styopa

Members
  • Content count

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

styopa last won the day on February 12

styopa had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

242 Excellent

About styopa

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Been playing RPGs since 1979, incl RQ since about 1980.
  • Current games
    RQ(3), BRP, D&D5e
  • Location
    Mpls, MN
  • Blurb
    Nah.

Recent Profile Visitors

737 profile views
  1. I believe that is already more generous and conscientious than some other companies that 'give away' pdfs of things. Thanks Rick!
  2. FWIW the more I think about it, at least in my conception, I could see Spirit Magic being inconsistent and wonky - ie a "weapon buff" spell from a local cult that uses warhammers might just work on both the pointy and bludgy bits...but not on a sword or a mace. Bladesharp for any bladed thing (whether or not the sharpness of the blade) bludgeon for blunt (unless it flies through the air like a sling bullet) etc....spirit magic is, by its essential nature, inconsistent from place to place, and from cult to cult. Divine spells are easy, they only work for whatever weapons that cult uses, end of story. I could see a cult where the favored weapons are broadsword and bow have a single buff spell that works on both, and only those. Or maybe only those if wielded by a cultist, etc. SORCERY, on the other hand, *has* to be about runic relationships and a logical underpinning. The sort of rune = weapon relationship you were talking about before.
  3. It does require more work, but I think it nicely supports and sustains the runes that suffuse Gloranthan existence. Of course, we also have to be willing to set aside precepts from a nearly 40-year-old game that - let's be honest - wasn't nearly as deeply dissected (like this) as we're able to do collaboratively today. I almost guarantee you that if we set, for example, a key rune to each weapon group (spears, swords, axes, bows, etc) we will find incongruous cults whose favorite weapon doesn't match metamythically...That's a place for a retcon, imo, in pursuit of an OVERALL better rq4.
  4. I'm fine with that, just make the full set of associations with (as you say) Death Rune solely and uniquely for swords - nothing else buffs swords, and the Death rune can't buff anything else. It makes a very nice sense, I like it.
  5. Yeah, but does disrupt ignore NATURAL armor?
  6. Maybe a simpler solution is just to have a SINGLE spell that enhances "a weapon's" to hit and damage, instead of having particular flavors for 'edged' and 'blunt'? It's magic. Besides (for example) the bulk of the damage a 2h sword is doing has nothing to do with the keenness of its blade. In fact, many historical 2h sword techniques would be impossible with a razor-sharp edge. Which spell are you using for a morningstar? Or a garrotte (there's no 'blade')? What about a shovel? I know, it's against the sacred canon but whatever.
  7. By gut I'd have said bludgeon but I see your point.
  8. Then he's dead, IMO. Pretty sure armor enchanting doesn't give you magic defenses, it simply raises the AP of the armor in that location. You know, that armor that's ignored by disrupt.
  9. So she's fighting a kobold, or maybe a bugbear?
  10. We call it the zombie defense....if you're fighting something with lots of legs that isn't discomfited by losing them, it can amount to substantial immunity from otherwise-devastating hits.
  11. Brithini are to Mostali as machines are to repair techs.
  12. As long as he's editing, note that the "*Strengthening Enchantment" at the bottom of the stat sheet is misspelled.
  13. I like this comparison, let's pursue the math? Javelineer with 60% skill, vs POW12 disrupt-caster. Both have 4 points of armor (they're ready for battle). The caster has a 60% chance to succeed, a 50% to overcome the target to do an average of 2 points ignoring armor a net 30% of his casts. Javelin does d8 or average of 4.5. With a 60% skill, that means that they have a 3% to do crit for double that (9) ignoring armor, another 9% to do 9-armor, and 48% more to do 4.5-armor. I'm arbitrarily adding a -1 damage for 2% of the strikes to recognize that the javelin has a chance to fumble, while the spell has no effective fumble consequence. It turns out that the javelin is a far better damage dealer up until the target has 5 points of armor, then they're about even, with disrupt pulling ahead at 6 points on the target. Now, taking into account that the caster only has that 60% chance to cast without armor on, and the attractiveness of tossing spells around in a fight becomes less attractive generally.