Are there any special challenges inherent in running a stone

Well it'd be a lot of theory crafting about how things work and how "difficult" it would be for players to execute things or discover stuff.

But if you don't care about that shit then boom done.

Every time they try to create something new, have them justify it as a completely new thing, or as a progression of something previous. Roll a d100. If they roll above [creation threshold], it works as intended, with flaws to work out and everything. If they get dubs, they feel the spirit of creation, and make something that works really well, but strangely, or that is unusual in its usage. The invention of musical instruments, or the like.
If they roll a 100, they understand the new technology innately and completely, and are stricken with a masterstroke of creative spirit.

Each character has a pool of creative spirit, which they add to by achieving great deeds/completing objectives/surviving. Most inventions cost 1 point of spirit, with an additional point counting as a reroll, as many times as you want to, as long as you have spirit to spend. Certain inventions cost more spirit, though. Anything life-changing, such as the first principles of agriculture, metalwork, or the like.

>>49929884

I feel the OP wants to avoid this kind of stuff.

What they should really do is make a list of things that the players know how to make. If it's not on the list, they can't make it nor can they even begin to fathom how to make it. If they try to "well my character innocently gets stuff together to smelt shit" just throw in "your character will be stuck doing that for the rest of the day" and then just say "you fucked it up" when they come back from the progress (also make it clear you aren't interested in them rushing the tech tree of humanity).

Once they have the list of the things they know how to do, then throw shit at them and roleplay like normal.

>>49929401
you'll have to allow a few innovations because it's hard to NOT metagame with that few tools innovations BUT thats okay too, innovations can be forgotten, lost, or made into trade secrets

my recommendation is the Jean M. Auel novels.
sure, there is graphic cave-person sex all over them, but they help you get a handle on the challenges, adventures and day to day concerns of a stone age individual.

>Clan of the Cave Bear
gives a good insight into the concerns of a medicinal character. MC is raised by a small clan's medicine woman and the herbology detail is quite good. you'll need to read Herbology texts for the region of play, but CotCB will give you a good mind-set

>Valley of the Horses
excellent at outlining the challenges of solo living, as well as the importance of craft including narrative details of flint knapping, carving for function, leather-work, and not wasting FUCKING ANYTHING.

>Mammoth Hunters
I'm a bit fuzzy on this one; but it covers the difficulties of plains-living there are actually HUGE difficulties when wood is no longer an option for construction or fuel

>Plains of Passage
it's a travel book, this means walking and dragging travois or taming(NOT DOMESTICATING, IT"S A DIFFERENT PROCESS) some animal to carry or drag supplies with/for you. breaking a spear on a hunt means stopping for a day to make a new one. also, cultures can change suddenly and that can be an excellent cause of conflict.

>shelters of stone
least useful in my opinion pertains to large groups and their interactions

>the latest one
have yet to read it
NO SPOILERS

and just because one or two individuals invent a few things does not mean that suddenly everyone will advance not everyone shares ideas. inventing metalurgy for example requires a LOT of things to happen together and coincidentally and for those things to be observed and considered and for the observer to be able to test them and pass them on.

>>49929919
Good point. I dunno, though- I'd feel a big sense of achievement from that advancement, especially if there was a glaring, obvious need, as seen through modern eyes. It'd be interesting to not have any way to deal with that at all, but that calls to question what these campaigns would be- either town-building, early civilization founding, or nomadic adventures, right?

>>49929999
THE MIGHTY QUADS HAVE SPOKEN

you forgot spiritual journeys...

>>49929999
>>49930010

...the campaigns would be whatever the GM wants to run...

>>49930066
I was just thinking about what a stone-age game would lend itself to, as OP didn't really say. Of course the gm decides what the campaign is in the end, though.

Nice double cuckold marks, by the way.

>>49929999
>>49930115
They could be fairly straightforward, personal narratives about overcoming obstacles and monsters.

It's still a game, though, and some players crave advancement. If 'inventing' a groundbreaking new technology based on something modern people just hear about in history classes grants their character a significant advantage, they're going to go for that opportunity.

>>49930115

It wouldn't lend itself to anything, there is only what the GM/Players want to do with it.

>>49930144

You could do advancement through stats and gear and shit.

If the GM doesn't want players to be inventing stuff like crazy then just say "that's not the story we're telling. Inventing things is extremely hard and I really don't care about balancing shit around stuff being invented."

Sounds a bit standoffish.

It's not just the DM's game in the same way it's not just the players' game.

>>49930199

...wut?

>>49930216
I think it's weird that the DM would, on his own, decide which story the group as a whole is going to be telling.

>>49930264

...who ever said that?

>>49930274
>just say "that's not the story we're telling. Inventing things is extremely hard and I really don't care about balancing shit around stuff being invented."

>>49929401
Just have the things they try not work as the players expected, and when they question why they failed tell them "Your character doesn't know why it failed, he lacks the theoretical framework to understand the process. Looks like you have to invent metalworking the hard way, from the ground up" then smile like a smug bastard :D

>>49930301

Ok?

Where'd you get the "on his own" part?

You know, I have no idea how metalworking was discovered. It can't have been a quick switch from knapping flint and carving to smelting ores.

Did people put malachite in their homes because it was pretty? Did some of it get too near a hearth?

>>49929401
First of all, y'all newfags don't know about what games are out there.

Second, go play OG. Your characters would be to busy bang smelly thing to think about inventing pennicilin.

>>49930349
>then just say
I'm not sure about your group, but my group isn't a hivemind that speaks through a single mouth in a haunting cacophony of voices.

>>49930366
Original Gangsta...?

>>49930376
https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13740.phtml

>>49930368

It really seems like you are trying to make an argument here where there is none.

Like, it seems you are making a really stupid assumption just for the sake of trying to make an argument.

>>49930358
I'm gonna guess bog iron was probably in the process? If you're already using the peat as fuel the circumstances of getting some shitty iron on accident seem entirely possible. Once you've got that iron, you're probably going to keep trying to do it again until you eventually figure out how to repeat if semi-reliably.

>>49929401
Your players are shit. Don't let them metagame. Done.

>>49930392
I'm just interpreting
>If the GM doesn't want players to be inventing stuff like crazy then just say "X"
in the most straightforward way I can see.

We were specifically talking about players craving character advancement through technological breakthroughs, and the DM wanting to face on other aspects.

I'm not automatically going to assume consensus has been reached when I see a sentence structured as "If person X doesn't want Y, then just say N". I have no reason to suspect the group is suddenly speaking as one.

>>49930396
>you're probably going to keep trying to do it again
Why, if it's shitty and of no use? Where's the incentive to start refining this black lump you got from the fireplace just in case it might become useful somehow?

>>49930396
Iron doesn't precede copper, though. By the time bog iron was discovered, people would already have known that certain naturally occuring materials can be made into metals.

The discovery of that process is the revolution I'm curious about.

>>49930422
>in the most straightforward way I can see.
>by making an assumption for the sake of making an argument

You could have made at least 2 assumptions.

You decided to make the one that lead to an argument.

File: ancedance.gif (4MB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 640x640px

>>49930441
It's like you didn't even read the post.

Don't assume I'm specifically out for an argument when the more straightforward, simpler assumption happens to be the one that leads to an argument.

>>49930460
>the more straightforward, simpler assumption
>because it's the assumption I first reached it's the more straightforward and simpler one
>I am the marker of straightforward and simple solutions

File: andydance.gif (771KB, 492x277px) Image search: [Google]

771KB, 492x277px

>>49930470
We were talking about a disagreement. A resolution hadn't been established.

How could it be more straightforward to assume the very next post would be based on a situation where a consensus /had/ been reached, if this isn't mentioned in any way?

How am I the one who is out for an argument, if you're the one who can't seem to drop this?

>>49930503

...wouldn't it make way more sense to not do any assumptions?

>>49930522
>please define making more sense
>please define assumptions
>please define not doing assumptions

This is what a post without assumptions looks like.

>>49930533

>ASSUMPTIONS ARE A ZERO SUM GAME
>IF YOU SAY DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS THEN HUMAN CONVERSATION FALLS APART
>EITHER ALL ASSUMPTIONS ARE OK OR NO ASSUMPTIONS ARE OK

Homie, get out more often. Talk with more people. I believe that you will learn about the finer things of conversation, like what assumptions are okay to make and what aren't.

Definitions of words are a safe bet to assume. The entire context of a hypothetical scenario made up are not.

>>49930552
You're right. I should have /assumed/
>do not do any assumptions
actually means
>do some assumptions when it is sufficiently convenient for the conversation

It is unacceptable for other people not to be psychically attuned to your definition of what is and isn't a reasonable assumption.

You apparently know this because you leave the house and talk to people. It is important to your mental wellbeing that we know this about you.

>>49930583

Acceptability has nothing to do with it, chum, it's about learning how to have smooth conversations with other humans that don't get bogged down by people making pointless assumptions.

And if you are confused by the specifics of a hypothetical scenario, then don't be afraid to ask for clarification. ;)

Don't worry though, keep on conversing with people and you'll learn. Hell, you might have just had bad luck talkin with someone who got triggered by your assumptive bullshit!

File: thesmugprick.jpg (10KB, 329x281px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 329x281px

>Players want X, DM wants Y.
>It's easy, just say "We're doing Y"

Yeah nah, it's entirely reasonable to assume this is something both the DM and the players will immediately be OK with.

Can we please talk about cavemen again?

>>49930610
How would a smooth operator like yourself interpret
>some players crave advancement. If 'inventing' a groundbreaking new technology based on something modern people just hear about in history classes grants their character a significant advantage, they're going to go for that opportunity.
>If the GM doesn't want players to be inventing stuff like crazy then just say "that's not the story we're telling. Inventing things is extremely hard and I really don't care about balancing shit around stuff being invented."
without making any assumptions.

>>49930613

Well you told them what kind of game you were running before everyone got together to play, right?

>>49930638
No.

I tell them I'm interested in running a game. If they're interested in spending some time playing on the regular, we get together to discuss what each of us is looking for in a game. I work this into a coherent game, and run it.

I don't decide on my own what half a dozen people will be required to spend X amount of leisure time on in the coming months.

>>49930631

Not gonna lie dude, I'm done feeding your argument fetish because unfortunately you don't seem to understand how vague the word "interpret" is as a directive (aside for maybe a tool to judge a person's default perspective)

I do wish you luck in your future human interactions! It's human nature to grow and learn so I'm certain you'll get the hang of it <3

File: dwoight.gif (500KB, 500x273px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 500x273px

>>49930660
>single, straightforward question
>I'm not going to answer that, "because I'm done feeding your argument fetish because XYZ"

Well ain't that convenient.

>>49930658

Well I'm glad that you find joy with this hodge-podge melting pot stuff!

I've found my group to be more interested in spending time together than worrying about their specific tastes being catered to so usually it just takes the GM to say "I wanna run X" and we're all down to give it a shot.

>>49930674

It certainly is for my sleep schedule ;)

Goodnight!

>>49930677
Some groups contain players who are socially capable enough to voice their preferences.

>>49930682
Yeah, good night, son.

>>49930690

More assumptions :(

Headin 2 bed now.

For realziez

>>49930677
Did you just assume that a coherent game, made to cater to more than one person, will always be a hodgepodge melting pot?

Don't assume bro.

>>49930708
>lel I'm cutting this off and not answering your question because I need my sleep, kiddo
>but not before I get the last word in

File: neand.jpg (147KB, 800x796px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 800x796px

>>49930620
What does your caveman character want to do?

>>49929401
Check out GURPS Ice Age, which has sections discussing just this sort of thing for when you are deciding what sort of game you want to run.

I'm not saying play GURPS, the advice is system-agnostic and it works as good sourcebook for stone age life.

>>49930731
eat meat, have a huge cave for himself and his family, sire like a hundred kids from his harem

>>49931184
>eat meat
>sire like a hundred kids from his harem

You're gonna need a lot of meat. You'd better say your prayers, or you're not going to be strong enough to tussle with the mammoth.

What would you say your character believes in?

Stone Age could be fun for horror games,.

>>49931687
Probably. Our environment was pretty hostile.