Tywyll

5 hours ago, Marty Jopson said:

My son (14) announced that he wanted to play a duck character with the Ultimate Power of Shaggy and the ability to make a herd of sheep appear to confuse his foes. On further questioning the power of Shaggy (from Scooby Doo) would appear to be luck based. Possibly I can convince him to play an aged duck grandmother worshipping Asrelia (and assuming I can work up a cult description for Asrelia), but it is neither very adventurer worthy nor does it sort out the sheep issue.  

Instead I am leaning towards Eurmal and allow him to describe any magic he does as fortunate happenstance. The sheep can then be illusory. But is it me, or are Illusion rune spells a bit rubbish?

To create a single illusory sheep that moves and sounds like a sheep would set you back 5 rune points

A really small sheep weighs about 50kg which makes it SIZ 7 or 8 - which is 3 points of Illusory Sight, +1 point for Illusory Motion and +1 for Illusory Sound. 

Am I reading this wrong? Or is creating illusory sheep just a rubbish use of the spells? You could, for the same cost, create three (SIZ 3) fighting shadow cats. 

Yeah, illusion rune magic is absolutely rubbish. 

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

Most Malkioni consider Tapping of living things to be evil, and many Malkioni schools do not teach Tap spells. But the Technique of Tapping in inherent in sorcery. Transforming matter into energy is just basic to the principles of Runic manipulation. So even if a school forbids Tapping, it is likely that it is secretly practiced.

Surely the process of tapping techniques isn't evil, being inherent in all magic. So teaching the rune wouldn't be a problem, it would just be specific spells like Tap Size and stuff?

50 minutes ago, gochie said:

It would probably look a bit like someone invoking a passion: more invested in their speech, more eloquent  than usual, better choice of words, knowing what drives the majority of the crowd, etc. Much like that incredible speech at the end of a film from that "loser" character who was horrible at speaking to anyone. 

Yeah, that's a great interpretation I think. Though I don't know what film you are referencing?

50 minutes ago, gochie said:

The real misunderstanding stems from the fact that I (and @Shiningbrow I believe) don't agree that people would accept the obvious use of spells for certain reasons, including convincing them to do what you want. 

I think that some people might not be too happy with it, the same way that people kick themselves later after they realize that they were bamboozled by someone's arguments, their clothes, their car, etc. But I think the resentment probably lays with the self, just as people resent 'giving in' to someone's line. But we recognize that privileged people (be it wealth, looks, etc) get away with a lot more than others do simply by the nature of their luck/gifts/eloquence. What it doesn't mean is that everyone turns a blind eye to those privileges and evaluates people solely on their arguments. An individual might, after being stung by that person, but society doesn't rise up against pretty people just because they have an easier time of things. 

Rune Magic is just one more gift that separates the haves from the have nots. 

On 5/11/2019 at 2:45 PM, gochie said:

Using external powers that only you have access to to convince people to do things they otherwise wouldn't... Yeah that could be seen as a kind of "cheating" in an argument.

I think you might be overstating the issue.

First off, no one argues from pure logic and reason, and even if they did it's a fairly modern idea. Gloranthans wouldn't particularly care about logical fallacies or appeals to authority. It would be about passions and occasionally reason. 

Now, the actual mechanical bonus of the Charisma spell is really only about what, +15%, +20%? That's the same as invoking a passion or a rune. If someone gets the same benefit from arguing about their loves or hates, its hardly a 'cheat'. Granted, these things can stack but you get my drift.

Also, social skills aren't mind control. You might intimidate a broo, but you aren't going to Charm it (probably...hopefully?). The spell doesn't allow you to do things you couldn't normally accomplish.

And people in the world can't see the dice. They have little way of knowing if the speaker rolled a 20% or would have failed without the bonus from Charisma. And they would still only do what was within the scope of the skill. 

That said, yes, I don't necessarily think you'd take on Ernalda's Hero Form everytime you cast the spell. Maybe if you cast it and then rolled a critical I might describe it that way. 

23 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Yeah, I was simplifying... effectively trading 1 POW for 1 (other stat). There's a round-about way of how it works, but that's what it equals in the end...

Wait, why is it only 1? 

31 minutes ago, Crel said:

It's more like effectively saccing POW than an actual one-to-one relationship. On p.272, a Divine Intervention can be rolled to increase a characteristic by one point, up to species maximum. Rune Lords roll 1D10 for DI (p.280), and it's implied that they lose Rune points first, just like a priest. Likewise, I take it as implied that a RL's RP spent on DI comes back normally just as it does for a priest (on p.278).

Hope that helps.

That's...interesting. Even if your POW dropped, you would still defend with Max Pow. 

I'd probably allow it to increase by 1d3. Potentially losing 10 POW for 1 point of strength is pretty rubbish. 

3 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

If you didn't have that rule, you'd have to make up a rule for something like Bless Pregnancy, Troll drinks, weird stuff found in scenarios like The Sea Cave, etc. Far simpler to have a core mechanic that can then be referenced elsewhere.

Alternatively you leave it at 18. Or don't call it 'species max'. Or, I don't know, actually make rules that allow it to be achieved normally. 

3 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

The point is that you have a mechanic for a tipping point beyond which magical improvement becomes much harder. Up to 21, relatively simple. Bless Pregnancy (or, in my opinion, "Increase a raiseable characteristic" gift) can take it up to that limit. Beyond 21, you need bigger magic to breach the "species maximum" threshold.

So set the number to what is achievable (i.e. 18). Then let magic go beyond that. OR allow characters to achieve it in play, sans magic...since it is supposed to be the limit a creature can attain WITHOUT magic. 

5 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Oh, and those scrolls weren't in the basic RQ2 rules so by your logic the RQ2 rules should have had lower species maximums, making those treasures impossible.

They were in the basic RQ1 rules (and RQ2). Page 100 in RQ1, page 94 in RQ2. So, yeah, there was a mechanic to push CHA and DEX potentially to racial max (though Str and Con were capped by that other silly rule). 

4 minutes ago, Anunnaki said:

This rule is gone.

(p.418, RQG Rulebook)

STR, CON, CHA = trainable to species max.

POW = trainable/improvable to species max.

DEX = lower of (starting DEX x 1.5) or species max.

INT, SIZ = magical increase only

Magical increase beyond species max, for any characteristic.

Thank the Gods for that change! Still don't know why they kept the Dex one though. 

11 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

So your problem is with the terminology? Fine.

And if it isn't a max then what is the point of referencing it at all?

14 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Dude, Glorantha!

I absolutely have no problem with magic raising attributes. That's not the point.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

I still don't think that the absence of any mechanism in the basic rules for getting that last extra +1 to INT means that the rules should say "INT maximum is 20 for humans, because we can't think of a way that it could get to 21".

Why not? They screwed up by limiting IQ, Str, Con, and SIZ from going above 18. Just call them what they are. 

1 hour ago, gochie said:

You can also train any characteristic (except INT) to species max for 500L a pop. 

Except Str, Con, and Siz which are linked to not rising above the highest natural of the three (or is this rule gone in RQG?).

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

You can't get them at character creation time, so it's pointless? Really?

Before the Rune modifier, you couldn't get them at all is the problem. 

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Anyway, some cultures have modifiers, Bison Riders get +2 SIZ, so 18 SIZ and Darkness dominant would give 22 if not for the species maximum.

That is a very new rule. This is a problem that has existed since RQ1. 

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Also a Humakti with INT 20 (rolled 18, Fire dominant) can take "increase a raiseable characteristic" for 1 geas and get INT 21. He can then take "increase a non-raiseable characteristic" for 3 geases and get it to 22.

Use of magic, especially a single corner case, doesn't explain its 'racial max' when racial max is described as the limit WITHOUT magic. I.e. how do you get an INT of 21 without resorting to magic? If you can't, it clearly isn't the species Max. Also, clearly non-raisable characteristic in this case is INT and SIZ, not a stat at 21 because these are magic increases.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think the simplicity of all stats having the same calculation for species maximum, despite some of them being less achievable than others, is better than having a different calculation for each one for no good reason. Are you really arguing that the rules should specify that the species maximum INT for humans is 20, whereas the species maximum for POW is 21?

I think that species max should be attainable in play is my point. But yes, if IQ can't be raised (a silly idea based on bad science from the 70's) then it should have a different max.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Also, any child born under a Bless Pregnancy spell can have an INT of 21, because that's the species maximum.

Again, magic.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Oh, and those scrolls weren't in the basic RQ2 rules so by your logic the RQ2 rules should have had lower species maximums, making those treasures impossible.

If they weren't, then yes. However, it seems clear to me that reading the RQ2 rulebook that it is incomplete with lots of stuff awaiting the expansions. Just because the scrolls weren't there doesn't mean they weren't in play and intended, so I'm not sure that's a smoking gun. Actually, thinking about it, there is such a scroll in Rainbow Mounds. It doesn't raise an attribute but it increases a skill similar to the other ones from Plunder, so yeah, I'd say they were always intended as part of the system. Regardless, the game gave you a way to attain those maxes, which is more than can be said about every iteration since. 

7 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Does anyone else think that the existence of Bless Pregnancy is a good enough reason to throw out the 18 limit for the 3 points distributed if you rolled low?

Absolutely.

31 minutes ago, Crel said:

(Moved from characteristic generation thread because felt like we were moving into Egregious Munchkinnery territory )

STR's important for making up your ENC. CON's important for HP, so it doesn't factor into skills but is far from a "dump" stat. I think SIZ can be a "dump" stat, more or less. You want STR+SIZ to be 25+ for the 1D4 damage bonus, and SIZ 13 gives a bonus Hit Point (but reduces Stealth by 5%, which is kind of whatever?). That 1D4 can often be the difference between getting through armor or not.

I don't think you can get more than 20 INT in RAW chargen. Fire/Sky as your highest, use some of your +3 points if under 92 to get to 18 then the Rune buffs to 20. (Those +3 can't go above 18, as Phil pointed out to me earlier in this thread.) So, I'd settle for aiming for 17+ INT.

Ironically Rune Lords don't seem to have a requirement on POW, or RP built up? Although as a GM I'd rule they have to have at least 5RP like priests, but I don't think there's a requirement present in the text. I'd say optimally, you want a minimum of 5 POW. At 5, you get the 1D6 Spirit Combat mod w/ CHA 18, but don't take the penalties to all of your skills. Of course more POW is generally better, but as a Rune Lord you resist with POW 21 at all times so that's pretty great.

If you want to be as heavily armored as can be, you want STR 15: Closed helm (ENC 2), Plate vambraces (ENC 2), Segmented plate (Chest&ab, ENC 5), Plate greaves (ENC 2), a weapon (usually ENC 1), and a Large Shield (ENC 3). You can wear leather underneath all locations for an additional +1AP at no ENC increase. This combo results in 7AP in all locations, plus an HP16 shield to parry with. If you've got STR 16, pick up a few darts to clip to your shield (2 darts for ENC1) to get a quick ranged attack.

You just hit the nail on the head of one of my beefs with RQ/BRP... we have 'racial maximums' that are impossible to reach! I mean, in RQ2 you actually could reach them thanks to the treasure in the game (scrolls of Stat +X). But since those have disappeared, apparently, these maximums serve no real purpose that I can see. In RQG you might as well just say attributes have a max of 20 and leave it at that since that's all players can achieve without magic anyway. 👿

14 hours ago, HreshtIronBorne said:

Joerg and Phil just made me think of this over in the Bless Pregnancy thread that's going. I had a total Munchkin hat idea that I thought might fit better here. A Rune Priestess of Ernalda could in theory have up to 21 CHA and 21 RP with no HQ expansions or extensions of RP, just keep it RAW as far as we have now. What about the Clan treasures, and all the other POW the Rune-Priestess gained during her lifetime, after maxing RP? 

Matrix Creation

1 Point Enchantment, Ritual, Stackable

This spell is used to store the potentiality of a spirit magic or Rune spell in an item. Anyone who can use the item gains the ability to use the spell whenever they are in physical contact with the item, though they lose the potentiality of the spell as soon as they lose that contact. POW points equal to the magic points or Rune points needed to cast the spell must be sacrificed to create the matrix. An enchanter cannot make a matrix for a spell they do not have access to.

...The POW sacrificed for the enchantment does not have to be provided entirely by the enchanter; if the enchanter sacrifices at least 1 point of their own POW, others can voluntarily contribute to the sacrifice, with no limit.

Does this mean that the Great Temple to Ernalda nearest our town has a ridiculously large bless Pregnancy Matrix? Would the Royal lines of different Cultures? I could see some awesome retiring Ernaldan contributing a goodly pile of Power to making something that the clan will treasure and benefit from for generations. And, in theory this spell has been around a while. There is probably no problem assuming you got a couple points, ESPECIALLY if you rolled up a Noble. You could even take the cost of the spells out of his 'inheritance' or starting money.

 

The availability of this spell is what sparked the idea for my current campaign where the PCs are all genetically engineered super beings thanks to this spell and the King's connections. 

On 5/5/2019 at 8:45 AM, Crel said:

AFAICT, there's no reason to not wear leather vambraces, hauberk, and pants below your other armor. The table on p.215 notes "Can be worn under any other armor, with a cumulative encumbrance penalty" for those items but the listed ENC is 0. So.... Free AP!

I think. Unless I buggered the reading again. Am I wrong?

In RQ2 there was an encumbrance of (2) for those undergarments, which I still use because yeah, otherwise there is no reason not to. 

Another thing I would like to see is what people did with those three weird artifacts in the treasure room. I would like to make them into something usable by the players (even if with difficulty) rather than just weird 'don't touch me' gotchas!

23 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Just quickly looking over possibilities... getting those 5x90% for Rune Lord isn't really that hard at starting if they have good starting stats (see Bless Pregnancy 😛 ). (BTW, Humakti Swords only need one Sword at 90%, plus only three other skills at 90%... with the +20% to cult skill Gift, and you can take 3 of them at initiation - that's made really easy!)

If STR, CON (and if possible, SIZ) become 'dump' stats (ie, not so crappy you can't pick up your sword) and try to get high in INT (21 is best, for the extra +5% on lots of categories), we know the CHA needs to be at least 18, and so should POW... then your weapon skills just based at least 25% (plus culture... plus occupation... plus cult (if so inclined)... plus personal skills))... and you have Rune Lord!

Many PCs are likely to start with at least 1 weapon skill at 90%, possibly two (especially if you choose dagger),  plus shield. So, right from that, you've got 3 out of 5 skills for Orlanth Wind  Lord or Humakti Sword. (if you choose Humakt, you actually have to spread them around, or you'd waste skills over 100....)

Other cult skills are likely to be in the 80s or higher as well.

 

So, with the right choices, players could (technically qualified to) be Rune Lord within a year - if not at starting...

 

Even with the ridiculous stat mods as I described earlier, none of my players made RL. The 'Humakt' player didn't want to take the Geas to get his skills up (though even if he had, he wouldn't make all of them). 

2 hours ago, dracopticon said:

I understand that my approach to the whole "Hero Wars character feel" is confusing, as it seems I want beefed up characters in the characteristics departement but not in magics. The reason for this is that I want magics and runes to be more of a mystery and something that comes from experience. So yes, I think I will both run the "before-initiate" start for PCs and also lessen the amounts of possible magic they can have/use, and give the majority of such knowledge to the priests/shamans.

2 hours ago, dracopticon said:

I understand that my approach to the whole "Hero Wars character feel" is confusing, as it seems I want beefed up characters in the characteristics departement but not in magics. The reason for this is that I want magics and runes to be more of a mystery and something that comes from experience. So yes, I think I will both run the "before-initiate" start for PCs and also lessen the amounts of possible magic they can have/use, and give the majority of such knowledge to the priests/shamans.

Obviously YGMV and all that, but it seems like you are missing a big draw in Runequest, which is the ubiquitous nature of magic. Shaman and Priests still have a (important) role, despite players having easy magic access...especially for spirit world matters. I don't think you need to gimp them so severely. Heck, look at RQ3 where every 'civilized' person used Sorcery. 

37 minutes ago, dracopticon said:

Thank you for explaining this! Yes, I probably have misintepreted the rules a bit, but... I still think it's a lot of casting possibilities for budding heroes. As I say, just the possibility of all this casting is too much for me, let  alone understanding for the players as they are quite new in this here. It should be a lesser amount in my mind - except when you are a playing a true representative of the temple/faith, such as a priest or a shaman/assistant shaman.

I also think that the role of a representative of the faith is really lessened when this much magic and this type of magic is spread throughout to just about everyone. In my eyes, if a group or a person that is not this kind of representative(s) finds some rune magic laid on something hindering them, let's say a Spirit Block or a Warding, then the interesting thing would be to have these people understand that they can't solve that kind of thing themselves. They need a priest or a shaman to take a look on this problem. In my eyes, only such a person should be the solution to something like this.

In the setting, initiates are those representatives of faith. Not everyone has burned 3 POW, or even 1 POW. You are playing characters who have already reached that level of significance. Older versions of RQ had you start before you became an Initiate and then it was something you did in game. You could always do that if you wanted (remove the Cult section of character creation, drop their spirit magic maybe, though even laymember learn some spirit magic, and ditch their rune points. 

But the new RQ has you playing more powerful, more important characters. They don't need (often) to get others to solve their problems...they are the problem solvers. 

Why 'gate' your problems behind NPCs the PCs need to supplicate for aid? Let them sort the world. 

Unrelated to your build...something that has always confused me about Herrick. He war's a God's skin from a God he killed. How...? All gods are beyond Time in the Compromise. How can you kill one?

For that matter, how did the Lunar Empire 'Kill' Orlanth? 

Honestly I don't worry about it. A strong kid destined for a 21 Strength is still not hercules strong. Their stats don't matter unless you are planning to run a kid/teen game...but I wouldn't as the system isn't built for it. A perfect child is unlikely to be a matched for a trained professional.

29 minutes ago, dracopticon said:

A related question (but one in the opposite direction, at least for me as GM) is: do anyone else feel that it is A LOT of magic flying around for starting characters to be able to use? I mean 11 common rune magic spells, 3 pts of special rune magic and another 5 pts of cult spirit magic (if the cult has it)? As a GM I feel overwhelmed with the potential rules browsing this presents once the fighting begins, even if being well read up on the spells!

If I have 4 or 5 players and everyone wants to lay different spells and they also meet opponents with a similar plethora of spells, phew! is the only thing I want to say. I understand that after a while the familiarity with the most common of them kicks in, but I still have a lot to run book keeping on during battle. 

And to be totally honest, the common rune spells of Command Cult Spirit, Dismiss Magic, Divination, Sanctify, Soul Sight, Spirit Block and Warding all sound like a priest would likely be the expert on, not just anyone, while the spells of Find Enemy, Heal Wound, Multispell and Extension sounds like more common to me. Am I totally in the wrong here?

//Erik.

No I agree its a lot, and I dread running powerful enemies against my players. Luckily, for most combat encounters you really only need to know how a few spells work-bladesharp, protection, countermagic, shield, heal wound, dismiss magic...maybe speeddart and multiarrow. That's not so bad.