Atgxtg

There is a rule for mixed parentage in K&L ((and K&L gives him a 50-50 chance of being "Cymric"), but generally sons inherent abilities (traits, passions, etc.) from their father, not from their mother (look at the family characteristic), so by most people lights, he'd probably be Pictish. Uh, why? I don't feel under any obligation to make sure that people get what they want. Giving them what they want will usually ruin the game for them. My players want all sorts of things: better stats, better equipment, land, wealth, titles, magical items, lots of glory, easier adventures. If I gave them what they wanted they would stop having fun and get bored. I'm more concerned with giving them what they need. Getting what they want is their problem. That's why they play the game and go on adventures.

Okay, and thanks. Then why does the spell drop if you go to sleep?

Is the spell active ?

Yes, it was felt that people would be too soft on their own children- it would be like joining the army today and having your father as your drill instructor.

Yeah, that was what I was alluding to. Emperor, High King, Pendragon, Riothamus and probably even Vortigern all basically mean the same thing: a sovereign ruler who is "greater" than a King. The Romans are probably partial to Emperor (actually Imperator) because it is the Roman title and thus a greater title than merely High King, as the Empire of Rome is so much greater than anyplace else, blah blah. At least in their eyes. Plus Roman culture has a strong dislike for the title of King, equating it with Tyrant. Meanwhile most Cymri prefer to use a title in their own native tongues. I suspect Pendragon might have come about because the old title, Vortigern, title had a lot of bad memories associated with it. In game terms it doesn't matter much except for the fact that these various cultures under Arthur all probably consider their own culture to be superior to everyone else's.

Just about every Roman general who lead Britian was considered to have declared himself Emperor in the HRB and similar sources. Magnus Maximus/Macen Wledig in particular. And King Constatin was a direct descendant of Magnus, indeed that was part of Arthur's justification for claiming the title of Emperor of Rome later on. It appears that Romanized Britons probably consider the line of Magnus to be the rightful Emperors of Rome, and are Loyalty to them. Constatin, Aurelius, Uther and Arthur do seem to have pretty strong support from the Roman areas of Britain. So I think Loyalty (Emperor) is practically the same as Loyalty (Pendragon) but from a Roman viewpoint. It probably is silly, and also probably a bit of Roman snobbery. They are loyal not just to some King of an outlying province, but to the Emperor of Rome itself! That the Emperor hasn't actually ruled over Britain since 410, and that the Roman Empire doesn't really exist (in the West) anymore are technicalities in their eyes.

There were a few tidbits of RQ stuff in the Dungeoneer, the magazine produced by Judges Guild, who also published a handful of RQ2 supplements, including a GM screen.

Thanks. That's kinda been my point for months. I'm not so much arguing against a particular rule here or there (I will note that some will be game changers, but try not to make a judgment call), but just pointing out how confused people around here seem to be. People who have decades of familiarity with the core system. If it true that only grognards are complaining, then where are the majority of RQGers who apparently understand all this stuff? Why aren't they chiming in and setting us straight, they way people do in all the other RPGs? Surely sombeody with a clue would pipe up and spell it all out for us muddled grognards. I think we all love it if one person who understands the RAW could explain this.

Oh, I would have put a few people ahread of you there. Then I suggest stop buying the products. Ultimately, it's sales that drive this, much like other products. If everybody keeps buying the products and telling Chasoium how great things are, then not only will they make more money, but they will get the impression that the majority of people are happy with things. As long as the products sell, then why should they bother to waste thier time fixing anything. especially if they feel that everything is clear and only grognards are complaining. If, on the other hand, their sales drop, and people claim it's because the rules are confusing, then they have a reason to do something about it. But as long as the game is selling like hotcakes, the rest doesn't matter. It's one of the bad things about RPGs. Companies only make money when people buy the games. If they play them or not, or even like them doesn't matter, as long as the games sell. So if you have complaints and don't like the responses your getting stop buying things from them. Sadly, it really the only thing you can do. One of the reasons why I haven't bought RQG is because doing so simply promotes whatever game they have released. I learned that with MRQ. I don't consider you a fool, just more optimistic about this than I am. The powers that be aren't going to address any of this stuff if they don't think it is a issue, and if they money is rolling in. It would be spending time on a non-existent issue, in their eyes. Why do that when they can spend the time making more supplements that they can sell to make more money? I haven't bought the game in part for reasons #1 and #3. When I started up a new campaign I had considered RQG, but went with Pendragon for just those reasons. And if I wanted to run a Glorantha campaign, I'd probably go with RQ3 or maybe RQ2 (for Glorantha) for similar reasons. I know how to make those games work, and most rule questions about those games are easily answered, typical in one or two posts. Any text that I can't understand is usually explained by a previous edition, making it fairly easy to work out how a rule is supposed to work.

I don't follow you. Trollpak came out long afdter RQ/RQ2, so it was a departure from how other characters were created. So the question might be to ask why did the ditch thier existing system for this one? I suspect they were trying to come up with something that they could vary the amount of previous experience. Yup. That's exactly what they did in RQ3 for most skills. I disagree. When skills start of at 5-15, a +7% bonus isn't pointless. Also, most skills get a x2 or x3 multiplier, and that's +14% and +21%. Not with RQ2 Trollpack. Characters get 55% points, broken up amongst 8 skills. The only ones who get a different number of skills give up some % points for things like potion POT or magic. Oh I agree. I think chargen could have been better in RQ3, but I think it was an improvement over RQ2 Trollpak. Personally I think I would have preferred a short list of skills under each profession and a pool of discretionary points to help diversify characters. I wouldn't say so. I've seen characters come out of chargen with their primary weapons maxed out. Most characters started off at 25% with their primary weapon, and usually had an attack bonus, so even an "average" warrior will be around 55% to start with a weapon. It's not Elric! skill levels, but it not supposed to be.

And I get that. Wich makes it even, except that you already own RQG. I don't blame you, I've seen traits, passions, a epic timeline, and deep integration with the setting in Pendragon, and when it works it can be awesome. But the thing is in Pendragon, the majority of the people running it can understand the basic game mechanics. Things like how hit points works, multiple actions, ultra high skills, and such are clearly explained and most people can agree on how a rule was intended to be used. People might houserule some things, but generally the RAW is pretty clear. But not so with RQG. There seem to be more posts trying to figure out the RQG game mechanics in the past six months than for all the other incarnations of Chasoium's RQ and Chaosium's various BRP spin offs combined, over the entire life of this forum. The game has been out for six months, yet we have pages and pages of threads with people all trying to figure out how to do very basic things, most of which are still unresolved. We have a thread where people are trying to figure out just what the designers intentions are as to how hit locations are supposed to work. We have this thread where we are all trying to figure out the various ramifications of combining attack & parry into one skill, skills over 100%, multiple opponents, cumulative parries, and which modifiers count towards the over 100% rule and which do not. I have seen traits, passions, a phased time line and a deep integration of a setting with the game mechanics. In Pendragon, where the system works and where most people who run it generally understand the game mechanics. I've also seen RuneQuest without such things, where again, most people who run it generally understand the game mechanics. And there is where the problem lies. There are indeed plenty of games where you don't have to try and make your own version. Unforntualty, RQG doesn't seem to be one of them. It's gotten to the point where some standard responses to questions about how to do thing come down to "whatever way you prefer". Like it or not, your stuck trying to make your own version. No I haven't read it or skimmed it yet,. I have asked questions about it here (as you are no doubt aware) out of both curiosity and concern for RQ. I have no intention of purchasing RQG until I see posts from more people who understand it, and generally agree about how things in it are supposed to work. It worries me that people who have been playing one version or RQ/BPR etc for decades are still puzzled over stuff that is very basic, generally cut & dried, in earlier BRP games. And to keep praising it when no one outside of Chasoium even knows how to run or play it confounds me. Ultimately it doesn't matter what great new thing or other is in the game if nobody can figure out how to actually play it. What RQG needs are some clear concise actual examples of play than resolves all these questions. But until everyone knows how something like hit location damage is supposed to work, those who want to play it are stuck. Either they houserule something or they don't play it. And when there are lots of things to houserule, they end up making their own version. Now, I didn't say that you had to roll back to an earlier edition. I can can certainly understand why you would want to stick with the edition that you bought. I can also sympathize with you and all the other RQG fans for liking the things you do about the game and actually wanting to play it. In my eyes you all the victims here. You genuinely like the game, want to play it, and would like to have a better understanding of how to do so than you have now. But, until the day comes when somebody can ask a question about the game mechanics and, more often than not, and get a definitive answer, that is generally the same from most people , I will dismiss it. I got lots of other great RPGs that I can play, and can wait to see if and when the bugs get ironed out. But if you happy with it and the status quo, by all means enjoy it. If not, then you have to decide what you should do about it. You've got a limited number of options. You can hold off and wait until things get clarified to your satisfaction; you can play something else, or you can try to figure out your own way of handling things. In you are going to do the latter, previous editions can help a great deal. You've had the game for six months, want to play it, yet haven't settled down to run it? Is that becuase of rule question or something else? I ask because if people aren't running the game because they don't understand the rules the RQG has a big problem. I agree, you shouldn't have to. But ultimately if you want to play the game, you are going to need to have "work arounds" for whatever problems you have with the game. What better sources for solutions that other versions of the same game? Which is why I keep suggesting looking at RQ3 or RQ2. Why reinvent the wheel? Either of those games are over 85% compatible with RQG and generally have solutions to the things that you are already going to have to make decisions and interpretations about.That's a huge advantage to the GM when the time comes to make a ruling. Not only does it give you a solution, which you are free to reject, but, the fact that the vast majority of all these game systems are functionally the same helps to establish a precedent. Many of the difficulties that people are having with RQG seem to be due to text that was cut & pasted from earlier editions, so having the "source" for a given bit of text will help to determine the context, and what the original authors of said text had in mind when they wrote it.

Yes, but most people wouldn't know what the term "mymidon" meant. They might, however vaguely recognize it as being Greek and so identify it with any sort of ancient Greek thing, if prompted. I bet if you told most people that the "Myrmidons" were soothsayers that murmured warnings into people ears in ancient Greece, they'd probably believe you. Anybody with any knowledge of the subject matter wouldn't, but most people probably would.

Okay, here is your one sample. Noble/Ruler: +10% to Oratory, Primary weapon, Evaluate Treasure +5% to Evaluate Trade Goods, Read/Write Darktongue, secondary weapon, speak other language, any skill desired and here is the RQ3 version for comparison NOBLE: Spear Darktongue x2, Speak Other Language x1, Orate x4, Animal Lore x2, Evaluate x3, Plant Lore x2, Read Darktongue x2, Troll Lore x2, World Lore x2, X2, Ceremony x2, Primary Weapon Attack x4, Primary Weapon Parry or Shield Parry x4, Missile Weapon Attack x3, or Secondary Weapon Attack x2 or Parry x1 I can think of a few reasons: They needed to keep RQ3 Troll experience in line with the other professions and races in RQ3., so they couldn't have a profession that gives +10% per year when RQ3 only gives +5% max. The roll to get the points for skills over 50% could lead to a wide variance between "starting" characters. If you take two characters and give them each 10 years previous experience, one could end up with a weapon at over 140% (with modifiers and lots of luck), while another could start at only 50%. That's a huge variance, and can be a tough challenge for a GM to deal with when writing adventures. Issuing previous experience in 5% and 10% increments doesn't allow for much variation between skill scores. A skill either gets 5%, 10% or nothing. Issuing previous experience in 5% and 10% increments doesn't allow for many skills to be improved (only eight). That sort of forces them to focus only on the most significant skills. The ability to break things down in 1% increments lets them expand things to cover more skills. So things like Perception skills and First Aid tend to get neglected unless they are a primary focus for a character (i.e. Hunter or Healer). Just look at how many more skills the RQ3 Noble gets. The RQ2 Noble doesn't even get to improve his ability to parry! They probably wanted to keep the starting skill scores a bit lower. Prior to Elric! skills over 100% were only reached after considerable playing time.

Yes, but they are almost exclusively limited to city dwellers. Dorset and Broadlands appear to be the only places in Britain where the country knights are considered Roman.

I doubt it. Based on what little Ken St. Andre wrote about it in the Stormbringer rulebook, I suspect it probably wasn't something written up in on a typewriter in nice, print worthy format. More like hand written notes that he used to run the game. Since that was before PCs became commonplace, I doubt the original still exists in any form. Someone could flesh out the adventure, though. Ken did mention the village of pirates, and the underground passage to the cave with the sleeping dragon, so that could be added. The cellar and third floor could be added back too. And the broken magic mirror could lead to someplace in particular in the multiverse that could be the basis for series of adventures to make their way back. So, there are a lot of elements to work with.

One thing you might consider, since it is a dream is to just use attribute rolls for everything. For instance they could shoot a weapon in the dream or drive a vehicle with a DEX roll, lift something heavy with a STR roll, win a game of chance with a LUCK roll and so on. That way they wouldn't need any skills, nor would they have to spend time training or studying, as in real life. They could just just default to a STATx5% roll. You could also allow them to use any relevant skill they have, if it is at a higher ability. So if a PC with DEX 12 took fencing and had Rapier at 85% he could use one in the dream at 85% instead of his default of 60% (DEXx5%). You might even consider treating wounds a bit differently, with damage potentially waking a character up, and knocking him out of the dream. As for creating fantasy persona, you best bet might be some sort of series of questions that they have to answer while interacting with the mental patient. Stuff like, "I like elves. Do you believe in elves? Do you like them better than dragons? Would you rather be an elf of a dragon? How about a shovel?" Fifteen minutes of rambling questions like that and you can probably get a good idea of what direction to go with each character.

Okay, there are different professions for Trollkin, Dark trolls, Mistress race and such. You roll randomly, with some modifiers. Some of the trollkin professions, such as "Food" don't count for much either. But the professions with Previous experience are: Hunter/Gatherer, Insectherd, Brewer, Overseer (of Trollkin), Herbalist, Chanter, Nurse (male)/Breeder (Female), Warrior (full-time), Shaman, Trader, Healer, Shaper in rock, lead or bronze (smith), Painter/SculpterTeacher, Alchemist, Translator, Boattroll, and Noble/Ruler. They all work about the same way too. For every year in the profession, you got to add 10% to three skills, and 5% to five others, although some profession did swap out some skills for potion POT or magic. If a skill was at 50% or higher, a experience roll was required to get the bonus-so someone who spent ten years as a warrior wouldn't automatically master a weapon. BTW, in case your interested ( was) I checked the RQ3 version of TrollPak, and they just adapted the professions to RQ3, which wasn't all that tough, since it was practically the same method to begin with, just different values. So pick one, and and I will post an example.

CoC7e while different, isn't all that different from BRP/RQ etc. So unless you want to use a different system, maybe to play up the strangeness of the mindscape, I'd say just use CoC7.and port over any weapons, gear, magic etc. that you want from BRP. That way your players don';t hve to learn a new game system, unless you want them to. You could let the PCs muddle through with the skills they have, allow modern skills to translate into mindscape skills in some way (like letting them use a rifle skill for a crossbow, drive to handle a cart, drive motorcyle for ride and so forth.), give thier characters bonus skills for their mindscape, or even let them write up alternate persona for the fantasy world. That depends a lot on the scenario and hoow you want it to play out. Personally, I'd learn to letting them use similar skills or even attribute rolls. I don't recall ever having a dream where I didn't know how to do what I was attempting to do. I might have been beaten or failed, or the task was somehow impossible, but as far as the dream went, I knew what I was trying to accomplish, even when it was something I can't actually do in real life. In fact, you might want to just have someone roll and random % roll to see how good they are at anything they can't do normally.

I plan to pick it up in a week or two, I've been looking forward to it. It should be helpful for establishing a pre-KAP timeline. I started my current campaign in 410, and am up to 418. It will be nice to have names for the Earls prior to Roderick. my very first KAP campaign, back in the 80s was set in Cornwall. It ended up being very interesting when the PKs all wanted to back the Boy King, but their liege didn't. In 4 we went with randomly rolled traits, which were not as problemicatic are they are in KAP5 with K&L. But even with fixed traits, the time it would take to quality for knighthood and such did slow down the chivarly bonus. Not quite. My initial beef was with how rolling random traits in K&L with British Christianity, Logres regional modifiers, 6 discretionary points and the free 16 in any trait tended to lead to super glory characters. I had a group of PKs who were netting over 500 glory a year just staying at home.It lead to some serious inflation and escalation issues. But Greg had a post on the Nocturnal forums where he said that random traits shouldn't get the free 16, so that would probably fix the problems I had. My current group is using the standardize traits, and the 96 threshold for the Chivalry Bonus, but they are in 418, so as far as they know there is no such thing, yet. As for the 96 thing, Greg said that the 80 which was used for decades was an error, and that chivalrous knight were supposed to be more rare. He also said that he had more trait bonuses in mind and some sort of tiers for the bonuses, and I'm looking forward to seeing those turn up in a future product. Yeahm, that and as Greg said, a math error. In KAP1 there were no trait modfiers so getting to 80 took some luck and some work. Over the years PKs got more and more trait modifers, and 80 got to be a lot easier. Plus I do think there was something to Greg thinking there were five Chivalrous traits and not six. Actually RQ has changed much much ore than Pendragon has. Game mechanics-wise wise Pendragon has been pretty much the same since KAP3. And the differences between 1 and 3 aren't all that much. Chargen has had more changes than anything else. The thing with the 96 is that it was added to this edition. As far a future editions go, while I do expect some changes, I hope they are minor. Pendragon is a fairly sound game system and doesn't need to be "fixed". I can see a few tweaks and such, but the game doesn't need an overhaul. I don't mind radical stuff in games based off of Pendragon, though. But I want the core game to basically remain the core game.

I'd be willing to write out one, as an example. I think that would be considered fair use. I'd even let you pick which one. If you want I'll look for the box set and post a list of the professions for you to pick from. That's assuming no one from Chaosium as any objections.

I'm trying to be diplomatic about it. That's a key example. Up until RQG the rule was always"round to the nearest" (with one exception that few people would be aware of).So whenever someone asked about rounded we always knew what the answer was. The change didn't benefit anybody, or fix a problem or something, so why change it? Or roll back to an earlier version of RQ (RQ2 or RQ3) where most of these problem don't exist.

I think most of this kinda stuff stems from the fact that there are several changes between RQG from previous editions, and that combined with text that was often cut& pasted from previous editions, makes sections of the rules somewhat ambiguous. This is compounded with the fact that some of the new changes are unique to RQG and constrict long standing policies (i.e., rounding and how to determine special and critical chances, two weapon use, etc.) so we can't just fall back on previous editions and past rulings to clarify these things like we used to.

Yeah, the 101%+ suggestion came from Elric! where characters had 250 points to break up amongst their occupational skills, as desired. And every occupation included at least one weapon skill.

Up until the new edition, Bladesharp only added to Attack and not to Parry. So creativehum's interpretation is consistent with how things have been run in that past and how most long term RQ players would intuitively interpret it to be ruled. And the way Hell's Razor worked in Elric! where attack and parry were rolled into one skill would support this interpretation. That's not to say that you don't have a point, but it "runs against the grain". Then again, quite a lot of RQG "runs against the grain", so we can't reject your point out of hand. But I think the way creativehum interpreted it is what was intended.

Some approximate Earth, Northern Hemisphere Equivalences to try and put this into context. Earth cities are listed if within about 5% of the listed place in Glorantha. Furthest (870) gets the same amount of Rain as Austin Texas (870) and Rochester New York (870), which is a little more than Brussels (852) Mirin‘s Cross (717) gets about the same amount of rain as Belgrade (691), or Dublin (758) Alkoth (614) gets about the same rain as Bucharest (595) or Barcelona (640) Glamour (410) gets about the same amount of rain as Salt Lake City(409) and San Jose, Cal. (402)) Raibanth (358) gets about the same amount of rain as Athens (365) Yuthuppa (461) gets about the same amount of rain as Sacramento (470) Elz Ast (563) gets about the same amount of rain as Budapest (563) Hazard Fort (1024) gets about the same amount of rain as Buffalo NY (1028), Saint Louis (1040) , or Washington D.C. (1009) Arcos Valley (410-512, average 461) ranges from a low of Salt Lake City (409) to a high of Kharkiv, Ukraine (525) or San Francisco (525), but averages about the same amount as Sacramento (470) or Glorantha's Yuthuppa Pentan Grasslands 307-358, average 333), ranges from a low of about the same as Los Angeles (326) to a high of Athens (365), but seems closes to the aforementioned L.A. Now one thing to keep in mind here that I neglected is how many days that rainfall happens over. A place that gets 4mm of rain every week will be veery different than a place that gets 1mm of rain a wekk for half the year, and 7mm a week for the other half.