Jump to content

Anunnaki

Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 Excellent

About Anunnaki

  • Rank
    God Learner

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://redbrickpublishing.com

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Roleplayer and wargamer since 1975.
  • Current games
    My Own Games, RuneQuest Glorantha, King Arthur Pendragon, Adventures in Middle-Earth
  • Location
    Winchester, OH 45697
  • Blurb
    Fan of tabletop RPGs and miniatures gaming.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Anunnaki

    New to RuneQuest-Glorantha

    @Scout. Mea culpa! I am going blind in my old age! Hahahahahaha! Yeah, probably an erratum in the making. Just do this once--Step 2.1 or 2.2. Multiple occupations aren't going to add anything here. If it helps, unless you're forcing player characters to follow the occupations of their grand/parents, it's really only useful for some background color for the character. For my games, I've used the occupations as a "guide" for my players occupation choices. "So you wanna be a Shaman's Assistant? Well there's nothing in your grandparents or parents histories that support that so how did you become one?" Makes for interesting discussions. Never a bad thing. As always, and you will hear this a lot, Your Glorantha Will Vary (much like the ED moniker, Your Barsaive Will Vary ... ever wonder where that came from? Now you know! ). Hope this helps! Kind regards, James
  2. Anunnaki

    New to RuneQuest-Glorantha

    Hiya, Step 1 (p.24, RQG) is Homeland; Step 2 (p.27, RQG) is Family History. If you're referring to Steps 2.1 and 2.2 (p.28, RQG), then 2.1 is determining which family members were important to you (grandfather or grandmother? paternal or maternal? father or mother? or even a closely-related replacement for either?), while 2.2 is determining occupations for each (important grandparent and parent from 2.1). There is going to be some flipping back and forth during character generation. It gets easier and quicker once you are more comfortable with book layout. Hope this helps! Kind regards, James
  3. Anunnaki

    New to RuneQuest-Glorantha

    Ah, Earthdawn. Another game very close to my heart.. Welcome to Glorantha, @Scout. Hope you enjoy the stay, @styopa summarized things nicely with the "hero's journey" comment. Both games are about heroes, for sure, but where Earthdawn is about recovering from the ravages of a Horror-fueled rampage, Glorantha is moving into the Hero Wars where heroes will determine the fate of the world. Player characters can make a difference, but for different reasons. There are definitely a LOT of parallels between Glorantha and Earthdawn. Given the pedigree of many of ED's authors over the years, that's not surprising. The biggest difference, IMO, is religion. Religion is prevalent and VERY important in Glorantha; less so in Earthdawn (which has Passions who walk among the world). How you relate to your deity or ancestors is a critical determinant of your character's approach to life and the world in Glorantha. Earthdawn, not so much. Well, it can be if the GM and players decide so, but it's not "core" to the game in the same way it is in Glorantha. I love both games and worlds passionately. But for me, Glorantha came first and it's far and away the more "mature" world, in my opinion. And, for me at least, RuneQuest came first and foremost well before I started with Earthdawn in 1993. Hope this helps! Look forward to hearing how you are finding the game, @Scout. Kind regards, James
  4. Anunnaki

    How are Traits and Passions Working Out for People?

    In response to the "demoralize an adventure" from the OP. That's a fair comment, but to me it comes down to being transparent with the players, and as a GM, being accommodating (to a degree) of "bad things" from a failed roll. If the player makes an honest attempt -- and let's be up front, some players are more easily into roleplaying (comes easy) than others -- then the GM should take that into consideration, even in the case of failure, rather than relying on a straight roll. From my own games, the first time one of my players made an augment roll, he fumbled. It wasn't an important part of the story, so I hand-waved it away, but highlighted that it could have been bad. Later in the adventure, the same player was in a critical situation and wanted to make an augment roll. I spelled out the risk again, but the roll was still made. And it failed. Badly. The player, responding to the failure, accepted the result and role-played accordingly. (See that beautiful woman with the overly-sharp teeth over there? She wants you. You 'need' her. Go to her ...) It was a genuinely dangerous situation for the player, but he responded well, picking his way through the battlefield with the purpose of getting to his new 'amore,' and as a result, when things came to a conclusion, I took that into account and gave the player another opportunity to 'shake free' of the influence, also based on the reactions of the other players. The point here is that, demoralized or not, the 'failure' provided great roleplaying fodder for everyone and all of the players responded in kind. This might be a group thing, perhaps, but mechanics or not, the commonality of the mechanics (succeed/fail) meant everyone was on board with consequences, but everyone was also on board with the fact that even a major fail could be redeemed by a group effort. Hope this helps!
  5. Anunnaki

    How are Traits and Passions Working Out for People?

    I'm using them as RAW, but relatively "flexibly" in my own games. My players are loving them, and quickly grasped the benefits. As a GM, one thing that I do highlight ahead of time is "if you want to 'risk' invoking a Rune/Passion, you need to be aware it's a win/lose situation and be okay with that." By this, I mean if you fail your roll, you lose (penalty); if you succeed, you win (bonus). That in mind, my players have been more surreptitious about using them all over the place, only using them where they can genuinely provide an edge. Also, I *always* ask for a roleplaying rationale for their use. Lastly, as a GM, if I think my players aren't taking advantage of their use (or, since they are new to the game, might not quite grok the benefits), I will throw out some suggested possible uses for various augments, in a roleplaying sense. Honestly, I think that some of my players have improved their in-game experience simply because they have skewed away from "roll-playing" to the "role-playing" (not a slight on rolling dice, just more towards an immersive game experience).
  6. Anunnaki

    Bladesharp

    Quoted for truth.
  7. Anunnaki

    Bladesharp

    For my RQG games, combat modifiers like Fighting in Darkness or Attacking from Advantage, etc, are "situational" and apply to every attack/parry (as relevant) -- I don't see how this should apply to the character's "natural" skill rating. Rune spells like Sword or Axe Trance modify the character's "natural" skill rating, IMO ("You are 'one' with your weapon"). And weapon enhancement spells like Bladesharp apply to every attack (situational while you are holding the enhanced weapon). Here's an example, using some of the options previously discussed in this thread. So our Humakti adventurer with a 10 MP Sword Trance and a natural 80% with Broadsword has a "natural" skill rating of 180% while the Rune spell is in effect. If she decides to split her attacks evenly, she has two attacks at 90% each. If she has Bladesharp 6 on her sword, those two attacks are now at 120% each (and her opponent is -20% if his skill is less than the Humakti, due to the "greater than 100%" rule). If the light went out before her first attack, she still gets two attacks, but each of them are at 45% (120-75). If the light goes out after her first attack, but before her second attack, her second attack incurs the -75% Darkness penalty, so is reduced to 45% (unless her opponent can see in the dark, this penalty affects him also). If her Bladesharp was also Dispelled before her second attack, she would be at 15% (120-75-30). If her opponent had been grounded by her first attack, just before the lights went out and her Bladesharp was Dispelled, her second attack would be 55% (120-75-30+40). If our Humakti adventurer decided to stick with just one attack, of course, and the light went out on her before she got to strike, she would be at 135% (180+30-75). And so on. Key points being, Bladesharp, IMO enhanced the weapon (specifically), so is applied to every attack (only, not parry). Sword Trance enhances the skill and is applied to both attack and parry (ignoring the ambiguity in the wording of "other weapon-enhancing spells" -- IMO, should just read "weapon-enhancing spells". /shrug Anyways, my 10 bolgs on this, FWIW. As always, hope this helps, not hinders! EDIT: I know this seems to run counter to the wording for Splitting Attacks in RQ:G, p.202, which notes that splitting attacks requires 100% or more in the "natural" skill (not augmented by magic), but in my games (call it a house rule if you must), potent spells like Sword Trance do improve natural skill. Also, note that Augments are applied to the "natural" skill before splitting as well. If our intrepid Humakti adventurer had successfully augmented her Broadsword skill by +20%, then she would be 200% with her sword (180+20), essentially adding +10 to each of the attack examples above. EDIT2: Also, while I remember, don't forget that Dismiss Magic is a common rune spell. If the pesky Humakti who has opted to use Sword Trance with 20 MPs is rampaging through your allies with 300% weapon skill, a well-placed Dismiss Magic will sort that out post-haste. Should be simple enough to discern that the Humakti is using Sword Trance and target that spell. EDIT3: Of course, if you do play completely RAW (rules as written), there is nothing wrong with having Sword Trance applied to each attack, IMO. In the example above, our Humakti would need to have a natural 100% skill out of the gate to split attacks. Then the 10 MP Sword Trance and Bladesharp 6 would apply to "each" attack. So that means each attack would be at 180% (50+100+30). That makes for a higher-powered attack, but that's perfectly fine. Doing things the way I do it, as above, means the Humakti could, in fact, split her attack into three attacks: say, each at 60% based on even distribution (180/3=60). Then Bladesharp would apply to each, bringing them up to 90% per attack. Or pump another 2 MPs into the Sword Trance at casting and bring her "natural" skill up to 200%, then split into four attacks of 80% each (allowing for Bladesharp; 50+30). A wall of whirling bronze, which is how I see Sword Trance ...
  8. Anunnaki

    Bladesharp

    Hiya, Bladesharp vs Dullblade edition differences summary: In RQ2, they canceled each other out for attack bonus and damage. The spells were also capped at 4 points and Bladesharp could affect multiple weapons (e.g. Bladesharp 4 could give one weapon +20% and +4 damage, or four weapons +05% and +1 damage, or combinations thereof). In RQ3, Bladesharp affects just one weapon and imparted the usual +05% attack bonus and +1 damage per point of spell. Dullblade only reduces damage, NOT attack bonus (as noted in the descriptions for both Bladesharp and Dullblade). In RQ:G, Bladesharp and Dullblade work the same way as RQ3 with one exception: if Dullblade is cast on a weapon without Bladesharp, it ALSO reduces the weapon's attack by -05% per point of spell (as well as the damage reduction). In this respect, it's better than the RQ3 version. Hope this helps the discussion. Kind regards, James
  9. Anunnaki

    Yinkin Cult satrting skills

    Hiya, RQ:G, p.73. You get a +20% and a +15% to cult starting skills (no mention of a +10%), plus Cult Lore, Worship, and Meditate. Not an oversight for Yinkin, though the cult has just two starting skills: Track and Beastspeech, as you noted. Based on where you allocate the additional starting cult skill bonuses, Yinkin player characters will start game play with a combined bonus of +40% Track and +30% Beastspeech, or +35% Track and +35% Beastspeech. Hope this helps! Kind regards, James
  10. Anunnaki

    GM Reference Booklet Printout Driving Me Crazy

    Hmmmm. OK, sorry, I got nothing (sadly). Only other thing I can think of (in the toolbox of the usual Mac fix-up stuff) is to try the "hold shift on startup and let system run a repair" diagnostics and/or grab a copy of Onyx and rebuild font caches, et al.
  11. Anunnaki

    GM Reference Booklet Printout Driving Me Crazy

    No problems on Mac here either (I have many iMacs, MacBooks, and MacBook Pros -- no issues on any of them, including Preview). That said, we are running nothing older than MacOS High Sierra and MacOS Mojave as operating systems. Which version of MacOS are you running @drablak? There were changes introduced to MacOS in previous versions that updated PDF behavior.
  12. Anunnaki

    Critical damage example.

    Hey, @Pentallion and @Atgxtg, can you please cut out the "we said, me said" and take it to PM so that this thread can get back on track. Thank you. @StephenMcG, I like your idea of giving players a choice when they critical. If facing a lightly-armored opponent, maximum damage might be better than ignore armor; and the other way round for heavily-armored opponents. But, of course, the same rule applies to NPCs.
  13. Anunnaki

    Strike rank conundrum.

    Gotcha. So essentially, "engaged" is a redetermination of the SRs of all engaged combatants, based on their actions to that point. So something like this? UNENGAGED ACTIONS PHASE Character A cast a spell (SR 3), then moves/prepares a weapon (+5 SR) and enters melee combat (becomes engaged). This ends the unengaged actions phase. ENGAGED ACTIONS PHASE Character B, having done nothing but wait patiently until now, acts on SR 2. Character A acts on SR 12 (3+5 from unengaged actions phase, +4 SR). Apologies for putting you wrong, @Tupper. Glad we are having these debates with more experienced players (thanks @RosenMcStern and @Psullie). And yes, I noticed the greater than half move thing as well, thanks @Psullie, but figured it didn't matter for the math. @Tupper, I think you are correct on the Prepared = Can Defend. Makes sense and easier math to boot. And more Maximum Game Fun-worthy.
  14. Anunnaki

    Strike Ranks: initiative order or action allowance?

    Hiya, The magic points for boosting Rune spells "do" change the number of Strike Ranks for casting the spell (RQ:G, p. 194); +1 for each magic point after the first. So pumping 20 magic points into your Heal Wound adds +19 SR to the casting. If you fail the Rune roll, you lose 1 MP (RQ:G, p. 314). For the question of "Can I move, then cast a Heal Wound on someone in the same round." It's less clear, for sure, as we have the following guide (RQ:G, p. 314): "Rune magic spells always take effect at strike rank 1." So, with that in mind: 1. If you have already cast a spell that round, you can't cast Heal Wound anyway. 2a. If you can cast Heal Wound, it goes off at SR 1 of the round "after" you have moved to the target, +1 SR per magic point after the first; or, 2b. (kind GM interpretation here) If you can cast Heal Wound, it goes off at +1 SR "after" you have moved to the target, +1 SR per magic point after the first. Personally, I would run with 2b as a GM on the basis that the SR 1 "implied" for casting a Rune spell is that it is potentially "very fast" and not bound by DEX or Rune points cost or even the initial magic point if the spell calls for it. This implication is based on the text on p. 194 where it compares the speed of Spirit magic and Sorcery versus Rune magic. Ultimately, might be one for the "needs clarification" list. RQ2 uses SR 1, but there is no magic point boosting to consider; RQ3 uses DEX SR +1 SR per magic point. Just for prior edition reference. Hope this helps! Kind regards, James
  15. Anunnaki

    Strike rank conundrum.

    Like preparing a spell (min DEX SR) or shooting a missile (DEX SR), technically you haven't prepared your weapon until 5+DEX SR (5 for preparing, but technically DEX is when you have it ready to "at least" defend). RQ:G rulebook, p. 193-194 notes that SIZ doesn't factor into determining missile or spell SRs. But DEX is always a factor for weapon/missile/spell (technically, weapon length could factor in as well, but I don't subscribe to that for "when" a weapon can be used to defend oneself). Apologies, didn't mean to muddy the waters. This wouldn't be a problem in your example if character A had a shield or an offhand weapon; both are able to be used to Parry. However, if character A was wielding a two-handed sword, then character B, by their declaration and action while A casts a spell, could have caught character off-guard without a weapon to defend herself (at least until SR 9, though she still can't attack until SR 12). Think of the +5 SR to prepare a weapon as what it takes to pull it out (or focus on a spell, or pull an arrow from a quiver), but DEX SR is the number of SRs needed to get it into at least a defensible position (or cast the spell, or nock the arrow and sight on the target). Others will no doubt chime in with examples, but hope this makes sense!
×