipped in an emergency, but is needed for long term
playability. She's the team diplomat, the one everyone likes and
respects,who can smooth things over when the rest of the group blows up
at each other. A group dominated by Daphnes would be too 'sweet' for
playibility, but there can be more than one in a large group. She
doesn't usually make a good leader, but is an excellent
second-in-command. Daphne shares the values of the group, but may have
her own agenda.
Velma - Every team needs a Velma. She's the team watchdog. She can is
usually somewhat abrasive, and her function is to keep the team on
track, whipped into shape, eyes on target, and not side-tracked. A team
dominated by Velmas would be ridiculously grim and intense. She can be a
good leader or second-in-command, if Fred is not suitable. She shares
the values of the group, sometimes to exclusion of all else.
Shaggy - He can be skipped in an emergency, but is recommended for long
term group survival. Shaggy is the team rebel. He is often a
good-timer or a free-spirit. His function in the team is to shake
everything up now and then, keep the team from getting into a rut.
Multiple Shaggys can be exciting, but you need a really strong Fred
and/or Velma to counteract things. Shaggy as the leader would be team
suicide. He usually has some sympathy for the team values, but does not
abide by them all the time.
Scooby - Every team ends up with one, whether you want him there or not.
He is another species (literally or figuratively) from the rest of the
group. His function is to force the rest of the team to examine their
position on things. Multiple Scoobys will kill a team. Scooby a
leader?! Get real, he's a DOG! He has no clue what the team values are,
even though he may try to.
* Insert tongue in cheek, an smiley's all through post for the humor
impaired.
--
Lise Mendel
Mommy to Abigail (5/9/93) and Dorothy (10/19/95)
http://www.access.digex.net/~catalyst/
I reserve the right to repost e-mailed flames wherever it amuses me to
Lise Mendel
Harry Flashman <sir...@clark.net> wrote:
> OK, everyone remain calm.
>
> Don't make any sudden movements.
>
> Everything will be fine, if we all just walk away quietly...
>
>
> :)
>
> Scott
Come on, Scott. You know you want to join this conversation, don't you?
I KNOW you've got some deep insights on this...
*Peer pressure, peer pressure*
+Scooby, dooby, doo, where are you?+
;-)
Necros
Lise Mendel wrote:
>
> Follow ups set to .advocacy.
>
> Here's one way to design a team of PCs (or NPCs) to work together,
> concentrate on personality type and shared values.
>
> For those of us who grew up in the 70's (or those who are into 'retro'):
> Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
>
> In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
> the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
> Scooby.
LOL
How about a Yogi and Bo Bo team dynamic. Yogi is the one always rushing
in to snag the treasure, you know picnic baskets. Were Bo Bo is the
voice of reason. I don't know Yogi, Ranger Rick might have a fire
breathing dragon gaurding the picnic baskets. There always seem to be
plenty of Yogi's, but Bo Bo are not usally more than one per team.
Drain a shifter,
Necros
Lise Mendel
Timothy Toner <than...@interaccess.com> wrote:
> Interesting analysis. However, that just doesn't explain the
> day I was watching cartoons with my chocolate frosted sugar bombs,
> and Fred turns to the "gang" and says, "Velma, Scooby, and Shaggy,
> you check out the kitchen. Daphne and I will check out the bedrooms."
>
> Zoink.
If you're really interested, I'll see if I can find my explanation of
that. I wrote up a "Scooby Doo -- where are they now!" article a couple
of months ago (posted on a mailing list)
:-)
Harry Flashman
Lise Mendel (cata...@access.digex.net) wrote:
:
: For those of us who grew up in the 70's (or those who are into 'retro'):
: Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
:
: In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
: the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
: Scooby.
OK, everyone remain calm.
Lise Mendel
Necros <nec...@tir.com> wrote:
> Lise Mendel wrote:
> >
> > Follow ups set to .advocacy.
> >
> > Here's one way to design a team of PCs (or NPCs) to work together,
> > concentrate on personality type and shared values.
> >
> > For those of us who grew up in the 70's (or those who are into 'retro'):
> > Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
> >
> > In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
> > the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
> > Scooby.
>
>
> LOL
>
> How about a Yogi and Bo Bo team dynamic. Yogi is the one always rushing
> in to snag the treasure, you know picnic baskets. Were Bo Bo is the
> voice of reason. I don't know Yogi, Ranger Rick might have a fire
> breathing dragon gaurding the picnic baskets. There always seem to be
> plenty of Yogi's, but Bo Bo are not usally more than one per team.
This is where the media examples don't seem to be reflected in the
games. Can you come up with a source material where more than one Yogi
worked?
Timothy Toner
Interesting analysis. However, that just doesn't explain the
day I was watching cartoons with my chocolate frosted sugar bombs,
and Fred turns to the "gang" and says, "Velma, Scooby, and Shaggy,
you check out the kitchen. Daphne and I will check out the bedrooms."
Zoink.
--
Timothy Toner --------- School Librarian ---------- than...@interaccess.com
"There is a group--how haughtly their eyes! how overbearing their glance!
There is a group whose incisors are swords, whose teeth are knives, devouring
the needy from the earth, and the poor from among men." Proverbs 30:13
John Aegard
|> OK, everyone remain calm.
|>
|> Don't make any sudden movements.
|>
|> Everything will be fine, if we all just walk away quietly...
And whatever you do, DON'T MAKE EYE CONTACT!
Johnzo.
William Clifford
On Thu, 22 Aug 1996, Lise Mendel wrote:
> Necros <nec...@tir.com> wrote:
> > How about a Yogi and Bo Bo team dynamic. Yogi is the one always rushing
> > in to snag the treasure, you know picnic baskets. Were Bo Bo is the
> > voice of reason. I don't know Yogi, Ranger Rick might have a fire
> > breathing dragon gaurding the picnic baskets. There always seem to be
> > plenty of Yogi's, but Bo Bo are not usally more than one per team.
>
> This is where the media examples don't seem to be reflected in the
> games. Can you come up with a source material where more than one Yogi
> worked?
I can. Every single game my brothers and I ever played. Not one
Bo Bo in the bunch either. Now that I think of it this may have more to do
with the plots I came up with rather than any character inclination on
their part.
Great thread Lisa. Next week: Archetypical analysis of the Smurfs
and The Transformers and application therof to party creation and "schtick
control" in RPGs.
-William Clifford
Mary K. Kuhner
In article <4vkfv5$7...@dilbert.whoi.edu> mmax...@whsun1.whoi.edu (Michael Maxwell) writes:
Lise wrote:
>: Scooby .....His function is to force the rest of the team to examine their
>: position on things.
>Nice bit here too. I think that Shaggy and Scooby can be safely combined as
>well. After all, they are very similar in personality: chronically ravenous
>cowards. I don't always like the idea of including a different
>species/form/type -- little companion animals or kids in action/adventure
>movies usually annoy me.
I think you're being too literal. Most of the Scooby's I've known were
not animals or children, they were adult PCs with worldviews so skew to
the others' that they had trouble communicating. They are not always
rebels like Shaggy: often they want to be part of the team, but they
just don't know how.
My _Sunrise War_ campaign had a PC (and, to be honest, a player) who
just could not internalize the idea that magical power had
ties to its source. So he was always blissfully convinced that he could
use whatever kind of magical power came his way, while the other PCs
were *very* careful not to become entangled in inimical sorceries or,
worse, divine magic. (This was the character who very nearly became a
priest of the enemy's god midcampaign.) He wasn't particularly
rebellious (thank goodness!)--he just didn't have a clue.
An otherwise high-tech Shadowrun party I ran had one character, Ratty,
who couldn't read or write, needed someone else to dial the phone
for him, and lived in a crack in the basement of an abandoned building.
He was on very good terms with the city spirits, and quite useful to the
group, but the clash of worldviews was continually entertaining. Again,
he was seldom a rebel or troublemaker--he fled from trouble, as a matter
of fact--he just wasn't on the same world as everyone else.
Contriwise, you can have a Shaggy type who understands things much the
way everyone else does, but is rebellious, rash, or overly
fond of trouble. (These characters can really help an overly timid
party, or really infuriate it.) Linnick in my _Haven Hill_ campaign had
a worldview very like his cousins', but he tended to think of great
ideas for accomplishing things and then rush off to do them without
quite telling the others. (He also perennially exaggerated or
underplayed the outcomes of his actions when talking about them, a
running joke of the campaign.)
I don't know how well this fits the Scooby-Doo show, but it's not
a bad way to think about PCs. My hat is off to Lise. I went through
a couple of parties from previous campaigns, and in just about every
case the character who didn't fit a Scooby-Doo archetype, or who
combined a contradictory pair, was the one who caused us trouble in the
campaign. Haven Hill, for example, with three PCs, had Velma and
Shaggy, and a third PC who veered between being Velma and Scooby, but
no Fred or Daphne--and we regretted it frequently. And the two
characters who were clearly Velma and Shaggy worked better than the more
ambiguous third one.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Michael Maxwell
Lise Mendel (cata...@access.digex.net) wrote:
: For those of us who grew up in the 70's (or those who are into 'retro'):
: Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
: In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
: the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
: Scooby.
A real-life (well, sort of) application of pop culture -- I can't resist.
Like far out!
: Fred - Every team _must_ have a Fred.
Agreed.
: Daphne - She can be skipped in an emergency, but is needed for long term
: playability.
(stuff about diplomacy the Daphe-way skipped)
I never did figure out what Daphne did. She was just the female counterpart
of Fred - good-looking, clean-cut - but never really did anything on her
own. She and Fred, to me, filled a parental function, presenting legitimate
male and female roles to society. I think Fred and Daphne could be
collapsed into one leader figure.
: Velma - Every team needs a Velma.
Yes, Velma is a key player. She's the brain who figures most things out
and keeps Shaggy and Scoob in place. She is the Merlin, Gandalf, Obi Won
Kenobee -- the super-thinker and repository of knowledge.
: She's the team watchdog.... to keep the team on
: track... eyes on target
And, ironically, she's always losing her glasses! Deep symbolism by
Hanna-Barbera?
: Shaggy is the team rebel. He is often a
: good-timer or a free-spirit. His function in the team is to shake
: everything up now and then, keep the team from getting into a rut.
: Multiple Shaggys can be exciting, but you need a really strong Fred
: and/or Velma to counteract things. Shaggy as the leader would be team
: suicide. He usually has some sympathy for the team values, but does not
: abide by them all the time.
Nice bit about Shaggy, and I agree. He is a source of uncertainty, chaos,
and confusion. Life without him would be pretty dull (how many times did
Fred get chased around on a laundry cart by a green ghost?).
: Scooby .....His function is to force the rest of the team to examine their
: position on things.
Nice bit here too. I think that Shaggy and Scooby can be safely combined as
well. After all, they are very similar in personality: chronically ravenous
cowards. I don't always like the idea of including a different
species/form/type -- little companion animals or kids in action/adventure
movies usually annoy me.
Stay groovy,
Mike
Lise Mendel
Michael Maxwell <mmax...@whsun1.whoi.edu> wrote:
Daphe-way skipped)
>
> I never did figure out what Daphne did. She was just the female counterpart
> of Fred - good-looking, clean-cut - but never really did anything on her
> own. She and Fred, to me, filled a parental function, presenting legitimate
> male and female roles to society. I think Fred and Daphne could be
> collapsed into one leader figure.
>
Right. You didn't quote the following paragraph:
:In smaller teams these functions can be doubled up, Fred-Velma,
:Fred-Daphne, Daphne-Shaggy, Daphne-Scooby,Velma-Scooby and
:Shaggy-Scoobyare all viable examples. Fred-Shaggy, Fred-Scooby and
:Velma-Daphne are not - they would be serving contradictory functions in
:the team. A team with five or more characters should not have doubled
:functions.
I tried to separate them out to match the team because they're well
known source material :-)
>
> : Velma - Every team needs a Velma.
>
> Yes, Velma is a key player. She's the brain who figures most things out
> and keeps Shaggy and Scoob in place. She is the Merlin, Gandalf, Obi Won
> Kenobee -- the super-thinker and repository of knowledge.
>
>
> : She's the team watchdog.... to keep the team on
> : track... eyes on target
>
> And, ironically, she's always losing her glasses! Deep symbolism by
> Hanna-Barbera?
>
Let's not push this too far :-)
>
> : Shaggy is the team rebel. He is often a
> : good-timer or a free-spirit. His function in the team is to shake
> : everything up now and then, keep the team from getting into a rut.
> : Multiple Shaggys can be exciting, but you need a really strong Fred
> : and/or Velma to counteract things. Shaggy as the leader would be team
> : suicide. He usually has some sympathy for the team values, but does not
> : abide by them all the time.
>
> Nice bit about Shaggy, and I agree. He is a source of uncertainty, chaos,
> and confusion. Life without him would be pretty dull (how many times did
> Fred get chased around on a laundry cart by a green ghost?).
>
Or eat Scooby snacks?
>
> : Scooby .....His function is to force the rest of the team to examine their
> : position on things.
>
> Nice bit here too. I think that Shaggy and Scooby can be safely combined as
> well. After all, they are very similar in personality: chronically ravenous
> cowards. I don't always like the idea of including a different
> species/form/type -- little companion animals or kids in action/adventure
> movies usually annoy me.
>
No, but in the team of intrepid explorers it's kind of refreshing to
have the one money grubbing bastard who doesn't give a damn about the
increase of knowledge. That's a slightly different function than the
scientist who is _also_ interested in the monetary value of his
discoveries....
Matthew R Blackwell
In <1996082211...@a-ko.digex.net> cata...@access.digex.net
(Lise Mendel) writes:
>
>Follow ups set to .advocacy.
>
>
>Here's one way to design a team of PCs (or NPCs) to work together,
>concentrate on personality type and shared values.
>
'retro'):
>Designing a Group - the Scooby Way!*
>
>In RPG every team needs at least one, and in some cases _only_ one, of
>the following five character types: Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy, and
>Scooby.
>
>Fred-Daphne, Daphne-Shaggy, Daphne-Scooby,Velma-Scooby and
>are all viable examples. Fred-Shaggy, Fred-Scooby and Velma-Daphne
are
>not - they would be serving contradictory functions in the team. A
team
>with five or more characters should not have doubled functions.
>
>material, but any gender works for any team function:
<lots of snippage>
>
>* Insert tongue in cheek, an smiley's all through post for the humor
>impaired.
I assume that the "combat monster" role in the group would be
represented by El Kabong?
Matthew R Blackwell
Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
Matthew R Blackwell
In <Pine.HPP.3.95.960823...@river.it.gvsu.edu> William
Clifford <clif...@river.it.gvsu.edu> writes:
>
>On Thu, 22 Aug 1996, Lise Mendel wrote:
>
>> Necros <nec...@tir.com> wrote:
>> > How about a Yogi and Bo Bo team dynamic. Yogi is the one always
rushing
John R. Snead
Lise-
When I first read this I was amused, *then* I realized you could
easily fit each of the PCs in our current campaign into this framework
(a scary thought actually). Gods, this isn't just funny, it actually works.
Very Interesting-
-John Snead jsn...@netcom.com
PS my PC's Shaggy, and Fred and Daphne are a pair of Jesuit
priests (an odd group of PCs).
Shane Dunbar
Too much is never enough.
>>>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<<<
The Alacorn Home Page ... http://members.gnn.com/alacorn/
Stretching the bounds of logic, reason, and sanity.
>>>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<<<
Lise Mendel
John R. Snead <jsn...@netcom.com> wrote:
> Lise-
>
> When I first read this I was amused, *then* I realized you could
> easily fit each of the PCs in our current campaign into this framework
> (a scary thought actually). Gods, this isn't just funny, it actually works.
>
You're right. That _is_ scary :-)
> Very Interesting-
>
> -John Snead jsn...@netcom.com
>
> PS my PC's Shaggy, and Fred and Daphne are a pair of Jesuit
> priests (an odd group of PCs).
Looking back on the PCs I've played, I find every type _except_ Fred. I
just can't get a handle on him :-)
Keith Kornelsen
Shane Dunbar <Ala...@gnn.com> wrote:
>In article <4vlmu4$k...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> Matthew R Blackwell wrote:
>>Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
>>Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
>>going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
>>of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
>.
>Too much is never enough.
Yes it is. I hereby lay down my sword and will henceforth forswear
all replies to Shane Dunbar's posts. You can all hold me to it.
--Solace
Shane Dunbar
In article <4vr2lo$c...@tigger.planet.eon.net> Keith Kornelsen wrote:
>Shane Dunbar <Ala...@gnn.com> wrote:
>>In article <4vlmu4$k...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> Matthew R Blackwell wrote:
>>>Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
>>>Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
>>>going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
>>>of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
>Yes it is. I hereby lay down my sword and will henceforth forswear
>all replies to Shane Dunbar's posts. You can all hold me to it.
Yeehaw. No more posts from Keith.
Steve Gilham
mbla...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
> Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
> going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
> of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
Compared with the enduring dice-vs-diceless thing that seemed in its
most recent instantiation to go on non-stop the early part of the year
until Shane arrived, a month is nothing. And his arrival did seem to
allow the dice-vs-diceless thing to finally die a death of neglect for
the moment.
-- Personal mail to st...@windsong.demon.co.uk (for which PGP is preferred) --
Steve Gilham |GDS Ltd.,Wellington Ho. |My opinions, not those of GDS
Software Specialist|East Road, Cambridge |Corporation or its affiliates.
steveg@ |CB1 1BH, UK |---------------------------------
uk.gdscorp.com |Tel:(44)1223-300111x2904|http://www.windsong.demon.co.uk/
Magnus Lie Hetland
Shane Dunbar wrote:
>
> In article <4vr2lo$c...@tigger.planet.eon.net> Keith Kornelsen wrote:
> >Shane Dunbar <Ala...@gnn.com> wrote:
> >>>Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
> >>>Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
> >>>going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
> >>>of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
> >Yes it is. I hereby lay down my sword and will henceforth forswear
> >all replies to Shane Dunbar's posts. You can all hold me to it.
> .
> Yeehaw. No more posts from Keith.
>
No - no more posts from _solace_.
> >>>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<<<
> The Alacorn Home Page ... http://members.gnn.com/alacorn/
> Stretching the bounds of logic, reason, and sanity.
> >>>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<<<
--
Magnus
Lie
Hetland
Shane Dunbar
In article <3222D0...@idt.unit.no> Magnus Lie Hetland wrote:
>Shane Dunbar wrote:
>> In article <4vr2lo$c...@tigger.planet.eon.net> Keith Kornelsen wrote:
>> >Shane Dunbar <Ala...@gnn.com> wrote:
>> >>In article <4vlmu4$k...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> Matthew R Blackwell wrote:
>> >>>Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
>> >>>Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
>> >>>going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a month
>> >>>of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
>> >>Too much is never enough.
>> >Yes it is. I hereby lay down my sword and will henceforth forswear
>> >all replies to Shane Dunbar's posts. You can all hold me to it.
>No - no more posts from _solace_.
Same thing.
Lise Mendel
Shane Dunbar <Ala...@gnn.com> wrote:
> In article <3222D0...@idt.unit.no> Magnus Lie Hetland wrote:
> >Shane Dunbar wrote:
n all hold me to it.
> >> Yeehaw. No more posts from Keith.
> >No - no more posts from _solace_.
> .
> Same thing.
>
Solace, if you're reading this (and you should have killed the thread by
now) DON'T respond. You promised. :-)
Simon Smith
Darn! And we woulda gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
--
Simon Smith
Caffeine *is too* a substitute for sleep.
Jeff MacDonald
>In message <4vij8l$6...@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca> John Aegard wrote:
>>
>> |> OK, everyone remain calm.
>> |>
>> |> Don't make any sudden movements.
>> |>
>> |> Everything will be fine, if we all just walk away quietly...
>>
>> And whatever you do, DON'T MAKE EYE CONTACT!
Avoid eye contact.
If no eyes avoid all contact.
(stolen from somewhere)
TheJeff
George W. Harris
In Thu, 22 Aug 1996 11:40:39 -0500 of yore, cata...@access.digex.net (Lise
Mendel) wrote thusly:
I can't resist. Since it's the world I'm most familiar with, I'm
going to classify the various Gloranthan archetypes (primarily
Orlanthi) under this system.
=Fred - Every team _must_ have a Fred. He's the team "straight man", and
=is the foil for the rest of the team, who are somewhat screwball. It
=would be quite possible to have a team dominated of Freds, if no-one in
=the group is interested in role-playing. In practice this role is
=usually filled by the token newbie or power gamer, but can be played by
=a hard-core role-player looking for a challenge. He's usually the
=leader of the group, but makes a good second in command, too. He
=exemplifies the values of the team.
Okay, this one is easy. Humakti. There are quite a few
Orlanthi who fit into this mold as well.
=Daphne - She can be skipped in an emergency, but is needed for long term
=playability. She's the team diplomat, the one everyone likes and
=respects,who can smooth things over when the rest of the group blows up
=at each other. A group dominated by Daphnes would be too 'sweet' for
=playibility, but there can be more than one in a large group. She
=doesn't usually make a good leader, but is an excellent
=second-in-command. Daphne shares the values of the group, but may have
=her own agenda.
This one is easy as well. This is the Issaries (or Etyries)
merchant, the one who knows a dozen languages and can sell
suntan lotion to trolls. Keeps fights from breaking out everywhere.
=Velma - Every team needs a Velma. She's the team watchdog. She can is
=usually somewhat abrasive, and her function is to keep the team on
=track, whipped into shape, eyes on target, and not side-tracked. A team
=dominated by Velmas would be ridiculously grim and intense. She can be a
=good leader or second-in-command, if Fred is not suitable. She shares
=the values of the group, sometimes to exclusion of all else.
Hmmm. This one can be either an Orlanthi (for the
leadership role) or possibly a Lhankor Mhy sage. Actually, the
Lhankor Mhy seems more reasonable, since he's always the one
who knows the key bit of knowledge, and the way to find things
out.
=Shaggy - He can be skipped in an emergency, but is recommended for long
=term group survival. Shaggy is the team rebel. He is often a
=good-timer or a free-spirit. His function in the team is to shake
=everything up now and then, keep the team from getting into a rut.
=Multiple Shaggys can be exciting, but you need a really strong Fred
=and/or Velma to counteract things. Shaggy as the leader would be team
=suicide. He usually has some sympathy for the team values, but does not
=abide by them all the time.
Well, the obvious candidate is the Trickster. With spells
like Hotfoot and Remove Hand, he can shake people up pretty
well. Some Orlanthi fall into the category as well, in addition to the
more inebriated Storm Bulls.
=Scooby - Every team ends up with one, whether you want him there or not.
=He is another species (literally or figuratively) from the rest of the
=group. His function is to force the rest of the team to examine their
=position on things. Multiple Scoobys will kill a team. Scooby a
=leader?! Get real, he's a DOG! He has no clue what the team values are,
=even though he may try to.
This is going to be either a shaman, or a different species:
the Uz/Aldryami/Mostali/Duck that hangs out with humans.
=* Insert tongue in cheek, an smiley's all through post for the humor
=impaired.
Next up: the castaways of Gilligan's Island as roleplaying
archetypes.
=Lise Mendel
=http://www.access.digex.net/~catalyst/
--
Doesn't the fact that there are *exactly* fifty states seem a little suspicious?
George W. Harris gha...@dur.mindspring.com
Lise Mendel
George W. Harris <gha...@dur.mindspring.com> wrote:
> Next up: the castaways of Gilligan's Island as roleplaying
> archetypes.
I'll leave that one to you :-)
Charles Ott
<snip>
>George W. Harris gha...@dur.mindspring.com
What in the Hell are you getting at?!?!
Are you anywhere near the point?!?!
"Bother", said Pooh, as he pulled out the Glock.
Matthew R Blackwell
In <4vud9k$4...@topcat.uk.gdscorp.com> ste...@uk.gdscorp.com (Steve
Gilham) writes:
>mbla...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> Okay, I wandered out of here a month ago because of the Shane v.
>> Everyone else posts, and now that I've wandered back in, it's still
>> going on. Granted, it's down to two or three people, but still, a
month
>> of this is a bit excessive, don't ya think?
>
>most recent instantiation to go on non-stop the early part of the year
>until Shane arrived, a month is nothing. And his arrival did seem to
>allow the dice-vs-diceless thing to finally die a death of neglect for
>the moment.
>
Gee, I kind of liked that thread. It was more interesting than
"Shootout in the Kitchen."
Lise Mendel
Charles Ott <chu...@olywa.net> wrote:
> What in the Hell are you getting at?!?!
>
> Are you anywhere near the point?!?!
>
For those of you who missed it....
Coming soon......
The Scooby Doo Role-Playing, the Web Page!!!!!
}:->
And now can even claim popular demand.
Thanks, Charles!
Charles Ott
cata...@access.digex.net (Lise Mendel) wrote:
>Charles Ott <chu...@olywa.net> wrote:
>> What in the Hell are you getting at?!?!
>>
>> Are you anywhere near the point?!?!
>>
>For those of you who missed it....
"Are you talking to me?? Are you talking to me?? You must be talking
to me?? Are you talking to me??"
>Coming soon......
> The Scooby Doo Role-Playing, the Web Page!!!!!
>}:->
>And now can even claim popular demand.
I understood Team Scooby concept. I thought it was rather humorous.
What I did not understand was the pointless diatribe of the Gloranthan
archetypes. I think that he made all that crap up.
>Thanks, Charles!
Your so very welcome.
>--
>Lise Mendel
>Mommy to Abigail (5/9/93) and Dorothy (10/19/95)
>http://www.access.digex.net/~catalyst/
>I reserve the right to repost e-mailed flames wherever it amuses me to