styopa

I think his point was more that thoroughly pillaging multiple sources for material means the licensing of such a product for actual publishing would be nearly impossible. "As I've raided every canonical source I can find, it breaches too many copyrights to issue without Chaosium's approval. "

My error, disregard, was reacting based on an earlier version of the rules. To the OP, I'd leave it to the player to decide, either they could take the skill as 'Javelin, thrown' OR as 1h spear. Someone who just got +1h Spear wouldn't have that option. And in use, I'd treat them as related - ie if your higher skill is thrown Javelin, then you'd have 1h spear at half; if the higher one was 1h spear, and your cultural background had offered you javelin, this would give you thrown javelin at half.

edit out error

Would that be #MeToooooo then?

Not at all, the intent was that the first 3 critical books at least come out pretty quickly.

A 2 point shield still blocks missiles, which is damned useful.

Then they should get poison spur attacks! Actually fairly nasty poison.

Yes. The Bastard Sword (or hand-and-a-half sword) isn't really a thing historically. It's more of a 2h-style-used-with-a-longsword than a category of weapon precisely. I can certainly see such a weapon aiming for the midpoint between greatsword and longsword being good at nothing - too heavy to use 1h effectively, yet too light/short to really get the leverage of a 2h.

BTW MOB & all, the pre-release stuff is terrific. Well played.

That's a great idea. Maybe even get a Chaosium talking head to run a session on a special edition of Tabletop. Jeff's in Berlin, but IIRC Sandy's on the west coast. Cripes, can you imagine the viewership if Will Wheaton was playing an RQ session run by Sandy Petersen? If Will could get Felicia Day to play, it'd break the internet.

Then I'd personally play to your players' prejudices. As Joerg laid out beautifully above, they're a marginal group, seen in many quarters as annoying, etc. Let your players disregard flow through them and even encourage/enable it a little...TONS of scenario hooks there. They can either treat ducks like trash and have ducks be just horrible horrible people who completely deserve their fate...Or, maybe let them push that a while and then throw a duck protagonist at them. Show their side. Small, highly militarized demographic with a huge chip on their shoulder because basically on the defensive all the time, constantly on the verge of being overwhelmed by massive numbers of Delecti's undead. Occasionally have to resort to rather despicable acts that they justify as "well this is necessary for us to survive"...and some using that excuse a little too often. Nobody takes them seriously, their own attitude makes it hard for them to find allies. Yeah, no adventure material there at all.

That's an irreparable artifact of the backwards initiative system (where "better" decreases your SR). Past a certain point, all DEX is the same in terms of SR. Dex 19 or 99 = SR0. Same with SIZ - SIZ22 and SIZ220 have the same reach. I've said for years that "the next RQ" would be a great place to fix that but for RQG backwards consistency was deemed more important than mechanical soundness/extrapolatability. It's entirely logically consistent with Jeff's earlier comments of wanting to gimp "big monsters" to be easier to kill by players - capping DEX and SIZ SRs removes advantages from having extraordinary values of either.

It's almost like stepped stat bonuses are something that should have been left in the 1970s? 😐

Or...one could be a great deal less judgy and if your players really think Ducks are silly - simply omit them. Truly, they're a trivial part of Glorantha and of no world-shattering consequence if they exist or not.

Yes, that's the question that I directly answered with: "To answer the op, certainly 2h weapons are maximal damage, etc but their CRUCIAL vulnerability is your two arms are needed to wield them. Either arm being incapacitated means you can neither attack nor parry. That's a huge deal." So I guess for those needing it explicit: people use 1h weapons because they are a) far less vulnerable to being unable to act by an arm injury, and b) (to add) a 1h weapon allows you to use a shield, which is utterly critical for dealing with missile weapons.

I can't think of a tool where pure utility is more critical. A person doesn't use a hammer because they're a carpenter, they're using a hammer because they need a hammer because it's the best tool to drive a nail. Weapons are for killing, and with quasi-realistic combat like RQ, you should be definitely incentivized to go for maximal utility to end combats as quickly as possible. Certainly cultural context will CONSTRAIN available choices (a Norse warrior couldn't reasonably start with a katana) but to suggest the role defines the tool used is really backwards. To answer the op, certainly 2h weapons are maximal damage, etc but their CRUCIAL vulnerability is your two arms are needed to wield them. Either arm being incapacitated means you can neither attack nor parry. That's a huge deal.

There's no way hide, wood, and wicker shields would be identical. Otherwise the entire Roman Empire would have been armed with cheap wicker hoplite shields. There's a reason that there's a technological progression that - afaik - never went 'backward'.

I think they are; RQG saw fit to include a whole very-2018-affirmative section on the broadness of gender recognition in Glorantha. Oh wait, you meant a different kind of engaged?

I look forward to reading it, but I think the point was to pimp RQG, ?

It seems mechanically odd that people with BAD SRs are essentially unharmed by the disengage rule in that case - they can simply stroll away on their action, suffering nothing more than they already have. The only people hurt by it are...faster people?

Oh yeah, and if you want really-well-done source material that's pretty easy to convert - https://www.lythia.com/ will blow you away. It's Harn, so low-fantasy but still fundamentally d100. But the amount of freebie adventures there is amazing, and the quality is (from everyhing I've seen) universally high. A lot of people have run Harn using RQ3, although that's probably faded over the decades.

I'd suggest gently that if the incentives in the mechanics promote/reward different choices than the behaviors in the setting (at least for the tiny demographic of adventuring characters), then the incentives in the mechanics are likely flawed.

Absurd it was, but it was the time my wife and daughters played with my sons and I, and they STILL remember it fondly as a wonderful time, even if the girls moved on to other things in their lives and (apparently) my wife hung up her gaming spurs some years ago. We play this game with anthropomorphic DUCKS; I don't believe a magical pizza golem is outside any sort of Gloranthan norm, whatever that may be.

Honestly, while RQG is a direct descendant of RQ2, the *joy* of the system is that any of these rules that people are complaining about (disarm, knockback, disengage, whatever) are incredibly simply to port in from previous versions. If you want a more substantive disarm rule, you have at least 4 versions you can bolt on or houserule your own. I don't know anyone personally who has ever run a lasting campaign without houserules of some sort. To carp about RQG missing this or that is sort of beside the point.

Release mosquitoes with damage boost +8 and damage resist 5 (both for a week or more) in a town and watch the fun ensue as they land on people who are annihilated by mosquito bites.