Jump to content

Tywyll

Members
  • Content Count

    653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tywyll


  1. On 6/3/2019 at 12:55 AM, g33k said:

    But I've also seen "modern media" show dragons exhaling an extended, multi-second blast, during which the head waved back and forth, covering a 90+ degree angle of fire... 

    Maybe one claims "dodging" into a shallow depression, or behind an obstacle, such that you escape the brunt of it.  But only a small portion (the very edges) of such broad target areas allow one to dodge entirely away...

    OTOH, the RQG-specific details are AFAIK kind of sparse...

     

    Check out GoT season 7 and 8 for PCs dodging a dragon's breath!


  2. On 5/9/2019 at 11:55 PM, Joerg said:

    Harrek did so during the High Holy Day rites when the God manifests. When you participate as an initiate, you cross over to Godtime, where interaction with the god is very possible.

    Ohhhkay...

    But isn't Godtime by definition timeless? I mean, the god should still exist in the limbo because your 'now' shouldn't impact on his then, right?

    One of the problems I have with dead gods... I mean, since everything of GodTime exists and heck can even be visited if powerful enough, why can't you worship a dead god and have the it from 'before' its death respond? 

     

    • Like 2

  3. 11 hours ago, jps said:

    At first glance, it seems there is no warming up, a Dream Dragon could breathe every round. I tend to agree with you about the head's pull back and lunge forward thus deserving a dodge roll.

    I think he probably meant, narratively. If the dragon takes a gulp of air right before it breathes fire (as is seen in most modern media depictions of dragons) than it seems reasonable that PCs could attampt to leap out of the way of dragon's face. It's not so much they avoid the fire as they just avoid the direction the head is pointing. 


  4. 1 hour ago, g33k said:

    I am inclined to take the harsher stance, here.  Halve the skill, successive Dodge's at -20% per, taken from that halved skill.

    Because if you are laying on the ground, surrounded by people wanting to hit you with readied weapons... you are about to get hit.

    A lot.

    Evenif you try to roll away.

    I mean I don't disagree with you, but a similar argument could be made for bladesharp or other temp modifiers applying twice when you split your skill. Hitting twice with a super sharp sword should be better than hitting once with one. But it doesn't (apparently) work that way. That's my only pause.


  5. On 5/29/2019 at 5:03 AM, Shiningbrow said:

    How did you choose to implement that?

    Did the PCs have to pay for it somehow? Or did you just give it to them all for free?

    Random...kept it old school. They each gained 1d6+4 bonus points. Everyone rolled 8 or 9 except for one guy who rolled 10. I decided since he obviously benefitted from the most powerful casting, he was the Crown Prince. 


  6. 4 hours ago, g33k said:

    I go back to my "rule of common-sense" -- if a rule is unclear, make the assumption that seems most common-sensical.

    I don't have the rulebook d/l'ed to this device, so I can't check the RAW; but in the absence of anything clear I'd probably put a x0.5 (1/2) penalty on the Dodge:  it's not that you cannot roll/scramble away... but you aren't nearly as nimble as when you're on your feet!

    YGMV.

     

    Yeah, that's how I was doing it. I just wondered if I missed something in the rules about it.

    Noe, how does the multidodge penalty work? Does the -20 happen before you half the total? Certainly that's how bonuses work when you split your skill.


  7. Right now in my campaign we are actually playing with that concept and genetic born "super-heroes". Lots of 21's in their stats. They definitely have a huge edge over 'mundane'! 

    As a parent, it is definitely something I would have indulged in for my own kid if I could have, so I see no reason that chiefs and kings wouldn't do the same. 

    • Like 1

  8. 13 hours ago, Crel said:

    I remember an RQ3 adventure I was run through a few years back with a gift like these. I don't know the name of the module, unfortunately. We were hired by Barren/Barran/Baron? the Monster Slayer to go with him inside a huge eel--I think it's a sea god's pet, as someone with a few more percentage in Grognardia now I'd bet it was Magasta's--and help him get to its heart, where he'd stab it and go into the Hero Plane for the real fight. This was set in Corflu, during the Lunar occupation.

    When the adventure ended we got spat out of the eel and some of us got funky changes to our characters. I don't remember the others (I bet my GM had a d100 table for it) but mine got webbed fingers, which gave him +20% to Swim rolls.

    I really hope we get a reprint of the RQ3 stuff someday. I played through a good deal of material from it, but have no clue what actual modules we ran.

    Yup, Strangers in Prax. I have the module. That addition was, if I recall correctly, pretty much a DM fiat. I don't recall there being any benefit to the PCs for helping Barran do his thing other than standard physical rewards. So good on your GM! I certainly thought that helping someone accomplish what Barran does should have had more impact on the PCs (and thought it was lame they couldn't accompany him to the Hero Plane). 

    (Of course I could be wrong, its been awhile since I looked at that module so I may have forgotten or missed it). 

    Edit: I was wrong. You can get 'gifts' while inside the Vomiter by doing certain things, so yeah, good spot! Thanks for that.

     

    • Like 1

  9. 6 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

    Any others who have that opinion (and I know there are some (many?)) are also purely 100% of their vision. Just as your opinion doesn't affect their vision, and theirs doesn't affect yours... 

    And neither does yours affect others? I don't see your point. The stuff that some of the writers have tried to put in to make the ducks more palatable obviously also doesn't affect other's vision. The fact will always remain it was a silly concept from the early days of roleplaying that got stuck in the setting. The old art style embraced its origin and made it less palatable to others and more palatable to those . The fact that, stuck with it, they've tried to retcon the race and make it more edgy or interesting or whatever, doesn't obscure what they were or where they came from.

    Regardless, if you want to keep talking about ducks, please could you start another thread? This isn't a thread about ducks, nor is it a thread about what I do or don't like about Glorantha.


  10. On 5/25/2019 at 1:37 AM, Shiningbrow said:

    Yeah, I can. Easily. And so too do many people who play the game. 

    And so too have the developers, and the storylines involving Ducks have zero hint of Daffy, Howard, etc (except one reference to Hueymakti). Decades ago, Ducks became a respectable, playable race that's not there for comic relief. 

    If you see Ducks as "silly cartoon characters", that's purely 100% your vision that's not allowing them to be anything else (e.g., a 'real' person, like any other race on Glorantha).

    Yup, I am totally alone in this opinion. 🙄


  11. 19 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

    The pdf of the old RQ2 version hopefully will be out in the not-too-distant future (part of the RQ Classics line).

    I agree these should be individual. I do like the armor gained from bathing in the dragon's blood (though whether permanent or not is another question - personally I like the idea that it flakes off if the person proves inimical to draconic ways). But I think there is a high risk of gaining a passion based on the dragon's passion (e.g. Greed, Lust, etc.).

    I was thinking permanent, again ala Seigfried) but yes, there would definitely be some draconic passion traits!

    Trying to think of abilities you might gain from other monsters...


  12. 2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

    Royal Jelly from giant bee hives increases your SIZ. There are some mechanics around resting whilst the process takes effect, and doses after the first require a standard species max based improvement roll.

    Interesting...is that detailed in their description or a module?

    I was thinking eating a dragon heart might boost species POW max and bathing in its blood might grant armor (ala Siegfried).


  13. 9 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:
      Reveal hidden contents

    In The Sea Cave:

    A poison which adds +1 to STR if survived (it isn't very potent)

    A potion with several doses each of which grants +1 INT, at the cost of STR, POW, and/or CON

    If you are worried that your players might read this, and are going to run this module, just change the nature of any potions they find, and add some extra random bottles of various stuff.

    Thanks Phil. Do you know of any others?


  14. 3 hours ago, soltakss said:

    Not for people who have just bought it through the RQ Classic Kickstarter or subsequently, or who have not yet played the scenario.

    What us oldies forget is that not everyone has been playing RuneQuest since the 80s, or even 70s.

    Sure, of course (though I would imagine old vs new there is heavily weighted towards old players), but since when has discussing old modules on this board been off the table? I have seen lots of such discussions and nobody batted an eyelid. Heck some of the new material has spoilers for old modules, like the cradle.

    Also, the thread topic clearly references the module and it's rewards as the topic of discussion...if people open the thread and care about being spoiled, that's on them. An article that discusses Endgame or GoT's ending and says that in the title...it's on the reader if they choose to continue and get spoiled.


  15. 9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    Considering the cost of some 40 year old module still runs to a buck or two and they are still commercially available.

    If anything, for GMs it might make them more interested in buying the module.

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    I would ask that you reconsider your argument. You are not saying that people who have just invested big in classic RQ are not welcome here are you?.

    That's a ridiculous and offensive take away.

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

     

    I propose a test of your theorem,  just post entire classic modules. I am sure Chasoium might agree with your 40 year statute of limitations. So in summary, RQ 2 modules are no longer current,  You would prefer no spoiler alerts

    I never said that, in fact I said if you don't want to spoil, to pm me. I don't know how less spoilery I could be?

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

     

    and it seems you might wish to use stronger language then silly with me. n'est-ce pas?

    Again I could answer but I shan't. 

    Strong language? When? Where? On the otherhand you seem to want to taunt me with supposedly knowing the answers I was looking for but rather than being helpful choosing to be obtuse. Rather than writing this post and continuing to say na-na-na you could have taken this conversation private and spare our hypothetical virginal audience their spoilers.

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

     

    I do, permanent, check, magical check, yeah it qualifies...

    It clearly doesn't. Please reread what I asked for. If I wanted Nysalor Riddles I would have asked for those. Are you basing your taunt on the presence of NR in the modules?

    I also wasn't looking for magical items, I was looking for things that behaved like the great mother's rewards or the mushrooms. Things that modify stats.

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    They are commercially available from chaosium...

    And? What are you saying we can't discuss modules on this board? That doesn't match the forum etiquette I have seen here, and certainly not in other old school forums.

    9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    Now keep in mind, I said I was not looking for flames...

    Cheers

    That isn't my impression.

    • Like 1

  16. 4 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    I do but I am not sure I wish to name the module (s) without a big spoiler alert. Why ruin a game for some poor group? The money spent, the time taken in reading learning copying, transcribing maps,  laminating, playing all at risk because of loose lips, I think not. Not being surly and I mean this in a positive way. :)

    My editorial opinion.

    cheers

    Um...it's a spoiler for a nearly 40 year old module. I think the statute of limitations has run out.

    Meanwhile, looking at my collection of modules and sandboxes I don't see any. Where is the permanent powers gained Griffin Mountain? What do you get in the Big Rubble (I don't count Nysalor Riddles). borderlands? It's possible I missed something but I don't recall anything like the rewards in Rainbow Mounds.

    But if you know of some and don't want to risk spoilers please PM me with details. As Gm I would like more adventures like that.


  17. 1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

    There is "YGMV" and all that, but I find that rather racist (in the literal sense, ducks being a very distinct race).

    I say this because - anthropomorphic bulls (minotaurs) ok. Anthropomorphic goats, antelopes, etc (broos) ok. Anthropomorphic horses (centaur) ok. Even an Anthropomorphic octopus (walktapi) or pumpkin (Jack-o-bear) is ok.

    But for some reason, an anthropomorphic bird (specifically a duck, although mythologically on earth there have been herons, cranes, owls, vultures, etc) is bad... I do not get that.

    Perhaps ironically, this attitude is exactly the mentality many native Gloranthans have about the Duck race... 

    (And, this should probably be in a different thread).  

    No, its because anthro ducks are silly cartoon characters. All of the other examples have some sort of real world mythological connections or at least a level of potential cool factor. You can't divorce ducks from Daffy and Howard, however. You can't pretend the source material and its connotations don't matter. Were it a cool race of owl-folk or crane people, I'd be totally down for that.

    But it feels like they exist because someone wanted to play Howard the Duck or Daffy in the early wild and wooly days of rpgs where literally anything went (like, I've read about a guy playing a Balrog in an early campaign with Gygax because why not?). To me it breaks verisimilitude. While I enjoy humor in my games, I don't particularly want abject silliness. 


  18. 1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

    Splitting this off from another thread...

    In a cartoon like OOTS, it's funny. If that's what you are going for in your Glorantha, great. I've played in campaigns where that kind of humour would not be out of place.

    It's the same as when an actor changes in a TV series. No-one asked Dario Naharis how he managed to grow that beard so quickly. How did he do it? Does Planetos biology have different folicles than our world? Is stochastic beard growth related to the unusual seasons? No, there was no change in the world, merely in our depiction of it. The old depiction was inaccurate, or the new depiction is inaccurate, but the underlying "reality" didn't suddenly change. Same for RuneQuest mechanics, or any other game world where the mechanics change from one edition to another. Unless you believe that all game worlds have to incorporate into their cosmology an explanation for sudden global changes to the rules of the world.

    Sorry, I think I may have not been very clear or misunderstood your stance.

    What I was meaning, say you've played a character for a year and then the new edition radically changes what you can and can't do. Of course, you can ignore it, but if a big part of your concept or enjoyment of a character is X,Y, and Z, it seems asking the player to ignore that they can't do those things anymore (or their effectiveness is seriously reduced) does feel like asking a bit much. 

    I wasn't trying to imply that you should incorporate the mechanic changes in a in play world altering event (though that also isn't really a bad idea now and again, especially in a setting like Glorantha where such things actually could happen in canon). I was just meaning that it seems like expecting the player to be happy with dramatic shifts in their fortunes seems fairly harsh. 

    As someone who has changed systems on my players numerous times throughout the years, I've tried to sell the line that 'oh, nothing's changed in the story, your character is still the same fundamentally' repeatedly. My players never buy it. 

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...