ffilz

9 hours ago, Jeff said:

You are welcome to do whatever you want in your Glorantha. However, in canon lay members and initiates of Chalana Arroy are forbidden from learning combat skills and take an oath against harming an intelligent being. They do not carry weapons - after all, who would harm an initiate of Chalana Arroy? 

Personally I find Chalana Arroy to be a great player character cult, and we've had many Chalana Arroy initiates in our parties over the years. 

I'd love to hear more about PC Chalana Arroy. What sorts of adventures did the PCs participate in?

It IS worth noting that my RQ campaigns tend more to the murder hobo side of things and are grounded in old school play and celebrate the early RQ adventures. Though they aren't as uncaring as early D&D adventurers tended to be. The world does matter. But given that play style, Chalana Arroy just doesn't fit for me as adventurers.

There was this from an old Q&A (Wyrms Footnotes #2 Advice from Rurik - Steve Perrin):

Cults of Prax says that a Chalana Arroy cultist can't learn a combat skill. Could she learn one through experience assuming that she was fighting to save someone's life?

Yes.

And this one from Wyrms Footnotes #13:

Are Chalana Arroy worshippers allowed to kill chaos creatures or aid in the killing of them?

The Chalana Array cult does allow the killing of Undead , though their attitudes about chaos are mixed. Orthodox healers often refuse any weapons-wielding at any price (even against Undead) . Practical healers might not be so rigid.

And in the "we didn't read Cults of Prax very carefully or consider things" department, the Chalana Arroy rune levels in Rune Masters all have combat skills in the 60% to 80% range... Attack and parry...

Personally this absolutism about violence is part of why I no longer allow Chalana Arroy PCs. I just can't see someone who won't even learn to parry with their walking stick being willing to stand by while their companions engage in combat. Turning the other cheek doesn't mean turning away so you're not actually watching your companions slaughter the trollkin...

I use both optional rules from RQ2. Most of the time, my players choose the +1/-1 per SR delayed option, but sometimes the specific location option is best, for example, when fighting skeletons, unless you go on SR 4 or earlier, the "pick a location and attack with 1/2 skill" results in a better chance of eliminating the threat since you have less than a 50% chance of reaching the head with a hit location adjustment less than +7 (though it SHOULD be noted that halving the chance of attack DOES increase your chance of fumble).

BTW, these optional rules are WHY I like strike ranks and hit locations.

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

None of my players in my current RQG campaign are old grognards. For four of them, this is their first experience playing RQ.

Cool. I see no reason RQG wouldn't be attractive to younger and newer players, glad to hear that is actually happening.

I have had at least one younger player in my RQ1 campaign, he graduated from college last year. I know he was also in at least one RQG campaign.

I think I have at least a few players who were not yet gaming in 1978 having been born sometime after 1970 but I don't carefully track the ages of my players (and playing by Roll20 often don't see the players).

On 8/25/2022 at 3:47 PM, Elcid321 said:

Wow, this actually quite detailed. It's easy to see you have done this. 

And now that i think of it, yeah, there are more games out there tgat have a closer feeling to runequest than dnd, so i should probably look into those (like trudvang chronicles, or symbaroum). 

Thanks for the info.

Yes, Crel has offered some nice guidelines. I tend not to be so formal in my conversions, but I'm in violent agreement that there is good material out there waiting to be adapted whether it be just grabbing a map, a loose adaptation, or a more formal adaptation.

So a partial list of D&D adventures I've used in RQ:

UK5 Eye of the Serpent (AD&D), used twice for adventures on Tada's High Tumulus in Prax. PCs got carried by rocs to the top of the mountain (the 2nd time, not all the PCs were carried, the rest climbed the mountain to find the PC who was carried, the first time the rocs returned to carry off more party members). As the PCs descended the mountain, I made various adaptations of the encounters to what was appropriate for RuneQuest. I did not use the "dungeon" at the bottom. Yea, my Tada's High Tumulus is very different from canon...

The Fell Pass from Dragon 32 (AD&D), used in the mountains between Sartar and Prax. I don't remember all of what I did with this. I do recall a dragon snail encounter. I may have mostly just used it as a map.

Lady of the Lake from Dungeon 5 (AD&D), lead up to The Fell Pass. I mostly just used the lady in distress and not much of the actual module.

Assault on Edistone Point from Dunegon 1 (AD&D), I just used the tower as a ruin in the Big Rubble. Mostly just used the map.

The Dwarves of Warka from Dungeon 16 (AD&D) I used the cave map as a cave in Prax which the PCs retreated to after spotting a large group of trolls. I don't recall if I based any of the RQ encounters on the published encounters. I need to remember this one for my current campaign, it's another place PCs could encounter Eurmal's Crumbs...

Chandrather's Bane from Dungeon 18 (AD&D), this was fun adventure.

The Well of Lord Barcus from Dungeon 41 (AD&D) made a nifty encounter with some cool benefits.

I particularly love using adventures from early Dungeon Magazine because they tend to be smaller which is more suitable for RQ where a party isn't going to fight many encounters before running low on POW and/or hit points. Sometimes I just use the map, though usually I take at least a few elements from the adventure. I might pick a roughly equivalent creature to use for a given encounter. Eye of the Serpent was neat because it was a small wilderness area with a number of small encounter areas (rarely more than 5 rooms, almost never more than 10) and many just single encounters.

I’ve utilized a variety of adventure resources from other systems (mostly D&D). Sometimes I just use the map. Sometimes I use the encounters as inspiration and sometimes I might be more true to the original.
 

When I get back from vacation and have a chance to look over my modules I’ll give a bit more detail. 

13 hours ago, Jeff said:

There is another solution to this. I can stop posting in forums or otherwise commenting on what I am working on or provide sneak previews of art or other materials, if that causes so much consternation. We can promote and market these books the normal way - don't market it until we know when it is going to go to the printers (as we do with our sell sheets for distributors). 

I post stuff here because I enjoy doing it (and because I think most people on this forum enjoy that as well)- but I do not enjoy or appreciate demands for more information about publication schedules than any of our licensees or distributors ask for. 

Your posts are much appreciated and as impatient as I sometimes get, you folks do a good job of communicating what you are willing to share, and sharing to those standards when the time comes.

The new status post that Rick updated is awesome. I don't know how I'll afford all that's in that pipeline when it comes out...

5 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

If my hazy memory is to be trusted, my group had much fun with random encounters as they travelled around the Grantlands on Duke Raus' business and later when exploring Balazar and the Elder Wilds. The adventures wrote themselves.

One of the challenges is there are two play styles. In one play style, random encounter (and event) tables are important, providing a lot of the action. In the other play style, random encounters are a distraction.

2 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

In such a detailed and varied world as Glorantha, no single encounter table can be true to the background.  The possible encounters should vary along several dimensions:

geographic area (after all Griffin Mountain has different encounters than Borderlands) ,

type of terrain,

urban vs rural vs. Oceanic,

and political (in Lunar dominated areas you may meet Lunar military, not so where Moonson's writ does not run),

even season.

True, and from that perspective, the GM's guide is the wrong place for encounter tables. They are better suited to regional supplements or scenarios. And in fact, when in an area covered by a supplement's encounter tables, I use those rather than the tables in RQ1 and RQ2.

I also have scoured a bunch of RQ products and made myself an index of encounter tables. I bet there will be a good list when the new Meints Index to Glorantha comes out...

14 minutes ago, Beoferret said:

Out of curiosity:

a) What was supposed to be in the GM's Guide?

b) How much of that's been covered now in other official, published material?

c) What does everyone want in a GM's Guide that isn't already in currently published, official material?  (Aside from basic heroquesting rules 😁)

I think adventure writing guidelines (including treasure and possibly opposition scaling) are obvious. Also some encounter tables (those aren't on the GM screen?).

I'm not sure what setting material should be in a GM's guide. We're clearly getting a cults supplement that will cover that in plenty of detail beyond what is already in the core book and/or the starter set. We have a bestiary. There's the guide and source book for larger setting, with more setting supplements on the way.

I have seen some want for more on sorcery.

Beyond that I'm sort of struggling to understand what will be in this tome...

We have a table of contents back on page 1 of the thread with some sections highlighted in red.

4 hours ago, soltakss said:

"Why, in my day we just got on with playing RuneQuest instead of whining about it"

Is that what you meant?

Yea, whining about RuneQuest or Glorantha is getting old. There's more than enough stuff out there to play with and the setting isn't something unapproachable.

3 hours ago, soltakss said:

It is a matter of what is seen as being essential.

Some people think that a good Cults book is essential, as Cults drive Glorantha.

Others think that Scenario Packs are essential, as Campaigns are what people play.

Many think that a GM Pack is essential, as it allows people to shape their RuneQuest scenarios and campaigns.

There are even some of us who think that a good HeroQuesting supplement is essential, to allow us to interact with, and become, Heroes.

So, which should be produced first? What order should they come in?

There is a lot of background for Glorantha that is in older supplements.

If Chaosium simply redid that background in new supplements, a lot of people would complain, as they did when this happened in RQ3.

Nobody is taking pride in waiting for the supplements.

In fact, I grew so tired of waiting that I wrote my own.

However, it is what it is. We can accept it and wait, or complain and lose interest in the game.

I have done the former, you have done the latter. Neither of us is right or wrong.

That is a shame.

Good point about all the supplements. Of course the cynical response is that "well, then that should have all been released day 1." I guess what should have been released day 1 would have been a complete starter game since that's all that would have been feasible. That game would have been of limited interest to the existing fan base, but maybe it would have checked the boxes for the newcomers. Who then would have been confused by all the existing fans playing a completely out of print edition (RQ3), or playing a very different game that was soon going to go out of print (HeroQuest)... With a few holdouts running the now back in print RQ2 (or gosh, wow, someone still runs RQ1! Also back in print!)...

Another thought beyond the sales potential of RQ vs. Call of Cthulhu is that CoC has been in continuous publication so getting a new edition out was a much more incremental thing than RQ. But potential sales for RQ being much smaller is a very good point. CoC is a main stream game (in as much as anything other than D&D qualifying as main stream...). RQ is a niche game. As a niche game, RQ is going to require a different publishing strategy and that is to get the bulk of the game out quick in a single volume, and then supporting scenarios, and THEN the rules that are more specialized.

But then I have lots of patience... I use almost no material published later than 1993 (I am currently running part of Shadows on the Borderland)... And if I was forced to choose only a few books, I would pack my RQ1 book, Cults of Prax, and as many other things as I could (I actually once did a briefcase challenge to see what would fit in a laptop bag, not even a back pack).

I'm also eagerly awaiting most everything expected to be published "soon." I don't know what use I'll actually make of it, but I WILL pick it up.

14 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

Only expert (well let's say initiate) or fan, not new customer, not lambda customer, should explore previous version. We can't ask the lay members to sacrifice all their POW to our initiates rituals.

Well, my take has actually been to recommend the classic game from the get go... It's a totally playable game. Not as some obscure initiation, but just plain seek out the game and play it.

But my recommendation doesn't seem to be popular 😞 ...

But I am also totally confident that what's available NOW for the current edition is plenty to play a totally satisfying campaign and if you choose to deep dive enough that heroquesting is important, there's stuff out there. But I feel like heroquesting IS a deep dive. For it to make sense, you need to be doing a deep dive into the mythology. It turns out that for me that's more of a deep dive into Glorantha than really interests me, so heroquesting actually is of little interest to me. And I hold myself up as proof that you CAN enjoy RuneQuest and Glorantha without the level of deep dive that makes people claim Glorantha is an unapproachable setting.

But that opinion doesn't seem to be popular 😞 ...

9 minutes ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

In my case -- they are the least important feature... I would want guidance on creating scenarios... appropriate "treasure" to be picked up, sizing NPC opponent parties to the PC party capabilities, random encounter tables for use if a scenario requires travelling (granted there is a JC document providing a start for this last).

My only attempt at being GM was for Traveller -- and that rapidly got out of my control (the players essentially went Free Trader and were working out trade circuits in the attempt to optimize profits; forget about adventuring -- unless I chose to go Mayday route with space pirates shooting at their junker of a ship).

For adventure writing, look at some published scenarios, official or JC, even look at the Classic RQ scenarios (if you do, the conversion guidelines suggest how to adjust treasure).

For encounter tables, pick up the JC offering, or if you run in Prax, pick up the Classic RQ Borderlands (which gives you a great selection of scenarios also). There are other products with encounter tables.

But OK, these ARE pretty important bits, but they CAN be surmounted if you strongly desire to create your own adventures and would like some guidance.

I wouldn't stress out too much about matching capabilities, just be generous if the PCs want to retreat or make sure someone will post ransom for them.

42 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Yes I would argue that, and I think many Gloranthan inhabitants would perform dozens of heroquests whilst participating in maybe one battle if they're unlucky. We have the rules for the reward of these common heroquests, but no rules on how they work. I've been playing and running in Glorantha for 40 years and it is a glaring omission. I started my campaign on the assumption that the battle and heroquesting rules would be out by now, and the COVID hiatus has saved us from that omission derailing it so far, but I'm at the point of winding it down until the rules do come out.

"Write your own rules" is not helpful. For anything else, where we all have some level of real world experience to call on, it's fine. For battles, less so. Heroquesting, not at all. Whilst I do feel that @Zelmor is overstating the case a little, maybe even a lot, it is a legitimate one.

Well, there is this.... https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/326489/Secrets-of-HeroQuesting

The heroquesting rules come off as the biggest thing people are itching for. Is there anything else that people are expecting from the GM's guide you can't live without? Do we just need a preview of the heroquesting rules?

1 hour ago, Jose said:

RQG has been an incomplete game since day 1. Heroquesting IS part of the setting and lifes of the player's characters. If someone tells a new player that the best option is to buy material 30 or 40 years old... Well something is very wrong in Chaosium. Nobody is worried about battle or sailing rules but Heroquesting... It's essential. That's the reason my group is giving a try to The One Ring 2e. I know that a lot of new players think the same. Finish your game Chaosium, and then give us a call. 

If you can't enjoy role playing in Glorantha because some hypothetical rules that were first hinted at 44 years ago an NEVER officially published, I guess find something else to play because RuneQuest has never been a complete game in its 44 year history. Numerous folks have invented their own rules for heroquesting because they felt it important. My campaigns have never featured heroquesting. Or maybe they have...

One could argue that Scenario Pack 2 Apple Lane contains a heroquest in the Rainbow Mounds. That scenario certainly offers some insight into mythic Glorantha.

One could point out that a Gloranthan inhabitant is far more likely to be involved in a war than a heroquest, unless you subscribe to the thought that even ordinary worship is at some level a heroquest, though if so, I would argue one that doesn't need game mechanics beyond what already exists for holy days and rune spell/pool recovery - BUT if you want ordinary worship to be a heroquest that has some mechanical impact on the game, write up some rules and go for it.

Is the delay for heroquest rules really any different that the delay from publishing Basic D&D and publishing the Imortals boxed set (well other than the 44+ year wait... 🙂 )?

Yea, mention of a GM's guide was probably a mistake. Will that be the next "heroquesting rules coming soon"? I hope not.

RQG may have a slow official release schedule, but RQG as something to be excited about has a pretty good release schedule when you include the JC. Sure, it's fan stuff not official, but still it creates a pipeline, and as mentioned, much of it is put out by folks who have been gaming for years in Glorantha.

RuneQuest is a small niche product. It will never have an official release schedule that matches the more popular games (and yes, CoC is a more popular game even if it's a child of RuneQuest...).

If the question is how do I run a game in Glorantha, if you're here asking that question, you're in the right place and you will get direct answers or direction to helpful products that ARE available. If you're not here and found RQG on the shelf, you're in no worse position that someone picking up any other niche RPG, huge swaths of which NEVER get anything beyond a core book, even in today's RPG climate.

If the question is why has the GM's guide been delayed? I'm guessing part of it is not actually being sure what content should go into it combined with discovering content really needed to be it's own product (like the gods - or was that always going to be a separate product?). Part of it is the desire that the GM's guide reach some level of perfection, having just the right information.

And there's a long history of fan work on heroquesting... Steve Marsh (the same Steve Marsh who did lots of work on D&D) was working on heroquesting c. 1980. And maybe heroquesting has been made to be more important these days than back in 1980, but in my 44 years of running RQ I have never felt deprived for not having the heroquesting rules.

Part of the problem is that Glorantha has a reputation of being deep and unapproachable because of the depth of fan delving into the setting. But the truth is it's not unapproachable. RQ2 + Cults of Prax makes for a plenty playable an approachable game. RQG core book and/or the starter set makes for a plenty approachable game. Grab some stuff that is currently available and start playing. If you run into something that stumps you, look to see if there's a product that helps, reach out to the community, or just make it up. If your Glorantha is different than Greg Stafford's more power to you. I think some lump Glorantha in with Tekumel and Talislanta, but Glorantha is WAY more approachable than those settings because it has way more parallels with Earth (or at least what folks in Europe and the US are familiar with - someone from Asia might have an easier time connecting with Tekumel than me, and maybe thus easier than connecting with Glorantha). Folks have been picking one Earth culture or another for 44 years to inform this or that culture of Glorantha, we may all be choosing different source cultures, but we make it work.

But to come here and dismiss all the help that has been offered, to DEMAND the GM's guide, that's going too far.

Maybe I need to hold fast in my recommendation of RQ2 (or RQ1 🙂 ) + Cults of Prax + an adventure or two. At least RQ2 doesn't promise a GM's guide...
 

The current edition of the game IS supported with setting books, both the Guide and the Sourcebook are for the current edition. The Starter Set also has a nice starter level of information. I think this is plenty well covered for the current edition. Between the RQG core book and the Starter Set I think cults are well enough covered to get rolling. If you REALLY can't wait for the new cults book, pick up one of the Classic era cult books.

There are more than enough adventures for years of play.

Sure, there are some missing topics that the GM guide will cover and it would be nice for it to be available, but it seems to me the current edition of the game is plenty able to be run now, and has been since the core book was released. I have heard of plenty of folks new to RQ and Glorantha picking it up and playing. A huge boon is the compatibility with the classic era products that meant RQG hit the shelf with years of adventures in print and ready to play.

Optionally, if this all stresses you out, take my suggestion for getting into Glorantha: Pick up Classic RQ (RQ2 - or even RQ1...) and Cults of Prax, grab an adventure, and start playing. You don't NEED anything more than that to play. If you want to run the latest edition, add RQG and use RQ2 to cover any GMing topics (like treasure and encounters) missing from the RQG core book. Really, that's all there is to it. Heck I started with less, I started with RQ1 with only 3 crude cult descriptions and some adventures.  But of course gamers today have more expectations...

Oh, and I've been waiting 44 years for heroquesting rules, I can wait a few more...

In the classic era, official product may have come out a bit more frequently, but not really that much when you consider the scope of the product that is coming out now compared to the scope of much of the classic era product (maybe someone can post a comparison of classic era and current edition release schedule to show how close or far apart they release schedules are).

FOES has some 3d10 tree trunks...

It's been so long since I've used a really big humanoid I haven't given large weapons much thought.

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

Yeah, in RQG some gods don't have both! Like Chalana lost their RL (which i found weird, since now they actually have at least 5 skills lol) and baabester gor got some (which, being the power gamer i am, i find outrageous... Not having rune ladies was the only thing that gave that cult a semblance of balance).

I haven't seen an RQ2 compatible Babeester Gor so that's a cult I currently ignore...

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

Yeah, when i read cults of prax for the 1st time i felt SO CHEATED. Gods of glorantha is a VERY nice book, and great to generate NPCs, but for players, CoP is just better. Plus RQ2 is soooo much better balanced. Taking shield/absorb from the standard list made most of all those new 40+ cults severely underperforming.

Yea, the breadth of Gods of Glorantha is cool, and it's of little use to me...

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

The starting list is supossed to do two things:

1- Let me have premade NPCs. Less work, faster, more fun.

2- Give NPCs an identity. Different groups should have different spells, and the spell list should be short enough that they are recognizable (oh no! Morocanths!!! These always use confusion!)

Oh, and also be a *starting* list for PCs. Being able to buy (mostly) any spell is one of the things that make Classic RQ the gameplay beast that it is. 

How would you do starting spells? I'm not married to my chargen, so please share!

Ah, OK, so you're currently working on NPCs. What I do right now for spell selection for PCs is they get whatever comes out of RQ1 previous experience, and then they may take up to POW * 100 L in cult credit to buy additional spells or skill training. It allows most PCs to have another spell or two or three and adds some nice variety. The free spells add some nice bits though there aren't very many free spells floating among the cults. The PC that wound up with Healing 5 was a noble that get Healing 2 plus a possibility of +1 to +3 more healing (1 on 1d6 is +3). When the elf left the party, they party decided to use party treasure to buy Healing 6 for that character...

5 hours ago, icebrand said:

It was a pleasure! Finally someone that likes Classic RQ better than the new ones! 🥳

Do share if you end up making something!

There are a few of us out there. I think there's even one other with a preference for RQ1. I have managed to collect several players, though many of them also play or run RQG.

8 hours ago, icebrand said:

I don't think theres any? At least not for the good guys!

A daka fal character would get any 5 skills and any 5 pts of spells, no restrictions but no freebies. Having said that, i don't have a daka fal pre made (yet).

I give them 5 pts in the "cult spells" (gods with very poor lists, like orlanth, get a few more spells that go with the theme (like, i added disruption so they can shoot lightning and mobility because doh).

Free spells are either free or 2x1, or free depending on the cult. For example chalanas get free sleep-1 and can purchase heal at 2 pts per pt (so heal 6 is worth 3 out of their 5 pts, same with humakt and bladesharp)

I think in RQG there will be some cults without Rune Lords and some without Rune Priests, and I'm not sure Daka Fal will have either.

It is true every Cults of Prax cult has both, and maybe every RQ2 cult, well, maybe not some of the smaller or more obscure cults, I'd have to look through all the sources...

RQ3 cults of course are very different...

And ah, if you've added some bits to Orlanth, then you're already working the solution - if a cult really doesn't look so hot for your previous experience system compared to others, then you will adjust things. With some adjustment, I think your system has a lot to speak for it. Most of my "objection" (which really isn't that strong) is that I would prefer starting PCs to have a bit more magic than your system gives. That's a simple tweak I could make if I was to adopt your ideas.

I will probably revisit previous experience sometime for my campaign, there are some definite issues with the RQ1 previous experience, and looking to RQ2 and your idea offers some ideas for a system that works better for me, so thanks for indulging all my questions.

Yea, having just rolled up an RQ2 character, I get the 30% no bonus. Were I to use the RQ2 previous experience, I would house rule it to 30%+bonus (I've done the same with RQ1 previous experience which doesn't even make it clear, though I think the intent is the percentages it grants are what you get, no bonus applied).

Hmm, what about cults that don't have rune lords?

Hmm, does a PC following Daka Fal get 30% in every skill? And 50% plus bonus in any 5 skills?

Daka Fal doesn't have any discounted spells, so no spells?

I just prefer my PCs start with a bit more magic. An RQ1 Mercenary gets 4 points of magic (Heal 2, Bladesharp 1, and Countermagic 1) plus a 50% chance for more points in each of those, plus a 50% chance of 1-3 more spells (each of which can be any spell...). The net of all the random chances is 2 points plus 2 spells so on average a character will have 8-10 points of starting spells (figuring anyone who gets 1, 2, or 3 additional spells is likely to pick at least 1 2 point spell, and could pick up to 3 4 point spells...). RQ2 does give less magic though... (and maybe less skill, RQ1 characters can get 70%+ skills, so even without bonus quite possibly higher than RQ2's 50% + bonus).

Overall I like your idea, I would just tweak it for my own uses, but it does seem to mesh reasonably with RQ2's previous experience.

For my campaign, I use RQ1 previous experience and all skill percentages you get the bonus. THEN you get to take your cult credit (100 * POW lunars) and spend that on anything your cult offers, spells or skills. Depending on cult, initiate status is determined. If your cult offers free spells, you get them all. I figure over 5 years of previous experience you're going to have the opportunity of learning them. Yea, it's a nice bonus... And there aren't THAT many cults with free spells. And I don't mind starting PCs having access to Healing 6 if they have an Aldrya worshiper (I pretty much don't allow Chalana Arroy PCs anymore - I can't see them joining an adventuring party and that's the kind of campaign I like to run).

Interesting, though it even more encourages players to play the cults that have decent lists of discounted skills.

Does an Orlanthi get 30% in EVERY sword skill...

Some thoughts:

To keep attributes meaningful, I'd make it 30%+bonus

I'm easy, I give every free spell, so yes, Aldrya and Chalana Arroy PCs end up with Heal 6. I'd give a bit more magic too, 3 or even 5 points isn't much, and to deal with the difference between cults that have 1/2 price spells and those that have few or no discounted spells, I'd give X points of spells the cult teaches, with 1/2 price spells being 1/2 price.