Mechashef

Great find. Thanks. My first thought was that newtlings must be able to breathe water (and even quicksand!) to make such an ambush tactic practical. However a quick look at the bestiary rules on ducks holding their breath indicates that they can hold their breath for 6 minutes (* See below) and then need to make a CON X 5 roll to get another full turn (5 minutes) and can keep on doing this. That does make the tactic possible though with a risk of failure if the victims are tardy in reaching the ambush point. Interestingly the CON multiplier doesn't go down. Humakt has Vigor as a cult spell. PC Humakt ducks with a high CON (16 or more which become 19 or more) can with a bit of luck travel long distances under water. Even 5 rolls of 95 or less allows a fully armoured Humakt duck to walk underwater for more than half an hour. Perhaps Humakt ducks are awesome at fishing. They kit up with their armour, weapons and vigor spell, sink to the bottom and go after the really big fish. * It does seem a bit odd that they can hold their breath for 6 minutes instead of the 5 that makes up a full turn,.

I would agree with that.

However in RQG: Ducks and newtlings both have Swim at 80% Ducks have the Air Rune as their primary elemental affinity (60% for a typical NPC) Typical NPC newtlings have the Water Rune at 80% Ducks swim faster Perhaps because it hasn't been mentioned (though I don't have access to every official scenario and source book) in any products using newtlings, then they do not have a superior ability in this area and though they swim much faster than humans probably can't hold their breaths significantly longer. It does seem something that a scenario involving netwlings and water would exploit, if such an advantage existed.

1) Can Bachelor Newtlings breathe water? 2) If not, can they hold their breath longer than humans (similar to Ducks)? The Bestiary doesn't mention it, so I presume the answer is "No" to both. Thanks

Thanks So the answer in that link is correct. It would be nice if the answer given by Jason D in the "RuneQuest Core Rules Questions" thread could be amended to reflect the official view but I understand that people are very busy.

Hopefully this has already been answered and someone can easily point me in the correct direction. Do Fireblade, Fire Arrow and similar weapon igniting spells do special damage & critical damage? The RuneQuest Core Rules Questions (page 11) thread has Jason stating no: No. Such is the unpredictability of magic. On a pragmatic sense, for a critical, rolling 3D6 (plus damage bonus) and ignoring armor is more-than-likely to disable whatever hit location it strikes. The gamemaster is wholly within their rights to decide that these results do in fact do special damage (impaling or slashing) but may soon discover that these spells become dominant tactics. But official answer https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com/home/catalogue/publishers/chaosium/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-players-book-print/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-qa-by-chapter/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-chapter-12-spirit-magic/ states: Which is it? Thanks

Yeah, I'd definitely agree with that being a good reason for not allowing that scenario.

I've always played it with every round being like the first, even to the extent of writing the SRs on the character sheets (such as 2,9), but have gradually been trying to bring my game closer to the RAW instead of being a hybrid of remembered RQ2 & 3 rules plus misread RQG rules.

Sorry, I can be quite dense at times. Were you stating that people do play it RAW? Or people do not play RAW and thus play every round like the first one? Thanks again

So (and I'm sure this has been described before), a Dex of 19 (or greater) is quite scary if combined with low level Multimissile (if that spell is considered to be like Bladesharp and other weapon enhancing spells where the SR requirements is only the extra SR needed to cast the spell). The SR requirements for casting Multimissile (1) for a Dex 19+ adventurer is 0 (Dex SR of 0, plus 1 for the 1 MP and minus 1 for the 1st MP) The SR requirements for casting Multimissile (2) for a Dex 19+ adventurer is 1 (Dex SR of 0, plus 2 for the 2 MP and minus 1 for the 1st MP) With a Dex of 19, round 1 could look like this: SR 1 - (actually SR 0 but my understanding is the first SR of a round is 1, so the SR 0 becomes SR 1). Multimissile (1) requires zero extra SRs so use it, resulting in two arrows fired on this SR SR 6 - Bow is reloaded. Shoot again, also using Multimissile (1) resulting in two arrows being fired SR 11 - Bow is Reloaded. Start casting Multimissile (2) which will take one additional SR SR 12 - Shoot again with Multimissile (2) resulting in 3 arrows being fired. 7 Arrows fired in the round, 3 real ones and 4 magic ones. If the RAW are followed, in subsequent rounds: SR 5 - Bow is reloaded. Start casting Multimisile (2) SR 6 - Shoot using Multimissile (2) resulting in 3 arrows being fired SR 11 - Bow is reloaded. Start casting Multimisile (2) SR 12 - Shoot using Multimissile (2) resulting in 3 arrows being fired 6 Arrows fired in the round, 2 real ones and 4 magic ones. Does this work, or have I misunderstood the rules?

If an adventurer has a Dex SR of 2, then by my understanding, assuming they start with their bow and an arrow prepared they can fire in the first round like this: 1st shot on SR 2 5 SRs to reload (now SR 7) 2nd shot on SR 9 That does not leave enough SRs to reload so by my interpretation of the RAW, round 2 would go like this 5 SRs to reload Shoot on SR 7 5 SRs to reload No second shot Every odd round they would get two shots and every even round they would only get one shot. Is my interpretation of the RAW correct? If so, do people actually play it that way or just play every round like the first one (with two shots, one on SR 2 and one on SR 9)? Thanks

My understanding of SR is probably at fault here, but this example makes no sense to me. Why? The character sheet shows a SR for Javelin (Thrown) as 2. Shouldn't that be 2 SR to Cast (2 for DEX SR plus 1 for the MP cost of the spell, minus 1 for the first MP)? Saroangan has a SR of 1 with her bow. Doesn't that mean she shoots on SR 1 then SR 7? Similar to Balgan's Protection 1, shouldn't this be SR 3 (3 for DEX SR plus 1 for spell's MP then minus 1 for the 1st MP)? Regardless of whether the Protection is cast on SR 3 or 4, adding another 10 SR brings the total to more than 12. Doesn't this mean that Korig can't unlimber his shield this round? I haven't read much further yet. And are the armour values for Balgan and Korig mismatched with what their armour is stated to be? Edit: Added Korig's Shield bit.

The common Rune Spells can be cast using any Rune which implies that different gods with different Runic associations can achieve the same result. To me, that variation would extend to the visual effects of their spells. The visual effects of Heal Wound or Spirit Block may look very different than those of the same spells from an agricultural god. These visual effects of course may include no visual effect. This would be quite common for spells from gods who focus on stealth (thieves, Assassins, Hunters etc). Some gods may have spells that have very noticeable visual effects and others that don't. In my opinion, the answer is that yes they do have a visual effect. However, just like zero is a number, the visual effect may be None.

You would probably find it in some weird alternative reality conjured into existence by my inexplicable brain failure while attempting to correct a typo. I of course meant RuneQuest Roleplaying in Glorantha. and that you could create a BRP Roleplaying in Glorantha. My apologies for any confusion. I now live in terror of Storm Bull cultists as I suspect I have gained a couple of percentage points in the Chaos Rune.

Many of us would say that doing away with Hit Locations means it is no-longer RuneQuest. However there is nothing wrong with playing BRPAiG (Basic Role Playing - Adventures in Glorantha)

RQ is one (the original) of a whole family of games using the same core mechanics but with many differences. See the Basic Role Playing (BRP) game available from Chaosium. Several of these forms of BRP (Such as Call of Cthulhu” are not so combat focused and thus do not use hit locations, instead only using hit points for the whole adventurer (like D&D). Some of these use a wounds system to model debilitating injuries without having hit locations. For armour, one possiblity is to just use the adventurers armour protection against every hit, but another option used by some forms of the game is to use the armour rating as the size of the dice to roll for protection against a hit. For example, armour with a rating of 6 would subtract 1D6 from any hits (rolled for each hit). This simulates different parts of the body having different armour protection without having to use Hit Locations.

For those of us who have been playing RQ for decades the base resolution mechanisms and when to use them (combat vs skills vs the Resistance Table etc) are so ingrained they have become intuitive. I'm sure it is easy to not appreciate how complex and overwhelming it can be to new people. I don't know what play testing was done so hopefully this suggestion was something they did, but it seems to me that an important play testing exercise is to get a group of people who have never played RQ before. Get them to read the manual and play a few games totally without any interaction with anyone who knows RQ. Then watch them play and see where their interpretation deviates from what the authors expected.

The level of complexity is not necessarily a good or a bad thing. As has been pointed out the two games have a different focus. I suppose a bit like how some people prefer manual cars while others prefer automatics. The resolution system for D&D is simpler and more unified, and in hindsight some of the old mechanisms from RQ1/2/3 should have been dropped in the new version but I'm absolutely sure I would have complained bitterly if they had done so. I prefer the percentile concept, the distinction between being hit and being injured, the resistance Table and many other features of RQ that can make it more complex. I think a big part of the problem is that the current rules in some areas are poorly written. There is much confusion caused by inconsistencies and ambiguities in the text. Sometimes this relates to new features (such as Augments), but sometimes it relates to fundamental parts of RQ (such as the effects of damage on hit locations) and those sections really should have been written better. Please note. As I have written in another thread, I write and run training courses. I'm fully aware of how hard it is to write manuals and how easy it is to write things that make sense to you but not to someone with no background in the product. Considering the resources available to them and the immense scope of the project, the authors have done a fantastic job, much better than I would have done. It is a huge, complex project. Most parts are outstanding, but some areas need more work.

This may demonstrate why RQ is considered to be more complex than D&D. It is part of a document I wrote for my players and doesn't include how to actually use Augments (that is another document). I wrote it to help my players get an understanding on how various "actions" were handled as they were frequently getting confused. RuneQuest Resolution Mechanisms General Rules (P141) Skills, Runes, Passions etc are all Abilities 1. Determine the appropriate Ability 2. Obtain the adventurer's normal chance of success 3. Apply any modifiers such as: a. Environmental (i.e. darkness) b. Magic (i.e. bladesharp) c. Opponents skill over 100% d. Augments by other Abilities 4. Roll against the Abilities modified chance of success 5. Determine the level of success (Critical, Special, Success, Fail or Fumble) 6. Apply the results of the Ability use Weapon Combat (P197) 1. Attacker rolls against their attack skill (P197) 2. Defenders attempting to dodge roll against their dodge skill (P201) 3. If attack is not dodged, attacker rolls damage (P203) 4. Defenders attempting to parry rolls against their parry skill (P197) 5. Damage is reduced by the results of the parry 6. Location of the hit is rolled 7. Damage is reduced by any armour or magic 8. Damage is applied to defender Skill Use (P163) 1. Roll against the adventurer's skill 2. Apply the results of the skill use Opposed Rolls (P142) These are not used to resolve combat 1. Both participants roll against their appropriate skills 2. The best level of result wins (i.e. a special beats a critical) o Winner & Loser = Winner succeeds and applies the skill result o Both same level (non-critical) = Situation temporally unresolved o Both same level (critical) = Both succeed and apply the skill result o Both fail = Neither achieve their goal Characteristic Roll (P141) 1. Determine the Difficulty Factor (X 5 for easy to X 0.5 for nearly impossible) 2. Multiply the appropriate characteristic (such as DEX) by the Difficulty Factor 3. Roll against the resulting number 4. The results of the roll are applied Resistance Roll (P145) Used for pitting one characteristic against another (Such as POW vs POW or STR vs SIZ) · Determine the appropriate characteristics · Determine the chance of success using the table on P147 · The active participant rolls against this chance of success · The results of the roll are applied Spell Attack (P244) 1. Roll against the attacker's chance of success with the spell a. Spirit = POW X 5 b. Rune = Chance with best Rune required by the spell c. Sorcery = Skill with the appropriate spell 2. Apply any countermagic type spells the defender has in effect 3. Use the Resistance Roll mechanism pitting POW vs POW 4. Roll for effected location if appropriate 5. Apply the effects of the spell Spirit Combat (P368) Uses the Opposed Rolls mechanism with the Spirit Combat skill Spirit Combat Damage is applied to: · The loser, if there is a winner and a loser · Both participants, if both achieve a critical

I agree with what is written above but I also use it for other things. Example include: Using it to augment a missile attack when ambushing foes as Battle helps the adventurer pick the optimal place to ambush from. Controlling positions in melee such as: Manoeuvring an enemy that you are in melee with so that they are in a position where a knockback can push them off a ledge, into a pool etc While remaining in combat moving closer to a location While in melee keeping your opponent between you and another opponent Running though an existing combat without becoming engaged. Any situation where the SR system breaks down, such as shooting arrows at two people in melee where one of those two is trying to flee.. The player gets to roll against Battle and a success allows the player interpret the situation in a way to benefit their character. I see it as a measure of how much the adventurer understands the chaos of combat, and how effectively they can direct it. In martial arts tournaments I have often seen people who are "better" in that they are faster, fitter and have better technique, but lose because their opponent has mastery of the ring and controls the bout. This is especially noticeable in "two on one" sparring.

Is my understanding correct in that an attempt to "sneak" cannot be augmented at all? As there is not a "Sneak" skill, this is instead accomplished by using either: The Hide skill augmented by Move Quietly or The Move Quietly skill augmented by Hide My reading of RQG is that only one augment can be applied to an action. Thus a further augment cannot be applied to a sneak attempt. Is that correct? Thanks

I have added a file to the Downloads section detailing my understanding of how damage works. It is available at Effects of Damage I'm sure there are errors in it so please notify of any you find.

While I believe that having to House Rule a game to make it playable is bad writing, I’m a big supporter of creating House Rules to adapt a game to make it more suitable to your playing style. In my campaign skills can only be increased to a maximum of 75% as part of Character Creation. So if you don’t like having starting characters with high skills, set your own limits.

Thanks. Your responses have been extremely helpful. btw, one of the things I get paid to do is run training courses. A couple of these courses I have written then modified many times over the past 20+ years and are on a topic I have an encyclopedic knowledge of. Even after more than 20 years I still occasionally find bits that are wrong because I knew what I meant when I wrote them, but they don't actually say exactly what I intended. And of course because I wrote it I generally don't spot the error. There is a reason good technical writers are worth their weight in gold. It is a really hard thing to do. While it is easy to pick flaws in what has been written by the authors of RQG or the posts by those helping to explain things, it is really hard to actually do it better than them. Thanks again for your invaluable contributions.