Home Forums Fantasy General Fantasy Greek Myth game rule question – turned to stone

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #89954
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    Grandad (me) and the boys have been play testing our rules for Jason and the Argonauts. In one game the boys had to visit Medusa’s Sacred Grove. In it were “statues” victims of her stare. Aiden age 8 decided that he needed more weapons and a shield and said he was taking them from the statues.

    With the logic of a small boy his argument was that Medusa’s stare affected the men because they were alive. Their clothes, swords, shields, armour, helmets, coin pouches etc were not alive and so were not affected. So the fingers could be broken off and the weapons or whatever taken.

    How do you think I should have played it? How have you played it?

    And would the stare affect an Amazon?

    #89955
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Go with them to keep the peace and not to be confrontational (assuming they are young) and then go check out the myth to see if that sheds any light?

     

    #89956
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    The boys are 10, 8 and 6 and I did as you say – only the living parts turned to stone.

    The myths are varied and unclear as to what happens to the accoutrements – “a face so terrible to behold that the mere sight of it would turn onlookers to stone”.  This implies that it is only the onlooker that turns to stone not his equipment and clothes – so a bit of repainting I think!

    #89967
    Gone Fishing
    Participant

    I think a good rule of thumb for most games is to go with “yes” (within reason, obviously) rather than “no,” even if it calls for a roll made up on the spot. This is all the more true when playing with youngsters. In other words I think you made a good choice!

    #89968
    Don Glewwe
    Participant

    I think a good rule of thumb for most games is to go with “yes” (within reason, obviously) rather than “no,” even if it calls for a roll made up on the spot. This is all the more true when playing with youngsters. In other words I think you made a good choice!

    Agreed.  The success roll ‘on the spot’ would depend on the age/mood of the players: having the straps of a shield or an axe’s handle broken while trying to pry them loose from the stone would have made the idea profitable but problematic. (not to mention the noise and/or breakage of the tools used to break the stone…).

    https://brawlfactory.net/

    #89970
    John D Salt
    Participant

    The boys’ reasoning seems commendably logical. As I recall the legend of the gorgons, it was the victim looking directly at the gorgon’s face that caused petrifaction, not the gorgon looking at the victim. Didn’t Perseus or someone cheat by looking at the gorgon’s reflection in a highly-polished shield? That would suggest that shields, at least if polished, are not vulnerable to the effect.

    All the best,

    John.

    #89971
    zippyfusenet
    Participant

    Aiden made a logical, well-constructed argument. And ‘yes’ is better than ‘no’. But really, what’s your goal here?

    If you want your grand-children to play games with you, then let them do what they want, within reason, and by all means arrange the game so that they win.

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    #89973
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    If you want your grand-children to play games with you, then let them do what they want, within reason, and by all means arrange the game so that they win.

    That is the general concurrence and how we play our games.

    Thanks a lot.

    #89975
    Gone Fishing
    Participant

    Another way to approach this, of course, is to ask “What would Harryhausen do?”

    #89978
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    Another way to approach this, of course, is to ask “What would Harryhausen do?”

    Why did I not think of that?  Slaps head.  Look at 45-52 seconds – Aiden was correct.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

    #89979
    Mike
    Keymaster

    True but is this person and their clothes not stone:

    #89980
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Maybe after sunset/sunrise the clothes turn too?

    #89991
    Mike Headden
    Participant

    In roleplay type games I would always reward the thinkers-round-corners and the thinkers-out-of-the-box.

    However, the smart-ass who, for example, has their fantasy character use the genie’s wish to ask for a gun will find they have a gun but no ammo or a Desert Eagle and a box of .22 ammo or similar.

    In my long-running Friday night RPG campaign a character once asked a Dwarven minor deity they had freed from the clutches of a demon for a “big gun.” He was told that his wish would be granted in a nearby chamber. The excited player had his character hurry to the place and there, many, many metres underground, in the heart of a labyrinth of narrow stone tunnels, was his big gun … a Karl Morser!

     

    Growing old is mandatory, growing up is entirely optional!

    #89994
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    So it may be that they petrify after a while?  In the image above the figure to the right of the circled one behind Perseus’ shield appears to have metal armour.  So perhaps the metal stays but cloth petrifies after a while otherwise Perseus shield would petrify.

    I’m thinking that I will stick with Aiden on this one – as all he wanted were the weapons and gold! I’ll just fudge the cloth part as necessary.

    #89996

    “What would Harryhausen do?”

    — there’s a signature line if I’ve ever read one!

    No, the clothes do not turn to stone. They do, however eventually rot away and thus is born the classical tradition of statues in the nude.

    Self taught, persistently behind the times, never up to date. AKA ~ jeff
    More verbosity: http://petiteguerre.blogspot.com/

    #89998
    John D Salt
    Participant

    I love the idea of a Karl Morser in a dungeon. I’m wondering if it would be worth writing a small dungeon campaign based on the unintended consequences of a bunch of dwarves finding a stash of assorted late-WW2 German weaponry, just for the title “Dr Panzerfaustus” (“Oh, didn’t I mention the backblast?”, says the DM, chuckling evilly).

    Wish-granting should always employ this kind of sting-in-the-tail logic, just like Peter Cook and/or Liz Hurley in “Bedazzled”, depending on which version of the film you watch.

    I’ll just fudge the cloth part as necessary.

    Imodium(R) should help with problems like that.

    No, the clothes do not turn to stone. They do, however eventually rot away and thus is born the classical tradition of statues in the nude.

    This seems such an overwhelmingly logical explanation that it must be true.

    All the best,

    John.

    #89999
    Alan Hamilton
    Participant

    That is really logical and now it is on the internet it must be true.

    Thanks folks.

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.