Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


styopa last won the day on July 30

styopa had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,286 Excellent

About styopa

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
    Been playing RPGs since 1979, incl RQ since about 1980.
  • Current games
    RQ(3), BRP, D&D5e
  • Location
    Mpls, MN
  • Blurb

Recent Profile Visitors

2,383 profile views
  1. My point (and the question when it was posed in our group) was SPECIFICALLY in regards kinship ties. And you addressed my point - upon initiating those ties would be severed (or would they just be massively reduced for initiates, and cut completely for RLs?), but nothing in my question was about forbidding them gaining them later in other contexts. Just saying that is a pretty big omission in the cult writeup - "by the way, if you choose this cult, you can disregard all those ties to anything not the cult in pre-gen".
  2. Last time I checked, for most people Loyalty(employer) wasn't a necessity to get a paycheck. Just do the job. I don't see the passions such as loyalty appropriate to be applied in the context of such ephemeral stuff as short/medium term employment. Sure, eventually. But that's sort of the difference between "job" and "career" ain't it? Or are you really giving players the ability to popup a new loyalty/passion that easily?
  3. Good question came up among my group the other day: shouldn't Swords of Humakt pretty much delete all their Loyalty() and Passion() for anything that's not Humakt-related? Particularly Loyalty(Clan) or Passion(Family, etc)? Not sure how this would impact initiates, but certainly if they want to be good Humakti, they certainly shouldn't be using those things. Cult writeup in RQG doesn't mention it, but lorewise it's pretty clear that Humakti connections to hearth, home, and clan are cut. They're ritually dead to their kin and clan ties are severed.
  4. A pretty common British one. I'm being multicultural. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/a-dog-s-breakfast https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dog's breakfast
  5. Thanks for the hard work, and particularly for your willingness to let this crew advise, edit, and make suggestions. I haven't read it through as I don't really use RQG mechanics (I think RQG combat sections are a bit of a dog's breakfast, unfortunately confirmed by the fact this is already a 2-page thread), but as a GM I'd already question the idea of 'slogging' through a swamp with a bow & arrow at the ready. I'd probably insist that the only weapon that could be readied in such a situation would be one handed, as you'd almost certainly need the other to help 'slog' through the swamp. "Creeping through the woods" however, I'm totally with you then.
  6. I think I'm coming to wrap my head around "how sorcery is envisaged in RQG": they're really more like magical equivalents to alchemists or sages. While I believe I'm understanding it better, it's nevertheless disappointing. Not because I believe RQ sorcerers should play like D&D sorcerers tossing fireballs and eldritch blasts per se; I simply think that: a) lorewise, sorcery is presented as a MAJOR pillar of magic; for (non-)God's sake, it's the foundational magical metaconcept to half of Genertela (or even possibly the majority, if you're talking population), Fonrit, and the Mostali, even Wyrms. ....to say nothing of what the God Learners did with it.. While I can see a persuasive argument that as-is, the organized and intellectualist approach to magic very well could empower Malkioni societies as entities enough to 'resist' theistic-powered cultural competition, but down at the player-character level? It's so evanescent as to be almost irrelevant to PCs. Maybe that's absolutely canonical, I can't argue that since you define canon. b) metawise: it's just damned dull. There's a reason pretty much nobody plays alchemist player characters or sage player characters. We all know sorcery wasn't in RQ2 - that's the basis, btw, upon which I claim that sorcery fundamentally doesn't belong in Dragon Pass or rules meant to be focused/set there - but RQ3 definitely presented it as something literal. Despite all its well-recognized warts, some players/GMs found it interesting and liked it. There were certainly plenty of efforts made to make it work. Why miss the opportunity in a new rule set (where there was wide creative freedom) to really make something cool? I'm certainly not going to change anyone's mind here. The model more or less seems to be set at this point. I think this 6 page thread shows that people want sorcery to be a part of gameplay, not a gnostic machina backdrop whose only impact on the world are some long-duration buffs. I ultimately find what we're uncovering here just seems like a missed opportunity ... so far. I hope the Western cultural setting publication, when it comes, exploits the opportunity to make something as rich, comprehensive, and interesting for players as it seems like it could be.
  7. It's sort of why an entire SOURCEBOOK is really needed to approach a whole different approach to magic. What we have in RQG is, unfortunately, this weird little stunted sort-of-rules shoehorned into Dragon Pass where (IMO) it simply doesn't fit any more than would draconic or eastern magic.
  8. In that sense, 'adventuring' sorcerers are as aberrant - and as weird, to those who understand the context - as broken mostali and rootless aldryami.
  9. August 24, 2019: I completely agreed with Jeff 2x in the same day. https://tenor.com/view/whats-going-on-the-office-jim-what-is-going-on-wtf-gif-3926604
  10. 1000% agree with the reasoning, both in game and meta. Good call.
  11. Pretty well? I'm not sure what niche you're looking at, there are always disaffected groups but the industry as a whole is stunningly healthy with no end in sight, really. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-12-18-global-games-market-value-rose-to-usd134-9bn-in-2018 https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/ (compare to the global film industry which is projected at $38bn in 2016 up to $50bn in 2020.)
  12. Relevant to general subject; I'll just leave this here. We play that Divine Spells are guided by a god - meaning if you have an AOE spell, you can freely cast it amongst friends and it'll ONLY affect the bad guys. (Note that this is in your GOD's pov...meaning that atheist sorcerer may get anything from a tingle to full effect, depending how sacreligious they've been....) Also, zero chance of fumble. Which as you can see, isn't trivial. RQ3.9 spell fumbles.pdf
  13. I was merely correcting your implication that there was no communication about CoC until about a year ahead of launch. That simply wasn't factually true. You know, you'd expect the licensor would remember things like that, I mean ... since they're working with the developers and all?
  14. Maybe it used to be that way. But the "we keep it under wraps until it's done" thing hasn't really been the model for video game development for a decade. Now the model is more or less constant feedback, alphas, screenshots, dev blogs, update videos, reddit AMAs, marketing splashes...OVERcommunicating, if anything. There was in fact a fair amount of communication about CoC...when it was actually progressing. CoC was actually announced in 2014 for IIRC release in 2016. Then it was moribund for what, 2 years? before being re-announced in 2016 for 2017 release. (Inference: in the 2 year span the game basically crashed and burned in the hands of Frogwares; the 're announcement' coincided with essentially a complete restart and handing over to studio Cyanide). At which point, when it was actively, progressively being worked on, there was a trailer releases already for E3 2016, and another at the start of 2017 - ie clear progress and communication to fans. In 2017 it was pushed to 2018, again with reasonable communication to fans. It was finally released later in 2018. In 2019 software no news from devs in any social media stream = dead project, functionally. It may not be formally dead, but it's unlikely any meaningful progress is being made.
  • Create New...