Really weird RPG's out there.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by thrash

... repeated claims in the text to the contrary not withstanding, yes. More like the games used to train improv theater.

Useful as an edge case, though.

It's the perfect example of a storygame that isn't an RPG. Right alongside Hobbit Tales from the Green Dragon Inn, Aye, Dark Overlord, and Once Upon A Time.

[J. Edward Tremlett]

Originally Posted by Pmandrekar

One of my close personal friends is the President of the Tekumel Society and has retired from his teaching job at a local college to develop more materials for the gameworld.

Have they been able to move the game past the controversy and get good stuff going, again?

I guess it's true what they say - sometimes you never really know people until you clean out their stuff, postmortem, and see what was lurking in the trunk.

[J. Edward Tremlett]

Originally Posted by Irish Wolf

Yeah, the unplayable weirdness was HOL: Human Occupied Landfill (and its "expansion", Buttery HOLsomeness). It was a wild read, but I don't believe its author(s) ever expected anyone to play it.

I have yet to meet anyone who actually tried.

[johndallman]

The weirdest games I've played have been home-built ones. Two notable examples had strange combat sequencing systems:

PumQuest (sic) had a loss of action points as the main effect of injury. When your action point recovery was reduced to zero, and you'd spent whatever you had left, you couldn't take any actions, and it didn't matter if you were unconscious or not. But the system could not decide if you were dead; that just wasn't considered.

CPRPG had a combat system based on action movies. You could keep on taking actions while they formed a sensible action sequence, bit the author could never explain how to decide what that was. I'm partially sighted and don't watch movies, so it was utterly baffling for me.

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by J. Edward Tremlett

Empire of the Petal Throne: Weird and exotic, and very lavish. Nothing has ever quite been like it. (A pity about the author, but thankfully he's dead so no more $$$ flows into his coffers)

Did anyone ever set it to anything other than OD&D?

[thrash]

Really remiss! Repent rebuff: Scooby Doo one-pager, by Tailsteak.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Did anyone ever set it to anything other than OD&D?

Yes, but the Tekumel foundation hasn't exactly covered themselves with glory in the situation (they knew about it for at least ten years before the information came out publicly).

[ckosacranoid]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Did anyone ever set it to anything other than OD&D?

Just what is the game about anyway and who made it?

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by ckosacranoid

Just what is the game about anyway and who made it?

It was created by Mohammed Abd-al-Rahman Barker, a professional linguist and science fiction fan, during the early days of Dungeons and Dragons, and the first of several game treatments was actually published by TSR. There have been several versions since then, including Tekumel: Empire of the Petal Throne, published by Guardians of Order and using the Tri-Stat engine from Big Eyes Small Mouth. Tekumel is an apparently fantasy world with some science-fictional underpinnings and weird monsters and societies; it's been much admired for its elaborate worldbuilding, including linguistic details comparable to those of Tolkien's Middle-Earth.

However, it has come out that Barker was not simply a convert to Islam, as his name suggests, but strongly anti-Jewish and a sympathizer for Nazism, which has made a lot of people uncomfortable with his work, including the game material from which his views seem to have been excluded—at least, no one seems to have suspected his political or historical beliefs from the game material.

I personally have only glanced at the EPT material; I found it a bit too creepy and unengaging to get me to invest in understanding its alien societies. But it has a lot of admirers, not least for the sophistication of its languages. There's still a Web site that discusses it at some length, called Tekumel.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Yes, but the Tekumel foundation hasn't exactly covered themselves with glory in the situation (they knew about it for at least ten years before the information came out publicly).

Isn't that a non-profit?

Assuming that the stated purpose of the non-profit is related to promoting the world of Tékumel, publicising other fictional works of the author which seem likely to negatively affect the viability of Tékumel might well be contrary to the fiduciary duties of officers and board members of that non-profit.

Even if it weren't, the moral rights of an author include the right to have a work published anonymously or pseudonymously. Depending on jurisdiction, moral rights may lapse with the death of the author, seventy years after their death or be assumed by any heirs. It seems far from clear that violating those moral rights of the author would have been glorious or even justifiable just because someone thinks that the pseudonymously published novel is exceptionally terrible.

Writing terrible fiction is, as yet, not illegal in most major jurisdictions. Neither is holding terrible views. In countries with freedom of expression, someone may even be free to express their terrible views, possibly even anonymously or pseudonymously. Even when people know the identity of the author, why do they have a duty to violate their moral rights to publish a creative work pseudonymously?

As far as I can tell, no crime was committed and no legal duty to inform authorities or anyone else is clearly evident. While it might frustrate historians and literary analysts, there exists no duty on behalf of heirs of an author, or foundations devoted to promotion or preservation of some of the work of an author, to reveal every detail of their lives, their creative process or any works they have published anynomously. Certainly not in the absence of some clearly stated duty in the bylaws of said institution which states that they are devoted to the preservation of historical accuracy, even at the cost of any other stated purposes of such a foundation.

Many, if not most, authors hold reprehensible views, or at least profess belief in memeplexes which include reprehensible views, such as most religions. Some authors admit to religious beliefs where foundational religious tracts promote infanticide, slavery, rape, murder, ethnic cleansing, misogyny, homophobia, bigotry, hatred or all of the above. I don't really consider it the duty of non-profits to promote the work of authors to reveal their religious or political views, if they have not disclosed them in life, and in many cases doing so would be unethical, as it would be contrary to their fiduciary duties.