Christoph Kohring
-
Posts
149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Profiles
Events
Posts posted by Christoph Kohring
-
-
On 2/20/2019 at 10:53 AM, womble said:
Do you mean the indistinct blob at the junction of the Old Man/Black Spear-Clearwine road and the Quackford road? Or the dot at the edge of the 'hatched' (lowland?) area? If the former, it's illustrated better on the map in The Broken Tower adventure in the Quickstart product.
Unfortunately not marked on this map either...
-
-
On 10/10/2018 at 5:42 PM, Ian Cooper said:
We still use catch up when something breaks the mastery barrier
I seem to remember @Jeff writing somewhere or other that he didn't use the catch-up rule in his game. I myself have never been very confortable with it, so why not drop it? Its absence doesn't break anything, now or does it?
-
Quote
When it seems necessary, I am going to reply to some questions or comments with the acronym YGWV
Fans of my other works will recognize it as "your Glorantha will vary."
Here is means Your Game Will Vary.
What this means is that I do not expect everyone to use all the material that I write.
In fact, it may be impossible for someone to keep track of it all.
But in fact, I do not always use it all, and I absolutely do not expect every gamemaster to do so.
I expect every gamemaster to change, alter and adapt his or her game to whatever is desired by the game group. That is why it says "will vary."
The only condition that I place is that anyone who submits material for submission must keep it within my published canon, for the sake of consistancy.
Of course, anyone who publishes fan material is outside of this condition.
Enjoy!
-- Greg Stafford
Game Designer
-
On 10/6/2018 at 9:42 PM, g33k said:
YGMV.
It's YG_W_V (Your Game/ Glorantha _Will_ Vary) & has been so for quite some time now! Just sayin' ...
-
On 3/15/2018 at 7:49 PM, Jeff said:
Let me just warn folk against making too much of a direct link between events more than 1200 years apart.
Yeah, one good reason for the Sun Dome Temple in Forthanland (or is it in the Amber Fields?!?) not to be called Vaantar. Who in 1579 ST or in 1627 ST knows anything about it? And those who know something about it might not be happy with the temple to Daysenerus that Palangio built there after the 397 ST battle or if they are OK with it might hide this history...
-
17 minutes ago, Jeff said:
The first two things don't have many mechanics associated with them - they are more or less a toolkit of concepts and ideas for the gamemeaster. The third is mechanical, and nicely supplements the existing RQG rules.
And where will those be published? In the forthcoming Gamemaster Book as first planned or in a specific heroquesting RQ:G book?!? This year, next year or later?!! Interested parties want to know...
-
1
-
-
On 4/26/2018 at 12:34 AM, Ian Cooper said:
Chaosium distinguishes between errata - errors to rules as written - and typos/grammatical errors. Whilst the latter are mistakes (no publication is ever perfect) errata only covers the former.
A meaningless distinction as both should be corrected.
See what @MOB wrote here in the "Book of Sires - Errors Thread" :QuotePlease post any typos/errors spotted in The Book of Sires. Please include the page number.
We will review posts on an ongoing basis, making necessary corrections to PDF/POD files.
Many thanks
Typos get corrected directly in the PDF as well as in subsequent printings (if any) whereas rules errata should also be published separately in a proper errata document.
-
On 2/18/2019 at 7:36 PM, Eric Christian Berg said:
Is there a rough ETA on when the heroquesting rules will be available?
No ETA. Ever! That's not how nuChaosium does work as has been said again & again... & that's a very good rule indeed!
It will come. In due time. Patience.
In the mean time, there is always HQ:CR/ HQ:G: questing with the Runes -all the Runes! since 2009! 😎 -
On 1/11/2019 at 5:46 PM, mandrill_one said:
"Prince (King?) Achilles Myrmidon", abbreviated "Myrmidon"
PAM!
-
2 hours ago, AndreasDavour said:
I started to wonder whether the amount of keywords related to those additional points made some special sense, that is if 5 keywords was a special case, but know realized that with those additional points you can buy many new keywords, so keywords are nothing special in relation to other abilities and relationships, right?
Right. Umbrella keywords as used in S:KoH, P:GtA & HQ:G are just one option in HQ:CR. Keywords as packages or no keywords are the other two.
In HQ:G PCs get 5 keywords but can add more (more Runes, Godtalker [S:KoH] as an additional occupation, etc... ) but only 2 on mine & they can also add more. It doesn't matter. Remember: the more keywords there are, the less they will increase.
-
7 hours ago, Aprewett said:
This week we had a tie on a failure - failure roll. Seemed odd that the higher roll still wins. Is that correct?
Yes, as said above, it's correct. But, no, it was not a tie according to the rules. Failure vs. failure is only a tie when not only do both contestants "fail" their roll but also when they both roll the same number:
-
OK, let's be precise here. According to RAW, crit vs. crit, success vs. success & failure vs. failure are a tie only if both participants have the same roll. Else, high roll wins & it is not a tie as there is a loser & a winner.
Joe Orlanthi 5W vs. Bob Lunar 15W:
- Both roll 01, crit vs. crit, tie
- Both roll, say, 04, success vs. success, tie
- both roll for example 15, failure vs. failure, tie
- & finally both roll 20, fumble vs. fumble, tie, in which case:QuoteIn a group simple contest (see [HQ:G] page 70), the Game Master may declare that both contestants suffer a Marginal Defeat to indicate that, although their results cancel out with respect to each other, their situation worsens compared to other contestants.
-
9 minutes ago, jajagappa said:
You'll have to find another way.
"There is always another way" (as the saying goes), Your Game Will Vary, MGF, yaddi-yadda...
-
1
-
-
Lets' not forget that Google is our friend... always!?! 😜
https://fadingsunshq.obsidianportal.com/
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/interest-either-the-shadow-of-yesterday-or-fading-suns-using-heroquest-2.469935/ -
Character Generation Checklist... for HQ:FS
HeroQuest: [Fading Suns] recommends we use an as-you-go method to let you create your basic hero, and then continue to develop it during play.
1. Choose a character concept. Your character concept will usually include a distinguishing characteristic and an occupational keyword.
2. Choose the community you have a relationship with as a keyword.
3. Choose an occupational keyword. This is usually part of your character concept.
4. Add your distinguishing characteristic as an ability. It is a distinct ability unless it is a breakout from another keyword.
5. One ability or keyword starts at 1M, 3 at 17 & all the rest at 13. Spend up to 30 additional points on keywords, additional abilities, or supporting characters. Keep track of any unspent points. You cannot spend more than 10 points on any one ability. Raising a keyword costs 2 points, an ability 1 point, a new ability at 13 1 point & a supporting character costs 1 point.
6. Describe up to 3 flaws. One flaw can be a distinguishing characteristic if you choose.
7. Give your hero a name.
See what I did?!? Compare with the original (HQ:G) here:-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, AndreasDavour said:
Will the math still work, or are my characters suddenly much weaker?
I'm not entirely sure where to take this, and if someone have experience of both HQ and Fading Suns I would love to hear you think out loud as well.
Yes, the math will still work all right! I know nothing about Fading Suns but I'm pretty sure HQ can be adapted to pretty much anything as many people have done so already.
If you do not get all the help you need here, you can always ask on another more general RPG forum like, say, RPG.net. -
1 hour ago, soltakss said:
Yes, you can just fail or fail badly.
[...]
You engage in a jumping contest and one of you makes a bad jump but the other makes a worse jump.
Yes, all very interesting, except it's not how it works in HQ! On a tie of failure vs. failure, the winner gets a Marginal Victory & the loser gets a Marginal Defeat.
-
19 hours ago, jrutila said:
Do you others note the level the player rolled? Is it same thing to tie with successes than to tie with failures? Or win with Failure vs Fumble than win with Success vs Failure?
Should the level names be changed in future material (ping @Ian Cooper) to reduce confusion with players coming from traditional rpgs?
Only the level matters -Crit-Success-Failure-Fumble- not the roll... except in a tie where it matters again (high roll wins in HQ:G, low in HQ:CR)!
A tie with successes is indeed the same as a tie with failures.
Crit vs. success, success vs. failure & failure vs. fumble are all the same win, i.e. a Minor Victory.
Yes, it is confusing to roll a crit or a success & get a defeat instead of a victory in some cases! That's HQ for you... a better terminology would indeed be nifty.
-
Yes, HQ:G (2015) favors those with high ability ratings whereas HQ:CR (2009) rewards the underdog, so to speak.
-
On 1/31/2019 at 6:36 PM, jrutila said:
I feel I crocked the system best by reading HQG and HQ2 both kind of cross-referencing. Some things were said a little clearer in HQ2 and the HQG was the actual implementation of those rules, so to say.
Exactly! Some things are clearer in HQ:CR (2009) & others are clearer in HQ:G (2015). There are, for instance, more examples in HQ:CR with probably one example for each & every rule whereas in HQ:G the examples for the core rules (sic) are longer, much more detailed & better explained but the rest of the rules can be sometimes hard to swallow due to the lack of examples. It's really a shame that HQ:CR is not available in POD on Chaosium's (Rick's?!?) Lulu page. When HQ:CR (HQ2) came out, I expected to hate it: just like RQIII, generic, bland & cut-off from Glorantha... urgh! Not so, not only is it one of the best written RPGs ever & a massive improvement to the rules of HW:RiG (2000)/ HQ:RiG (2003) but Glorantha is also cleverly hidden most everywhere in the game before the last, purely Gloranthan chapter. Thank you very much Robin, Jeff, Rick & all the others involved for this masterpiece!
-
2
-
-
Good catch! Thank you very much, Harald!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_the_Wild_Things_Are -
23 hours ago, Ian Cooper said:
I'm not sure of the original intent, but I would suggest (1) Treat Sword Fighting as a breakout ability from the Death Rune (2) Allow the Death Rune to augment Sword Fighting even though it is a breakout.
Neat. That's also how I saw it at first, but not anymore. Breakout abilities are never "at the same rating as their" keyword because they are always higher, they are not "independent" & they cannot be "augmented" by their keywords.
For me "[a]ll Humakti have the specific ability of Sword Fighting at least at the same rating as their Death Rune" means that you can not improve your Death Rune before you have improved your Sword Fighting ability.
My take on it is this:
• Initiates of Humakt get the Sword Fighting ability at a rating of 1W during initiation.
• Their Death Rune rating cannot be raised higher than their Sword Fighting rating. (Thus initiation during play with, say, Death Rune at 3W means it can not be improved until Sword Fighting has reached at least 4W.)
• The Sword Fighting ability can be used for all kind of fighting with swords (duh!): sword & shield, two-handed sword, two swords, knife, dagger, etc...
Getting an ability at 1W for free just because you initiate to Humakt is already a tremendous "gift" but getting the same ability at the same rating as the Death Rune would simply be overkill (!) now wouldn't it?!?
Let's consider Joe Min-max* the Sword of Humakt beginning character:Death Rune 11W (1W + 10)
Devotee of Humakt
Sword God Feat +1
Sword Fighting +3 (+2)
orSword Fighting 13W (11W +2)
Unspent Additional Abilities: 5 Ability Points: 0 Hero Points: 3
A bit hard to swallow for anyone -players or GM- isn't it?!!
* Of the famous Max-imin family (see what I did here?!! 😜 ) -
On 7/17/2018 at 10:12 AM, Martin said:
it is best to think of the sword fighting ability rating to derive from the death rune ...it does say the rating is "at least the same rating"
Think of it like this: It is an association between the two...the Sword fighting ability and the Death Rune...not a causal link....like many other issues association doesnt imply causation...that is the meaning IMO of the word "linked" in this case
Rules, @Martin, mechanics, specifically for HQ... This is not the Glorantha part of the forum here! What's your take on this wee lil' paragraph on p. 170 of S:KoH & p. 165 of HQ:G, mmmh?
Hero Wars
in QuestWorlds
Posted · Edited by Christoph Kohring
Hey, you'll need the following, then!?!