Jon Hunter

I think there is an issue there. I think the figures you gave are probably historically accurate, but don't add up with price lists and cash sloshing round the system especially from RQ2 eras supplements. Where we would see the price dagger as being a soldiers whole years salary, or a bow as the best part of a commanders yearly salary. When we start to look at training and spell costs it just gets ridiculous. I think we either need to look at a complete rehaul of all price lists, monster treasure, spell and training costs published or accept that the Gloranthan monetary system is an not an accurate reflection of bronze age economics.

also i think its a bug that caught not a understanding thats taught

hmmmmm also for solo play i think city based stuff around Pavis works much better than rubble runs, rubble adventures will thrash small parties of non rune level characters.

I was thinking of a mid draft boat, something designed to operate on either, but excellent at neither. Also depends on your river, the thames always took deep water vessels as far as London, though galleys couldn't traverse the delta at the nile without significant help.

Play a game and then..... let him read the cults of prax story ....... thats what worked for me.

Cheers, bought

I'm prone to agree with Dave here; Praxian is so utilitarian a society, and combats vrs chaos (the primal enemy of the culture) so deadly that it doesn't fit. It could fit with a Balazaring or other less pressed culture quite nicely. but as said YGMV.

Historically some could, viking long ships were able to do both quite well. I think certain sea going vessels can deal with rivers, but will struggle with small shallow rivers. What you really don't want to do is take a river going vessel onto the open sea. I'm sure there are vessels that can do both, but not optimal for either they will not as safe on the open sea or as manoeuvrable and easy to navigate on rivers. Variables will be the depth and current of rivers, the natures of the seas is question, seasons, technology, tradition and the effects of magic. Glorantha is primarily a game world, maybe one or two players might appreciate the extra bit of detail that a change of boat between the river and sea portion of there voyage, but most won't even notice you worried about it.

That's a usuable system, but i just tend to roll dice ignore them and make up what makes the best story for npc on npc diceroles.

Its not a rules change its juts organising it for speed and flow. If you don't find large RQ2 combats clunk and difficult to manage you are fine, if you do it is a possible solution. I have been a programmer by trade, if something gets big and unweidly, chop it up into small bits. I have in my time found a complex RQ combats take an entire evenings gaming, or sat for 15 minutes between actions.

An idea that came to mind when replying to thread on the Facebook page, this is a reffing technique I use in my WOD games, to simplify and speed combats in a clunky and occasionally difficult combat system. Which i think most of us will agree that RQ combat can be slow as well. I think it will work well as a reffing style/technique for RQ combat. I find round by round combats with multiple opponent using multiple tactics on each side can get bogged down as you are trying to work through multiple actions. Sometimes a good few minutes can work through between players individual actions; a rhythm of combat isn't created and a consistency of action can be lost. My suggestion is to formalise something i have been using informally. In creating combat sequences, which are groups of rounds in which actions take place. Splitting the larger combat down into a number of micro combats or duels. Broad actions are declared for the sequence, Then Playing through each micro combat quickly through all turns of the sequence. Summarizing the combat and allowing players to declaring broad actions for the next sequence were people can change targets, or make major changes in tactics after every sequence. Reasons for this are I think this actually replicates the rhythm of combat where people make decisions, make a number of actions based on the decision, pause, reaxmine decisions, act again It splits combat down into manageable chunks, making the whole process faster Each micro conflict generates its own rhythm, which can be fast and has a feel of parry, riposte, act and counter act, without waiting for everyone else action and that feel being lost Different characters can be paired off against relevant and challenging opponents Supporting characters have interesting decisions on which micro combats to support It stops powerful combat characters hogging all of the game time and resolving everything I think thought its complex to talk through and write down in practice it will speed things up and add simplicity It can be used to add drama - ( ie just survive to the end of the sequence when the help can arrive ) OK so a detailed break down; The ref determines the length of a combat sequence based on how long is reasonable for a micro conflict to resolve. This would usually be 3 to 6 combat rounds. The more even opponents are the longer it should be. Players declare broad actions for the sequences, 'i'm engaging the main dark troll warrior', "i standing shielded behind our main warrior to cast defensive spells and heals', 'im shooting the troll priest who isn't engaged in combat', 'i'm engaging the flanking trollkin warriors', 'i'm waiting to support where i'm needed.' The ref then splits the combat down into the largest number of micro combats that make sense. `Players will be in only 1 micro combat or waiting to support. Compressed melees or shield walls where multiple targets are viable probably need to 1 micro combat Ranged attackers usually will be able to engage other ranged attackers and supporting players but not into melees Resolve range and magical actions first, Any supporting players make a decision on the order the melee micro combats will be resolved, based on which micro combats they are paying most attention to. Melee Micro combats are resolved in order, through the whole turn sequence, supporting players can join a micro combat at any time, but once they are committed to one they are committed to it for the whole combat sequence. At the end of the combat sequence the ref recaps the whole scene, making sense of carnage which has just happened, representing a natural break in combat The players then decide actions for the next sequence Some thoughts in applying this technique. Apply liberal common sense Always allow for coup the gras moves on downed players by NPC's to be responded to by either breaking the rules , or making the coup the gras part of another combat sequence. Has any body tried similar and what do you think?

What i'm driving at here is in the story's of the great heros of Glorantha such as Arkat is that the power corrupts. Heros loose empathy and loyalty to there people and tend to become avatars of a higher purpose. You could argue about words such as 'definition' or 'distortion', but in the stories of Glorantha how I read them, I see a trend of hero's creating doom for themsleves and there people as they are driven by higher forces.

I'd agree thus I was surprised to see see sword as secondary and spear as tertiary, as spears are hunting weapons and sword are expensive ones. Agreed on the points again, but we seem to disagree on the outcome. Depends what you defined as primary and secondary. There will be more spears than swords but swords will be the weapon of choice of professional warriors. Also depends how you define light Orlanthi and Sword Orlanthi, i assume light orlanthi were skirmishes and sword orlanthi were thanes, is there another definition?

lol .... The view stated is counter intuitive to all the real world information i get, Skirmishes tended to be poorer warriors without the quality kit, heavier infantry tends to be more professional warriors with better kit. Thus swords being better kit are more likely to be used by sword thanes than skirmishes. Glorantha may vary for various reasons , but its counter intuitive compared to RW history.

I think we disagree on a little, and its hopefully its not an argument but a exercise in persuasion, or an exploration of ideas via debate. I think the runes have an effect culturally, phsycological & physically/mystically. I think we are complete agreement about the social and physiological elements and their effect. However I believe all races have innate ties to certain runes which are physical and mystical in nature. An Orlanthi who has no ancestors who has ever used the man rune, is still defined by it, because his nature is that of a man. The same a troll darkness and a Aldryami plant. This isn't about cultural or religious preferences its about nature. I think you are viewing things through the lense of religious affiliation and use of runes only. care to comment ?

and Greg never got anything wrong or changed his mind on anything? I'm not sure if all the old Wyrms Footnotes are still canon as such? I wait to be corrected on that one.

Not sure if you were looking for feedback/polite disagreement; but a couple of points. 1) Light Orlanthi would probably use a spear more commonly than a sword due to cost and expense of a sword. 2) Sword Orlanthi probably would use the sword before spear due to the prestige of the expensive sword that they have, and as its a warriors weapon rather than a common weapon.

Our Gloranthas may vary in this regard... I see races and maybe be even peoples having runic associations, to align onself with rune associated with you race or culture will be easier to cope with than a rune not associated or contrary to your culture or race. ie a troll aligned to fire rune will have a harder time than a troll aligned to a darkness rune, a mostali associated with movement with be seen as being different difficult and even broken. If races and cultures have innate runic associations ( and I think this has been established in Glorantha ) a characters would not be as adversely effected by his association with that rune, I also think its is not ridiculous to think that a grounding in the innate which helps define a person nature means that other runes would not have as greater distorting effect.

Martin far to much for me to go back on piece by piece, but can i comment on this. My irk is that there is this desire to preserve the RQ2 rules as being correct and almost perfect, rather than light years ahead of its time, but still somewhat primitive and incomplete in separating RQ2 from the generic fantasy mush/collage which was being widely published at the time. In my theology I encounter people who are absolutely desperate to believe the kind James Bible is world for word infallible in english, even as a conservative (in theological terms) scholar i know its not even a remotely plausible position. But i see people trying to retro fit very bizarre arguments and explanations in to Justify this position. I kind of see parts of the community trying to do that with RQ2, trying to make it more than it was. It was great, it is how I fell in love with Glorantha, but I see it as young and a little naive, it was at times incomplete and imprecise. It set a stunning trajectory, but didn't always fulfil it. Therefore to justify every element and say its was consistent and correct just isn't needed. The weapons were a list which just hadn't been completely thought through and contained stuff that shouldn't have been common. The crossbows described included abralests not 5th century BC Chinese variants. Polearms were designed to take on platemail which doesn't exists in the world, Chainmail is iron age/late antiquity but popular and common in the dark ages on-wards (send art work to Jeff with chainmail on it and see how bronze age he thinks it is ), and if you think that the writers at the time meant that rapiers were the of the ancient Greek variety I think you are engaging in an act of revisionism that would make a Christian fundementalist blush. What we know of roman and earlier guild structures is very very thin, remember RQ2 guilds included the 'thieves guild', the foresters and horse masters guild, and all were presented as secular organisations at that point. The roman religious guild thing is a good retrofit, but that is what it is its a retrofit to explain an inconsistency. Agreed about that but, townsmen without explanation gives a middles ages feel, i think it could have meant that but was never explained in that way. The artwork was a mixed bag some was ancient world and some was more generic fantasy (thinking inside of pavis books especially) However the individual answers are not the point i'm trying to make. The point i'm trying to make is that RQ2 was almost 40 years ago now, just cause it was awesome for then doesn't mean we have to pretend it was things it wasn't. It was flawed it was imprecise and inconsistent. It set a bronze age trajectory and agenda, but to my eyes didn't fulfil it consistently, but that's OK because its only a game.

OK you stand a chance of letting loose a hobby horse here First whats good about the bronze age/ancient world setting is it makes the world immediately different from the Generic Fantasy medievil / Tolkienesh mishmash that D&D popularised. That difference gives it an immediate sense of 'other' and distinction. It also draws the eye to world and not the system, and i've always thought RQ's strength was Glorantha. On the hobby horse front, I struggle with respecting the current party line of 'RQ2 was completely bronze age' and RQ3/Hero Wars undermined that by bringing Celtic/Saxon/Viking influences in to define the Orlanthi, and that recent changes are purely a revision to RQ2 standards, if i'm being polite id call it spin, being direct i'd call it horse shit. RQ2 had a good few elements within the rules that were clearly hadn't made the break fully away from a generic fantasy/medi evil setting - Weapons & Armour Lists - Great Swords, Pole Axes, Crossbows as described, Rapiers as described, Chainmail, all mainly medievil weapons Guilds - a Medievil Social structure. Class of Townsmen - could be argued either way but had a very medievil feel in its presentation. Artwork for people within the Pavis/Big Rubble books often had a medievil even Renaissance feel. Did it matter? Not really, RQ2 was far better than anything else I saw or gamed with at the time in terms of culture, world and definition. Its only matters if you start to claim that RQ2 was the halcyon days on undlituted Bronze age Glorantha, and anything we've changed recently is a return to RQ2 . In the RQ3 Renaissance( particularly strangers in Prax, Dorastor and King of Satar), Kind of Dragon Pass and HW, the definition of the Orlanthi with strong Celtic/Saxon/Viking influences added massively to both definition of Glorantha, its sense of otherness, and defined the Orlanthi in a way that brought strong distinction between them and the surrounding cultures. even though they were more iron/dark age than bronze age influences. The recent aversion to this description and a move to a more Mediterranean pure bronze age theme for the Orlanthi,to my mind removes much of richness from Glorantha, reduces usable Orlanthi materials, makes the Gloranthan cultures significanlty less distinct from each other. It also makes the games much less accessible, if you say the Orlanthi are similar to the Hallstatt people and the Lunars as Similar to Assyrian empire, most people will not have a clue what you mean. To my mind is self indulgent of the design team. I would consider myself as a moderately well educated man, with a passing interest in British and European history, I had never heard of the Halstatt people before debates on here. The Assyrians I knew more about because id studied the Old testament, but I think am in a minority position here. Real world parallels need to be rooted in real world cultures which a target market know something about and can identify with or else they are meaningless.

Pondering ..... i do like to ponder led me to another thought. Though there is canon and structure to Glorantha there is also room in Glorantha for a lot of your own weirdness without upsetting the mix.

I think runes will touch different people in different ways, and its a role playing opportunity where players can express these differently. These are the broad principles I think should apply Most runes distort a persons character away from there humanity The man rune is the obvious exception The greater the runic power the greater the distortion of a characters humanity This effect will be obvious with some and subtle with others but it will be there Different runes will have more obvious effect as they obviously clash with the human nature - chaos, death, disorder, undeath, Other runes which are more in keeping with the human nature will have more subtle effects, but as characters becomes more powerful in a rune they become less human and more an avatar of an rune. examples - life, harmony, movement, truth As a character becomes more powerful in a rune, the rune tries to asserts as much control of the individual as the individual does over the rune Balancing these runes with a strong association with the man rune limits these effects When I put together WOD:Glorantha I allowed the buying of rune related flaws, and merits which including derangement every time a rune was increased in power, so as characters advance in there Runes, they gain a unique collection flaws, quirks and derangements and advantages that reflect their runic associations.

oh juts these guys ........... • https://store.warlordgames.com/collections/aegean-states/products/persian-immortals-regiment • https://store.warlordgames.com/collections/aegean-states/products/persians-archers • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1144-persian-slingers-i-4?variant=4539266371 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1145-persian-peasants-4?variant=4539267331 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1195-scythian-infantry-4?variant=4539290435 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1211-persian-guard-i-4?variant=4539294979 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1221-persian-elite-infantry-ii-4?variant=4539298307 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1222-persian-peasants-with-spears-4?variant=4539298627 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1263-persian-slingers-ii-4?variant=4539309059 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1271-persian-cavalry-ii-3?variant=4539317123 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1282-persian-infantry-i-4?variant=4539320195 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1419-persian-peasants-ii?variant=4539351363 • https://eoeorbisuk.com/collections/ancient/products/ia1143-persian-elite-infantry-i-4?variant=4539266179

Persians, so many good Persian miniatures out there, distinct look and feel and there shields have such a hint of moon about there shape? Do they pass as Carmanian?

I think most people prefer the 25 - 28mm size.... so may i politley suggest http://28mmreview.blogspot.co.uk/p/dir.html If martin doesn't think its gazumping his idea I may dig into this a little more.