Mechashef

Are you also thinking about removing Reputation to augmenting? I would suggest letting Reputation continue to be able to augment. I really like the concept of augmentation in RQG but the writing of it does need to be made a bit cleaner. For example, it is surprising how many people miss that there are four types of Abilities that can be used to perform Augmentation: Skills Runes Passions Reputation (which is not a Skill, Passion or Rune)

I've gone back an read the post from the Core Rules Questions thread and I think I agree with Jason's rule, but I do believe he has misapplied it in this case. He wrote: That sounds reasonable, but in my opinion they are clearly not cast on the same item. Sword Trance is cast by the person on themselves. Bladesharp is cast on the sword. They are not the same item (unless we have sentient swords casting spells on themselves) thus Jason's guidelines do not apply in this case.

Perhaps the existing “Parry” spirit magic spell?

I agree with you, unless I see a compelling counter-argument. I have always played it that it is possible for adventurer one to cast bladesharp on a sword and then to pass it to adventurer two who would get the benefit of it. Sort of like bladesharp 1 being a temporary form of a D&D sword + 1. That is because the range is touch not self and the description certainly seems to imply the spell is cast on the weapon. On the other hand, if an adventurer casts it on a sword, then drops that sword and draws another, the spell won't have any affect on the 2nd sword. Sword trance on has a range of self and improves the casters sword skill. It could be cast and then the user could drop that sword and use another one and still get the benefit. Handing their first sword to another adventurer would not provide the 2nd adventurer with any benefit.

Plus they can be added to later and currently there is no limit as to how powerful they can be made.

Am I missing something or are the requirements to become a Rune Priest rather trivial now? In particular the requirement for the Loyalty (Temple) or Devotion (Deity) Passion to be at a minimum of 50% is laughable as passions typically start at 60% The Cult Rune of 90% seems trivial as it is easy for starting characters to typically achieve that. Most starting characters will already have a good start on the required 5 RPs The Worship (Deity) and the other 4 skills shouldn't be too hard as they only require 50%. The hardest part is probably POW of 18, convincing the examiners and finding a vacancy. (And personally I'm not sure if someone with only 50% for their worship skill and Loyalty or Devotion is the calibre of priest I'd want leading my congregation. They seem to be rather amateurish). Or have I missed something? Thanks

You are correct

Thanks Having the spell just remove the Move Quietly penalty for noisy armour does make sense. As has been pointed out it is only a one point spell. The worst penalty for noisy armour is 50%, so under some conditions the spell can still give quite a good "bang for its buck" (or perhaps a very quiet bang for its buck). It would be nice if the description in the manual was a bit clearer.

So even without this spell a failed Move Quietly is still less noisy than not attempting the skill at all?

For the "Silence" Spirit Magic the description initially states: Then goes on to add: So it doesn't protect from a fumbled Move Quietly roll (fair enough) but: Does the adventurer need to attempt a Move Quietly Roll at all? If Silence suppresses noises created by the movement of the adventurer, does the description mean that it will suppress the adventurers noise without them having to make a Move Quietly roll? I see three ways of interpreting it: It does such a good job that a Move Quietly roll is not required, in which case it would presumably be best to not use it with Move Quietly to avoid the possibility of rolling a fumble. A Move Quietly is still required. In this case what affect does the spell have? Does it mean that a failed roll still doesn't make any sound? A Move Quietly is not required, but some other roll (perhaps an Agility) should be made to give the possibility of a fumble (this is not supported by the text, but is more of just a thought). The player could choose whether to roll a Move Quietly or an Agility roll when checking for the fumble. How do people interpret the description? Thanks

There seems to be two ways of looking at this; You appear to be treating them as two different actions: 1) A move which uses 4SRs (2 for DEX and 2 for the distance) and - 2) A spell cast which uses 3SRs (2 for DEX and 1 for the spell) On the other hand I’m treating it as one action which has a SR modifier due to movement as detailed on P192: Those moving no more than half their usual movement allowance may also participate in melee or perform other feats such as throwing a spell. Every 3 meters of movement adds 1 to the mover’s strike rank. So I would calculate it as 5SRs (2 for DEX, 2 for the movement and 1 for the Spell)

Ok. I’ll blame it on my failing memory. Thanks

Shouldn’t that be (DEX SR +2 -1 = 3)? DEX SR plus 2 for Befuddle minus 1 for the first MP SR is free. And I agree that applying the DEX SR twice is debatable. I probably wouldn’t.

If my memory and understanding is correct, this idea of the first MP not using a SR is new to RQG (not in RQ2 or RQ3). If so it feels like s late change and I would not be surprised if there are several examples that do not reflect it. In my opinion it feels wrong too. It seems like something that is an exception (1st MP SR free but not 1st Move SR etc) and I don’t like exceptions (except if they can’t be avoided 😀)

I've tried a couple of rules over the years. but my current one is following the example with Short Spear in RQG. If a weapon that can be used either one or two handed is used two handed, I bump its damage up to the next dice. So a Battle Axe which does 1D8+2 when used one handed, does 1D10+2 when used two handed. This is consistent with official stats for a Short Spear (1D6+1 when used one handed and 1D8+1 when used two handed). I would have a Bastard Sword do 1D8+1 when used one handed and 1D10+1 when used two handed. This makes such a weapon do more damage than when used one handed, but still less than the dedicated two handed weapons in their category. I'm considering using that rule for almost any one handed weapon, even a dagger but at some penalty (perhaps to attack or parry) as they are not designed to allow two hands (i.e. a dagger would require one hand to be placed over the other and thus represents the classic two handed downward stab with a dagger). None of my one handed weapons do 1D12 (or an equivalent) damage so I haven't had to worry about stepping up from there.

With bastard swords (and other weapons that can be used one or two handed) should there be a benefit to using the weapon 2 handed (assuming the adventurer has enough STR & DEX to use it 1 handed)? A spear does more damage wielded 2 handed (which seems to make sense), but a battleaxe doesn’t do any more damage.

I'm sure Jason will provide a better answer (though I am surprised there isn't an obvious version number or date at the start) but this will work. Look at bottom of the right column on page 254. If like this example, the 2nd last line of black text has "(minus the first)" you have the new version.

Great advice. However to make it even more useful for beginners I'd suggest changing your point 3 from "battle magic" to either "Spirit Magic" (if you are using the old RQ2 terminology) or something like "magic in combat" (if you mean the general use of magic during battles).

For such a small book, my copy of RQ2 had a surprising amount of corrections. RQG is much larger. I wonder which will end up having more corrections per 1000 words.

My apologies. I hadn’t seen your post there.

So what about Castback which has Magic plus Stasis plus two techniques? And Identify Spell and Pierce Veil which both have Magic and Truth and a technique? Can the required Runes be used a second time in place of the Magic Rune? Can Identify Spell be cast using Truth and Truth again and the technique? Is the Magic Rune really only being used to add an extra Magic Point to the base Spell? Or is it to place a limit on those spells so that an adventurer needs to know multiple Runes to use them? It does seem poorly written. Considering that the spells using the Magic Rune do all seem to have something to do with magic it feels like it was a valid Rune that was changed at the last moment. Perhaps a better approach would have been to lower the INT requirement by one (so they can learn one more Rune) and give every sorcerer the Magic Rune as their initial one which is used to understand Sorcerous Magic.

However on P389 for the Malkioni it states: (Emphasis mine) So it is apparently a valid Rune to select. There seems to be a contradiction in this chapter regarding the Magic Rune.

So if a sorcerer casts Drain Soul using the Air Rune instead of the Magic Rune, does the Air Rune count as a minor or opposed Rune to the Magic Rune and thus cause a doubling of the required Magic Points?

I always thought crush was a great joining of mechanics and Glorantha culture. I agree, for many humans it is the poor relation of the specials, but it really does give a reason for trolls to use their maces. Trollkin are probably better using spears, but Dark Trolls and other large ones truly shine with crush.

This is probably more a case of me just misunderstanding instead of an error in the text. On Page 391 under the section "SPELL NAME" it states: What does that mean? For example, the spell Drain Soul has the Magic Rune and the Dispel Technique. Does a Sorcerer need to know the Magic Rune and the Dispel Technique (directly or indirectly) or could (for example) they learn the Drain Soul spell if the know the Darkness Rune and the Dispel Technique, or the Stasis Rune and the Dispel technique? Thanks