MJ Sadique

Oh... Great Exchange of Words  !

.............................and the place of the experience-systems in this ?

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

As a final observation on this, I am very reluctant to tie how much psychic energy a sorcery can add to a spell to increase its intensity to his skill at casting a spell. 

I always had two opposite point of view of this :

-POW / INT limitation as mental STR : when you reach your maturity, your psychic strength won't evolve much. We are not all equal phycsically and won't be able double our strength ! So in terme of magical power why should we be able to ? In this case be able to use powerfull spells from start without much evolution seems logical ! Solution for giving a feelling of evolution : Make INT evolution easier as INT is not only base on naturals abilities but also represent a general knowledge.

-POW / INT limitation as a skill : To create powerfull spell is like create a sword, when you start in the job as apprentice your abilities are a lot worst than an expert. As a skill limitation some master limit MP usage, I never done it because adding a rule is inefficient. I prefer use the "ritual of concentration" giving more chance to succeed by incanting some more rounds with a max of double is base percentile. Evolution : You start at a lower level but the evolution feel more refreshing and natural.

Personnally, I give to my sorcerers the technique "(mental) concentration" (no percent) which give 1d6% par RA, 30% per round (simpler than the original Fibonacci table) and give them one INT point or one POW each year (at their preferences).

Nope rust, The colichemarde is a rapier created by Dunkan McLeod ( XD I'm Joking, and yes i'm a big fan of Highlander).

Historically speaking there is not really one "rapier" creation, it's an evolution of a sword's usage and need :

-First, People need a light sword to defend themselves in city when not at war. They use it without armour which give a speed and dodge type fencing : Rapier is born

-Second, Rapier is great at attack but cruelly lack of defensive, so they had a ricasso : a thicker part than the blade without edge : Colichemarde is born

-Third, Rapier(s) are great but people need a shorter sword (rapier blade is 1m length) so they create a 60-90cm length blade : the court sword / Epée (next one)

Fleuret was a demoiselle's sword (for girls or training) which cannot deal damage but the precedent others are duel weapon made to hurt or kill. In Term of size and weight, the Colichemarde is heavier that a simple rapier (rapier with a ricasso) but the weight in the ricasso help the sword to made quick turn and give it more "agility" so IT IS a rapier and i agree didn't choose the best lookin' image :p.

Most of rapier(s) have more than the design in common : their way to fight... this is probably why Jeff post an ancient Ci sword because they were used in thrusting, but bronze age sword rarely get to a full meter length. Rapier is fencing style used without armor with great mobility. If you are looking for Bronze age sword similar in use to rapier we could class the next one as the best choice of Mycenaean swords (here in steel).

These one are really cools !

Sandy Petersen's rules for shamanism ... don't remember of these, won't you mind explaining ?

As for RQ3, Shaman rules to create a fetch is like a being a full pledge sorcerer, something done after a lot years or XP. Starting characters wasn't good for these, except if you do a 50 years shaman (15y + assistant for 15y and the full shaman for 25y = base pow + 5 + 25 = 3D6 +30). POW economy wasn't well use because there are a lot of littles rules, like the spirit of POW only usefull to give you massive amount of MP.

As for the fetch, I never understand the concept of separating your own soul in two. I just use a "familiar" as interior spirit and consider the shaman to fully awaken and being able to use his full POW and INT in the spirit plane.

But I agree with a lot of people, shaman lacks lot of things and they NEED a skill apart from the usual ceremony / ench. / invoc. So I made one to help shaman learning things and create a feeling of improving in the spirit way apart from collecting spirits.

On 08/09/2016 at 10:53 PM, styopa said:

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here?   Obviously memory is massively important in a largely pre-literate world, even in the literate bits before Gutenberg.  I totally see both the point of a memory skill and (on the contrary) the point of leaving it out.

These are ancients methods of training your brain; they are also mystical books and scriptures of ancients times. I think, in terms of roleplay you can also use them to raise your INT or even use them as grimoires with spells like "Augment INT" which can give you some extra RAM in your brain.

On 08/09/2016 at 10:53 PM, styopa said:

Somehow my main question about Grimoires and their role in RQ4 sorcery was (entirely) missed?

Oh.... yes           but some of mine too. So I don't think the thread are there to answer all ours questionings. But what we can guess from the new system is that using a spell is just like solving a big formulas in this point of view : runes are basics ingredients, techniques are tools to prepare them and spells are the recipes to prepare a meal. In this analogy, grimoire is just  a food book which don't need to be magical or enchanted.

They can contains informations like true names as state before ! (notion which I'm clearly against, because true name cannot be written down nor vocalise unless there is a Rune of Law Language)

Another sword that could go in the Rapier Class sword is my 2nd favorite rareseen ancient sword : The Colichemarde

I really like her because in french her name is close to "cauchemard" (nightmare) and it's really the nightmare because I gave her good armor points with the ricasso (12PA) and the same damage as rapier (1D6+1 / 3D6 / 18) and the best part : In Glorantha, I made her out of mercury (water metal, Sa-metal) which gave her flexibility of a whip, no malus in water (great advantage in Sog(s) cities). Another ideal weapon again any protection and easy to cary but yet stylish sword !

Colichemarde 05%, 12PA 1D6+1 (E) special : 3D6

On 06/09/2016 at 2:01 PM, Jeff said:

I've always been a fan of experience checks in RuneQuest and Call of Cthulhu, and hence the new versions of both have experience checks. RuneQuest gets the skill category modifier (making it easier to improve through experience in skills you have a natural talent with). I'm not a fan of improvement points in RQ or CoC - as I think they go against certain essential features of the system - although am a fan of improvement points in HeroQuest and other such systems.

But I'm conviced by Jeff that Imp Points for RQ are bad because Checks skills + training already give player a lot of liberty. I personnaly use some improvement points in CoC 7 because it give player a bit control of what he want to progress and I choose to not allow training unlike in RQ (time consuming and didn't find/search a rule for). Most of time I wanted to use Imp points to fill what I was lacking for... BAD MOVE !!! XD

... I should find a way correct my lacking first ...

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Even if the players choose to ignore your directions - which is always an option - at least they will do it knowing that they are actually houseruling the game!

Experience checks are another example, to go back on topic. The rules are clear enough, but since sometimes there is a tendency to skip anything that does not remap to "Lose 1dx hit points", many groups experience the problem.

"Lose 1dx hit points" It remind me of The Legend of Zagor ..."Dwarf fireball ! you lose one staminaaaa" : Sometimes things happens and players are not happy or don't understand what the game master want ! This is a problem of communication not RULES ! House rules are good because they intend to be an exposed point of view of the master OR an answer to a player's complain about some rules.

In term of experience systems, I've rise the evolution rate because I feel it too slow (1D6 -> 1D10; Training 1D6-2 to INT roll). What bother is the adpatabilties in term of evolution. In CoC v7, you can choose your Game Level form HardCore to Tremble_poor_mortal or even Pulp Mode ! In some Game Like Herowars (or HQ) you can adjust evolution from mortal (Mastery 0-1) to even play Godly being (Mastery 5-6).

...In these cases we all think the system is lacking something, but is it true ? or are we the one that don't understand the rules / the objectives behind them ?

I'm now a teeny little bit unsure of it.

The Palace of memoy for sorcerers is a great idea but i never think about it for my players XD, only the Magistes was using it in my campaigns. 

The simpliest examples for it are The Holmes of BBC's Sherlock which openly use teh palace memory's theory and it is visually spectacular. The Mentalist is also using this principle as a memory bank abilities; the main character usually help the others doing the same for learning quickly a large list of elements formulae or building new personnalities (lie a spell).

14 minutes ago, davecake said:

I'm surprised that Magic is not included, because one of the few schools of sorcery we knew about, the Malvonian school, was described as a Magic rune school ..

I'm not surprise !!! Magic is not included because the Magic Rune is (1) as powerfull a Mastery Rune -also a bit the counter part of Mastery- and (2) also mean "It means the communication to the Otherside." which mean to be able to go to (The World of Forms, Gods' n' Spirits or even Hero Plane or Underworld) ie (3) doing Heroquesting which is not the point in RQ2.5 as state earlier.

37 minutes ago, davecake said:

And no respectable member of the major sects would be interested in Chaos rune sorcery, but it is not a surprise that it is out there.

Respectable... we are speaking about Dragon Pass area. This word mean nothing in the area ... Lunards, all of them rotten to the core XD, a certain bat like monster. The horde of orgres, vampires, succubus and others worshippers of the devils. Armies of Broo pretending to be civilized.

What bother me is the very principle of Chaos having a Rune !

7 hours ago, Jeff said:

BTW, the Runes that can be mastered in sorcery include the: the five elemental runes (Moon is ONLY acknowledged by Lunar sorcerers), the eight power runes, and five of the form runes (spirit, plant, beast, man, and chaos). Dragonewt, mastery, magic, infinity, or whatever is not an option in these rules. 

6+1 Elemental Runes (Light ? / Darkness, Water / Earth, Fire / Wind) & The Moon Rune
8 Powers Runes (Harmony / Disorder, Death / Fertility, Stasis / Movement, Truth / Illusion)
5 Form Runes (spirit, man, dragonewt, plant, beast, and chaos)

I was afraid of the "choose any runes you what" that could ressurect the god's learners bad habits of "let's rock all the laws and worlds together..." but there's a lot of thing to play with ! 20 runes x 3 funs techniques (command, combine, summon) + 3 complex/battle ones (tap -bad-, dismiss -fumbler's safeguard-, separate). And we have 30+ spells examples.

1/ Will the spells to control metals will only need elemental rune or did the metal/mineral/mostal rune will be had later ? Because form/animate bronze was a very (if not ultimate) usefull spell ? Same idea for gas and liquid base spells ! or Iron with death rune ?

"unlike Runes and Techniques, spells may be forgotten."

2/ One big, and always uncomprehensible question from RQ3 period (20 years ago unsolved one) : Spells may just be a method or an habit to manipulate magic but how can we forget such knowledge (can't just use tapping spell knowledge on myself ?) and what will append to the percentage associate with it ? It's not like I can forget myself some formulae or recipice because I just want it !!!

On 27/08/2016 at 7:20 AM, Jeff said:

Semi-freeform in use does not model how I see Gloranthan sorcerers actually work. They aren't "winging it" - they use extraordinarily complex formula, like giant mathematical formulae. An individual sorcerer can develop new formula (and not just choose from a spell list), but it takes time and research.

In some cases, I get the feeling people are proposing favorite rules mechanics - in a vacuum - rather than think about what the sorcery rules are trying to model.

As scientist a core, I always seen sorcery as the Science of Magic so the concept behind the rules a really interesting, more than the rules which I found horrifying at first but a lot more interesting now. Runes are likes the elementary particules who compose the world and the techniques like the laws rules their intercations... Most rpgamers don't like science but the simplier is the better (and nothing is better than Mother nature).

For the rules, people will always "proposing favorite rules mechanics" because adaptaing the rules to their minds and linking is easy than trying to grasp what Glorantha's Principles really are. In science learning thing is easier than understand them and teaching them is the hardest... so don't mind them !

For myself I really whant to understand the logic behind the rules about how the Glorantha's Celestial Mecanic works... it's like attaining the Yesod's state, nothing is more beautifull than finding the "Castle of Logic". And I think a lot of think like heroquesting will be more understandable from this change : know yourself, know your enemies...

On 27/08/2016 at 7:29 AM, Jeff said:

As an aside, please keep in mind that the sorcery rules presented in the core RQ book is not intended to cover the breadth of sorcerous options - heck, it presents sorcery from the perspective of how it might appear in a Dragon Pass-centric campaign (it discusses Aeolianism, Lhankor Mhy, Lunar sorcery, and a very brief overview of Malkionism (primarily Rokari). The goal was to present a robust framework of sorcery that can be expanded in future supplements. 

For the rules, they aren't different from RQ3 in finality because the new ones explains everything at a upper level and with better logic but the final "spell" really seem to be the same. I Understand that Jeff can't fully explain all the rules but some things bother me, not the rules but a bit of the logic behind the techniques and the runes.
-Combine : make me thing of Multi-spell ... XD I'm just smilling with nothing to said if it really mean what I think !
-Command : the ability to control the Runes are a basic feature but what if someone have the Mastery Rune ? will this influence the ability to manipulate ? Could the fact of having multiple (or minor) rune help the sorcerer (like having the heat and fire rune or even the hedkoranth' one) ?

Some technique feel wrong at first sight :
-Separate (death ?) : separate like cutting thing feel more to be the work of the death/sword rune which separate thing (soul and body, head and body...). Is the technique just the opposite of combine or a really self-usefull tech ? I can't figure out how !
-Summon,  Dismiss : does summon mean "to call or notify to appear at a specified place" or "to gather" something. The first will explain the seasons great influence but the second feel more natural because calling power (of fire) around you is simplier than calling forth power from another plane of existance (like knocking at Yelm's realm and ask him to lend you some fire).
-Tap : I always feel it to be the work of a Rune (thief / steal, will update with image later) because I always feel the tapping spell to be a "Steal Life".

The goal was to present a robust framework of sorcery that can be expanded in future supplements. 

I understand that the sorcery will be a core rule which cannot explain everything and I'm ok with it because I can better understand how Gerlant make his flamesword with the help of sorcery. But I fear that every sorcerer will turn to be a fireball's launcher which will be the end for Glorantha's sorcery for me. I also don't think / hope either a sorcerer can have access to any runes like the rune that govern magical planes of existance ...( Like having the Dragon, Mystical rune or even Luck and destiny/fate).

Answer to page2, Atgxtg remark : As for the 2D6% improvement is probably from  RuneLord abilities or advantage. I'm only sure that 2D6% is use in "La voie du Sabre" (Land Of ninja french ed.) because none of my PC whant to see the tengu who ***offer*** training in mountain. I won't read the RuneMasters a second time, it's long complex and my eyes are too much tired 0_0.

To rejoin the theme of the lasts posts : We need rules for equity and fairness .Even if sometimes rules is again fun we can cope with it a lot of way. But what can I do if the rules really get in the way, and becoming extremely annoying. Not any rule but a core rule ! To level up a skill, you basically have to (1) check the box (2) make a roll to know if we evolve (3) make a roll to know how much we evolve.

(1) Check the box complain is not a problem for me because you can do it in a multiple way :

1. Stick to the rules and try to use your skill in any situation (hunting check' player is born)
2. Do it roleplay because RQ and Basic FIRST(s) rules are If you cannot fail a test, you don't roll the dice. If you cannot succed either. If you have more than 100% too. If the master think to give you situations bonus that will make the test impossible to fail... don't bother ask for rolling dice to check.
3. Ask your master why he is a jerk ! (Master hiding being rules VS player's fun)

(2) Roll to know if you can learn something : it's the most realist part and as Atgxtg said "Now the 90% guy is also getting check boxes easier, too." Yes but to evolve, he will have some big problem at this step !

The question is what to do when someone who try very hard and for very long time does not get any improvement and why the system/dice don't accept training for +75% skills...(yes I can ignore it and I usually do). This is the main reason why I think check skill have a weak point and this is the strong point of XP system like Herowars.

-My only valid answer was to dig up some peculiar rules like a god's help or gift... this why I use the +2D6% special training trick. And I don't like it ! XD

(3) Make a roll to evolve : is a lesser one because you can evolve randomly by the dice or take the average dice number (1D6% or 3% same for POW D3-1 or 1pt). Don't ask me where in the rules : I'll said "Everywhere !!!!". For myself i've modified this part as my own first master does (1D10% for EXP; INT roll for training INTx1 : +5% minus 1% by INT multiple superior).

In the Roleplay VS Rules box fighting between you guys : I will said I prefer Roleplay whenever I can but since I'm bad with it I always come back  to roll the dice baby ... because it's funnier, sometimes surprising thing append (no fumble surprise in Amber), my player won't get sleepy and I'm a scientist in the core so Rule's Lore is my forte !

+1Pt for Jon (sorry...)

On 03/09/2016 at 11:27 PM, styopa said:

Thanks for the clarification - that MJ's comment totally lost me, and I was wondering how I could miss something so obvious?

Sorry for the reference, Next time I'll provide RQ3 editions, publishers, year of publishing, serail number of my book and I'll accept to be whipped at the "pilori" for not bein enough precise. XD. Joke aside I did mention french bad-translated version, be undestandfull please... (One day I'll speak you about the "arc à pierre" and you'll understand what how bad translation can be tricky...)

On 04/09/2016 at 2:49 AM, SDLeary said:

I tend to go a little further than RQ3. Half armor value vs. flexible, save for chain. Chain only counts the 2 points of the assumed padding. I note when a player says they aren't using padding.

2 points only with chainmail vs Blunt weapon... I won't whant you as master :p. let me estimate the fact : Half of 7 pts is still 3pts so a 1D8+1 mace could do at max 6 pts of damage on an arm with 3HP, at 0 your arm is broken at -3HP it's be turn to pulp and lesser than this your arm no more exist !

Original rule (RQ3, oriflam edition, 2nd edition, 2nd print, errata 2) : Mace 9 damage vs 3pts armor = -3HP (arm in pulp)

you rule (RQ3 SDLeary special custom) : Mace 9 damage vs 2pts armor = -4HP (no more arm - oneshotted)

And I am the one called "sadic" XD

14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

6/ I don't think I'd like giving out 1% free in skill after a skillin checked. I think it would accelerate the rate that combat skills would improve. In an adventure with a half dozen fights skill could improve by 5% before the experience rolls! Somebody might become a master swordman in no time. What I might consider is to allow multiple skill checks, and then let the PC roll multiple d6s for skill improvement and take the highest. But then I could also see higher skill scores requiring multiple checks to get an improvement roll.

The problem is still the same and I will properly give the details why it bother me :

-First : Multiple Check force to make a new character sheet or to write down somethinglike training hours (bothersome for player and master). I REFUSE multiple check for that.

-Second : The chance to evolve is the problem : at 89% of a skill, one of my player failed to evolve after more than 10 evolution checks and training the skill still also need to make a roll for evolving or not. I cannot find a way appart from the a great master give you a trainning and you get the 2D6% evoltion, and the gap of 90% is extremely important because It's a samurai and the Ki's rules change your world...

-Third : take the highest evole is not the problem because we have no obligation to roll a dice, we can take the average score instead (it's in the rule) : you can choose to get 3% instead of rollind 1D6. As for me I've always use a D10% evolution and offer to choose to take 5% instead of the random part of rolling.

12 hours ago, g33k said:

How about 1% better chance to improve, on that skill-Check?  So that 80%-skill (20% to improve when rolling the Check), if you used it enough that you'd have gotten a Check any of... say... 15 times?  You only get the one check, but the extra 14 times you succeeded each give you a +1% chance on your check -- improving on a 34% or better roll !

This will be a minor effect at lower levels, but a substantive one for more-skilled folk...  The's succeed in their skill-checks notably more often.

Same problem, bother some to write down on the player sheet.

12 hours ago, soltakss said:

I have used an Experience Spend system for a long time and it works in our game.

• Players spend Hero points (We merged Experience Points and Hero points very quickly, to be similar to HeroQuest) to get an increase in a skill
• ...
• There is no need to have used the skill in the session/scenario

As for the endless arguments, what's the point? Find a way that suits you and use it. There's no point in saying that someone else's way is wrong as it is right for their game.

Using the Hero point as in Herowars/heroquest is actually the only way to get out of deathlock called "my dice won't roll high enough for me to evolution"...

 In the similar case, getting a new sorcery spell in RQ3 is tricky because you have to take an awful lot of time and you still have to make a roll for learning it or not. In this case Check Skill system take to much time or is too risky for player to even try because you can lost an awfull lot of time and still fail. and other non-magician will evolve standard skill and get a lot of progression.

Example : Learning a new spell need 500 hours and INTx3 % test; If you try 3 times with an INT of 16, you'll have a 85,93 % of succed and you'll lost 1500 hours so 30 weeks of training. In the same time what will you be able to to with 1500 hours of training : an awfull lot of thing.

Is sorcery broken : nope !, I never think it was ! because my problem lies in the random part of roll evolution; nor spirit magic nor divine magic need a roll for progressing and they have their own difficulties fighting a spirit or losing a POW points cost a lot too but didn't need a "all or nothing" roll test ! XP points evolution may be slow but you don't bet everything you've earn in one go (like a poker game where you can only do the ALL-IN) ........too much punishing in some case !

First : thanks for answering my always too long answers/questions.

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

1/ A player who "made a dangerous training" wouldn't get a skill check, but would be able to take advance of the training rules.  

2/ Yes, the Runelord would get a skill check. It probably won't do him much good, but that's another issue. 

3/ In Chaosium's RuneQuest, Spirit ad Divine spells don't get experience checks.

4/ RuneQuest Combat is deadly. A GM might allow the PCs a chance to flee, but theres no guarantee that the opposition or the situation will allow it. And arrows travel a lot faster than running characters. Arrows are very deadly in RQ. Even if the GM allows the characters to flee, there is nothing to say that they will do so. Or that things will go the way everybody expects when they are supposed to stand and fight. I've seen highly experience characters fumble and kill themselves with their own weapons.

...

The encounters aren't as heavily biased in the PCs favor, and there is always a slight chance of things going horribly wrong for the PCs, and them it's usually too late to do something about it. 

5/ Have you played much RQ? it's not like D&D.

6/ Multiple checks during a (long) adventure are fine. The old RQ2/RQ3 rules basically state that you get to make improve rolls about one game week after "the adventure". When something takes a long time to play, like some sort of epic quest, then multiple improvement rolls are the way the rules work. There are even some examples of PCs making improvement rolls during travel in the rules. 

1 & 3/ This as always sadden me... before I started to read Rune Masters (the old one with "overpowerfull" runelord. Because there is somewhere a special rule for 1-2 week of training get you 2D6% without tossing the dice for the "will I evolve today" (still one year use only).

2/ That is my problem because I get bored to play/master cockroaches-character... I whant RuneLord adventure in RuneQuest doing some Rune's Quest.

4/ This is why sometimes I cheat, as master, because the game is for play and fun not for remaking another character each sessions. This bad habit had given me the surname of "Sadic game-master" because I prefer a character to suffer, being heavily injured, to miserably crawl to save their lives and to suffer the terrible consequence of a little travel to land of death and the come back in the world...

For me a hero destiny could be like "The Revenant"... the hardest way, the better

5/ RQ3 only : from 15y'ol to 35... as PC (RQ, land of ninja, viking) about one session each week during 5 years = 1500 session gaming and as master it's easy, my scenarii are numbered....#77 x 3-5 session each so three hundreds session gaming as master during 10y?

6/ Agree with you but we where speaking about Multiples successives checks... Like giving 1% free in skill after the skill is checked !

2 hours ago, Jeff said:

To use Rune Magic, a magician wields some fraction of the cosmic Rune through sacrifice and devotion to a god that wields a larger part of that Rune.

There is an historical reason for the naming : The divine magic system was use for a lot of type of magic like I say but from RQ2 to herowars, the keepers of God's faith were RuneLord, the Gods of Glorantha mainly use or are described by Runes. Greg have mainly develloped the Sartar area where the god's magic dominated and where they claims to be the true holders of the runes. So naming Theism magic to "runic magic" because they always refers to runes is one main and good reason.

Logical reason : In the others part, Sorcery control the laws of univers (spells), Spirit magic gains help from spirits abilities (RQ3 spirits spells) and Theism magic gains help from a god's abilities. In the old times of RQ, theism magic could only access to some abilities of one god but not all... And after herowars generic system, it was more logical that a believer can access to almost all abilities of the god that he try to incarnate (All magic of orlanth adventurous for a adventurous believer of Orlanth). A better reason.

The "probably" actual reason : The RQ 2.5 system will get you all the abilities of a god but not some spells (RQ2/3) so I think they will state it by having control over ONE RUNE like "Wind Rune 12" to have 12pts of a deity's magic dedicace to the Rune fo Wind which will truly give the greatest reason... but I'm not sure of it (better ask jeff).

I accept the term technically but don't agree with it : For me, In term of Glorantha's lore, only Mystical Kralorela who directly access to the Runes without intermediate vendor/buyer may be call the true Rune Magic.

I only speak about RQ3 (Advanced Runequest for the first naming) for armor point and specials effects.

-Armor points : Leather 1-3, brigandine or Chainmail 7, Metal 8. You may cumulate a flexible and a solid armor but you'll be slow a a tortoise.

-Weapons basic effects : Slashing weapons cuts (wooo), Thrusting weapons can get stuck in some shields, Blunt weapon ignore half of flexible armor.

-Weapons specials effects : Slashing weapon give bleeding (regular blood, PV lose), Thrusting weapon give impaling (Damage x2), Blunt Weapon give Knockback (hellish mecanism).

Knockback, RQ3 French version : Depanding of quality of the attack if damage greater than SIZ+FOR / SIZ / 0 then target flew a meter away by damage point and IF(2) he is stopped by something he get 1D6 damage knockback for every 5 meter he should have done or the half IF(3) the something is soft like another human who also get the half damage !

7 hours ago, Sayerson said:

Pass the popcorn... 

Get the popcorn, and chewing some of them to think out how he can put some oil and gasoline on fire... Viper-tongue mode ON

First of all, Skill-check are done with stressfull situation but nobody ever tell that player HAVE to make a dice roll... Like Saint Gygax Said Dices are to make some noise and for player not get bored. The very principle of RQ check is "you are and adventurer, you progress as danger lure around you" and I'm pretty sure all the masters you are have already accepted a check roll for a player fighting and enemi who had 30% less in is skill but with 30% less, was he really in danger ?

OIL : skills checking in case of Danger, but what is the danger ? Does the player have to make a dice roll ? Can't we just roleplay the skill and give the check ?

GASOLINE : what if the player made a dangerous training ? like sparring with a troll or troll-balling ? Will you give the check or not ? If a 30% skills fighter go against a RuneLord, will the Runelord merit is skill check ? If the player make an excellent and wisely use of a spell but not in danger, did he merit a check or can he go to hell ?

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

RuneQuest combat is deadly, and if you expose your character to dumb risks, they are likely to die.

Deadly fight : RuneQuest combat is not deadly, unless you whant them to fight minautors head-on without armor or divine spells. A master is really dumb if he can't let the player the choice to fight or flee, and the players are even dumbers if they still try to fight they cannot win or will die trying... My player often flee when they feel they cannot do it; It saden me a bit but they don't act stupidly.

Multiple check is stupid but evolution aren't to be done at the end of the campaign... if players have time to think about their recent fight, they can do their evolution rolls. I oftenly give time (1-2 week) in the same scenarii to make multiples evolution or use this time for training ! Why do you all fight about this stupid multiple check, recent game system don't give a lot of XP at the end of the scenarii but manage some cooldown time in it, even in a 6 hours scenarii. Evolving mulltiple times in the same scenarii is common thing to me, but a lot of game master just do it every 3-4 gaming session... lot of them are friends but I think they are dumb !

Viper-tongue mode OFF

2 hours ago, styopa said:

To reflect this, I considered for a while suggesting that the 'special' effect of blunt weapons would be to reduce defender's effective armor by 1/2, but I wasn't sure what that would do balance wise.

It would certainly make blunts more attractive against high-armor targets but I doubt in RQ2/RQ4 (with a max armor value of a measly 6ap) it would be attractive enough.

Yo, Styopa... there was always a rule like this one. Blunt weapon ignore half of flexible armor... i'm 100% sur in RQ3 and probably in the 2 too.

My best exemple : Chainmail 7PA + Plates 8PA vs Blunt critical give : Plates completely ignored (critical effect), Chainmail halves so AP drop from 15 to 4. The player with and hast blunt weapon just to 20+ damage because he jump off some highs... so I didn't even take in account the standard special effect of blunt weapon (knockback).

Just love this "battle on Experience" even if I don't care a bit now... I'll explain why ...

21 hours ago, Jon Hunter said:

1/ Seriously, an advancement system that is "evenly balanced between players" is a myth or joke.

2/ The systems been changed, adapted, simplified, revised, re-envisioned, renamed, revised, resurrected, revamped. updated, altered, and adulterated in just about every way imaginable.

3/ If the RQ community wants remain solely in the halycon days of the 80's and reject all good role-playing developments since I think we will have to wave goodbye to RQ as a commercial game.

1/ Experience system and Players : Experience systems are not design for players, it's for the gamemaster ! Thinking of experience with a player mind and you'll get the short stick... because, as we all know, experience is a reward for playing that the master give to player to evolve if they do what he wants. A balanced system is a myth ? yes, because we are human and I sometime want to give more to a player that do the good thing and save the campaign or the one who give me a fresh beer... a balanced system as a joke ! Yes, some masters (I know a lot) strictly want to play it this way because nobody will complain and it's easy to manage them (players). for me, such gamemaster is coward or a hypocritical master !

Experience is a reward for a player's character who act like he is suppose to do, who atteint the objective fixed by the master ! So I cannot accept a balanced experience but it must be equitable and fair, everyone who participate must have a reward :

-Equitable is the everyone get some reward, it's the principle of XP Points System. But it take times and " I " don't like doing all the XP points counting.

-Fairness is the better player get better reward, it's the principle of Skill Check System. It's easy to use in game and the players do the job not the master.

2/ (I agree this quote at 42.000%) Every gamemaster in the world have different priority toward Equity and Fairness so as we evolve, the system evolve... None systems are perfect and none can evolve as we want THEN we change it by ourselves. And I've made so much change during these 20 last years that I've even created a set of "Rules of Authorized Evolution"... so no system is perfect as no-one is perfect

3/ So you speak about RuneQuest 2.5, It's true there a lot of RQ2 fan that woke up after the reprint and more that will choose the 2.5 edition. Why ? RQ2 was different that RQ3, in the rules, skills, systems evolutions and also the way of playing it. I'm a fan of RQ3 (the French one, with a lot of translate error and missings chapters) and always will be.

What I know that the communauty who "reject all good role-playing developments" is non-existant fact and the "we will have to wave goodbye to RQ as a commercial game." is false too because the two RuneQuest side evole :

The Runequest system : D100, which survive and commercially evolve and exist in Moongoose RQ4 to Legend and now Mythras. (not Mythas).
The Runequest world : Glorantha who still exist in M.RQ4 and really evolve in Herowars then in Heroquest and now in the "Guide of Glorantha" for HeroQuest.

But there are still very bad news :

Primo : For the Runequest 3 system i love,... It will never exist anymore unless one of us personnaly release a new one. Glorantha.com, Chaosium and the designmechanism (Legend and Mythras) has chosen to use their own system base on XP Points for heroquest and good ol' skill check for Mythras. You can go for BRP in Cthulhu 7 for a more recent system (it has a lot of good thing it) and it can be even greater with Cthulhu Pulp (not as great as I wish XD).

Secondo : Experience itself will still be a problem ! Why ?? Because Equitable or Fairness is only achieve by the master no only by the systems (the systems offers, the master choose ... like men offer, women choose - if you're picky, you're screwed ). A great system offer or authorize multiples choices and the rest is up to you !

1 hour ago, styopa said:

I'd built a calculator (an excel sheet) ...and from that, it responds with:"After 103 hours of training, I get a skill roll","That will cost me 5p (based on 2.05p/week)"

It also actually does the xp roll, showing the result, skill gain (if there was one) and if a fumble was indicated, the injury result. I don't tell them the "hours needed" until they reach it.

This makes training 1) more interesting, 2) much less predictable as a mechanical money=skill transformer, imo 3) more realistic, 4) FAR faster to implement than people scratching out their hours/week calculations.

The marvellous excel calculator... Mine is still working but I don't like using it XD. Styopa are you really still using yours ? 

The main problem in skill check system and why D&D and level-games users don't like check is the mystery and not predictable box called "random DICE evolution" ... yes, they prefer get few experience, almost not evolving but they know that they evolve than "perhaps evolving this time and probably wining more than 3%". Like we frenchies said ""a here-you-go is worth more than two you-can-have-it-laters".

The main problem in XP points system is not the specialization, I am playing Warhammer 1ed, Fantasy craft, Polaris, Kuro... old or new systems specialization is the consequence of big level monster not the system but the master fault. Most of them, as a hero you can find a way to evolve a lot of thing. Complain to you master if you need to be a level 50 warrior to be able to do anything in the campaign. The problem is the gap of evolution and the non-existence of alternate learning or evolution...you are like a pokemon that double you power strength as you gain a level ! And any logical or realist way to evolve and learn or change yourself is absent !

A lot of question, but can I give a answer ? Is there a solution ?

YES : I've started to play a lot of new systems, as player and master ... the best in RQ / HW / HQ are : skill check on actions or Fumble, characteristic check by heroic actions, Learn by spending money (RQ2), XP points by session, XP points by extremely funny actions/moments and a lot others of thing. Skill check system is good for low level and basic progress as your character can become anything unlike any others heros. XP points system is good for great evolution, high level gaming.

Few of the best recent system are "Space Pirate Cobra" or the "Game of thrones" RPG with XP points and Hero points. The idea of two different system of evolution in the same game is great and give a good compromise between Equity and Fairness... you can evolve as you want and still take in account some idea like training ( it's a Roleplay action that can be rewarded as the same level as spending tons of money to get a master).

NO : There is a tons of way to do thing and a compromise or a mix of skill check system and XP points system can solve them... BUT I WILL CREATE AND RUN such system, but all the game-masters I know WILL NOT bother themselves to do it.

Sorry for the length

On 29/08/2016 at 0:53 AM, Mankcam said:

I would prefer the later, as it doesn't make sense to specifically refer to the faith-driven form of magic as 'Rune Magic', considering that Runes are also firmly entrenched in the Sorcery system.

Isn't it all Rune Magic?

All runes are Magic and All Magic(s) are runes... There is two things :

The Mechanical rules of Spirit magic, Theist magic and Sorcery in RQ3 (RQ2 two mechanics, RQ3 three mechanics). 

The Principle behind them : Glorantha's Runes Interactions : a many magic as there are cultures :

1. Animist magic use Spirit magic Rules and sometimes Theist magic rules.
2. Theist magic use Spirit magic Rules as the god's servant's powers and Theist magic rules for the god direct power.
3. Sorcery magic (Magist) use Sorcery rules only
4. Dragon Magic use Theist magic rules and Specials dragonic skills (Dragonewt only)
5. Heroic and Saint's Magic use Spirit magic Rules as the god's servant's powers and Theist magic rules for the god direct power.
6. Mystical Magic (oriental) use Theist magic rules or mix of  Theist magic mechanics and Sorcery Spells.

There are others minors magic's rule in RQ3 describe as a mix of others rules (The Lunar Magic) or the Ki from Land of ninja that ca be used for Vormain...

The Runes Themselves are part of the later magic as the very principle of Glorantha : a Rune is not just a symbol but an elementary brick of the universe and Also a NEXUS of Power, knowledge and feelings and sometimes incarnate as an object of ultimate power. For Example, Death is an part of glorantha, the Nexus of power, the very knowledge of what death, sword mean (separation of two things : as body and soul) but also the very Sword of Humakt. Some others runes may have incarnate themselves like the "Spirit of Adventure" for the rune of movement (in the old Glorantha tabletop war game), or the horn of plenty which could be the Fertility rune incarnation...

First of all, I'm more a RQ3 Gamemaster who mostly play in Loskalm and Vormain Third Age and after. But as a french master, a lot of essentials info missing in RQ3 in my games came from RQ2.

Medieval Rapier : just to be clear, I always have described Rapier in my game as " Oakeshott Type XV Swords" not as the late Rapier but more like the ones existing in the XIII era : a long sword with triangle shape about 1,1m length like Black prince sword.

( Example of Oakeshott Type XV Swords : https://myarmoury.com/feature_spotxv.html, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakeshott_typology )

Antique Rapier like : I always love old bronze sword but they could hardly be call rapier; My favourite sword the cinquedea never fit in any RQ2 sword example and using it as rapier seems off because in RQ rapier as low base damage (no cutting power) but a extremely high impaling damage (triple base damage vs double base damage for other impaling weapon).

So Rapier in RQ is not a simple piercing weapon, it's a weapon better than a spear... a sword in bronze (real bronze) could not reproduce what a Type XV or a espada of the XVIII era can do. Because their cross section are too wide and bronze do not have the mechanical properties to go trough a body and an armor like the others steel sword do. Glorantha bronze will do it but the shape of bronze age sword are not good enough !

Second thing about the very interesting things styopa said (really like this)

On 23/08/2016 at 4:44 PM, styopa said:

(1) I'm entirely with him on the idea that init being based on DEX (exclusively) is nonsense ... this is probably why Dex has become such a canon in RPGs for initiative. ... experience has EVERYTHING to do with it

(2) he didn't know how to PLAY TACTICALLY with initiative

(3)  doing whatever they want when their initiative comes up based on the situation at that point.  ... This (I agree) unreasonably empowers toons with bad initiatives

(4) let's remember at the end of the day, the mechanics of an RPG combat system ... are is ALWAYS a COMPROMISE between what (we believe) is reasonably authentic and what takes an appropriate amount of time.

(5) Hell, Robin Laws more or less rationalized it down to roll your "combat" skill vs their "combat" skill and in one roll you've determined the winner.

(6) He has some GREAT points about common issues in melee combat, problems, and the necessity of secondary weapons particularly in light of changing engagement ranges.  This is something I'd LOVE to figure out a more authentic set of mechanics for RQ4.

1/ Yes the reign of DEX in a lot of system create strange situations like two hand spears slower than a dagger... and the master tell you : "it's the rule !" but a lot of recent fighting systems have corrected these. For RQ2/3, you need a extremely high dexterity (21+) to create such cases;

2/ The main problem is the word tactically and initiative, meaning you need a master that play wisely and players that play tactically. When someone tell you "it's not in the book/rule", just tell them to go to hell ! And sadly, a lot of people don't go out of the box ! one of the best idea is from fantasy craft : "conditioned action" where you can cast or attack in the peculiar case like an enemy approaching you... 

3/ Initiative ranks are not the problem, in theory we are supposed to ask player what they want to do from rank 10 to 1... and then resolve them from 1 to 10. So people cannot take in account what another player have done/succeed/fail 0.3 seconds before... but the main problem is doing this take time and a lot gamemaster just directly ask for the action an resolve it immediately which give the " doing whatever they want when their initiative comes up based on the situation at that point ".

4/ The appropriate amount of time you want to spend on the fight is always the problem.... You need a good and open-minded master, a good system and clear rules and the time to do the fight.

5/ I hate and love the idea : I hate it because a lot of gamemasters just do tells "roll the dices and stop asking for tactics things" and I love it because it's simple and as a open-minded GM, I like "take in account a player ideas and easily resolve it".

6/ Me too...