Jump to content

Paid a bod yn dwp

Regulars
  • Posts

    824
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Paid a bod yn dwp

  1. On 1/17/2021 at 8:27 AM, Stephen L said:

    Are they issues with that?  I only recall falling in the completely-wowed category. 

    Quick start is a brilliant way into RQG. To my mind it’s easy to follow. Obvs by its nature it’s abbreviated. IIRC there are tiny differences in presentation of some combat rules, but it’s minor stuff * and the gist is all there.


    It just goes to show how some of these things are a matter of taste, and I’m sure many make these sort of house rules. It all works, nothing is broken. Brilliant little adventure too.

     


     

    * Edit: On closer inspection really really minor differences from the core rules. Some rules are necessarily abbreviated like special types of damage. Differences in the presentation of remaining rules are as follows :-

    • Dodge is described as usable against all attacks from one source. In the core it’s applicable against attacks from any source.

    • Parry Normal Success vs successful attack - Parry weapon takes 1 hit-point. Core rules - parry weapon only takes hit point if dam exceeds weapon hit points. 

    • Parry normal success vs unsuccessful attack - if attack failure, parry weapon does normal rolled damage breaking it if it exceeds the weapons hit points. In the core rules, this is toned down to only inflicting 1 hit-point on the attacking weapon.

    • Two weapon fighting spot rule is incorrect and makes the same mistake the core rules did in 1st printing regarding number of parries.

    So in general the parry results are a bit harsher on a couple of results in the QuickStart, with a bit more chance of weapon breaking.

     

     

     

     

    • Like 1
  2. On 1/15/2021 at 3:37 PM, Stephen L said:

    Is rule clarity in RQinG actually an issue, or am I just amongst a small band of whingers? 

    On the whole it’s great, but there have been a few points which I think have all been clarified. In fact I don’t think any RPG rulebook has been scrutinised so closely, a mark of people’s regard for RuneQuest. 

    From memory the main points that stood out for me were:

    • Two weapon fighting - issue being rules not updated for new RQG combat rules, in particular the new parry rules.

    • Parry/Dodge not fully explained as being interchangeable. But hey I guess this may be down to personal taste. The official clarification is that you can interchange them in defence but the -20% cumulative applies to both regardless.

    • Confusion on damage to limbs. Issue example error, and lack of an explanation for why limbs have different damage limits. Why the extra crunch? etc

    • Special Crush damage lacking clarity. Turns out both damage bonus’s are “special damage” so both are maximised.

    • One-Use Rune Magic. In process of being clarified in the new Red Book of Magic.

    There may have been a few other example errors, but on the whole the book reads fine, and is 100% playable.   

    • Like 5
  3. 1 hour ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

    Main book, page 314

    Given that page 314 states for a non-fumble failure (hmm, no way to insert a quote block?)

    """
    If the casting success roll is greater than the adventurer’s relevant Rune affinity, the spell is not cast, and there is no Rune point loss. If the adventurer is boosting the spell with additional magic points, they lose 1 magic point (no matter how many are being spent). On a fumble, the spell fails and the adventurer loses the Rune points intended for the spell.
    """

    """
    Once spent, Rune points must be replenished before they can be used again.
    """

    It would seem rather punitive to have a permanent loss on a fumble when plain failure essentially has no effect at all. Permanent loss might make sense if a failure resulted in the (recoverable) loss of the RPs -- as if the spell had succeeded -- but with no spell effect taking place.

    Including the success categories, I see four levels of cost here:

    • Critical Success: spell succeeds, NO RP COST (spell is free)
    • Normal Success: spell succeeds, at REGULAR RP COST (recoverable via worship)
    • Normal Failure: spell does not go off, NO RP COST (absolutely nothing happens)
    • Fumble: spell does not go off, at REGULAR RP COST (ie; recoverable via worship)

    In contrast to the second quote above, the RBoM, page 9, on one-use spells explicitly states

    """
    The Rune points used to cast spells designated as ‘one-use’ in the Rune spell or cult descriptions cannot be replenished.
    """

    The four levels of cost for one-use spells (still page 9) come out to be

    • Critical Success: spell succeeds, NO RP COST (spell is free)
    • Normal Success: spell succeeds, at PERMANENT RP COST (not recoverable)
    • Normal Failure: spell does not go off, NO RP COST (absolutely nothing happens)
    • Fumble: spell does not go off, at PERMANENT RP COST (not recoverable)

    Note the symmetry between one-use and reusable spells: 0 RP, x RP, 0 RP, x RP. The difference is that one-use spells have permanent RP loss while reusable spells have recoverable RP loss.

     

    Yes agree. That’s the point I was making. The rules aren’t unduly punishing One-use spells on a fumble, It’s just that the defining aspect of one-use spell is that the rune points are spent permanently when casting, and by extension fumbling.

  4. 1 hour ago, Russ Massey said:

    Changing this to a permanent loss is not a clarification - it is a change to the original rules.

    That’s just clarifying what already happens with one-use spells (at least by the RBM clarification) Looks to me that It’s just following the One-Use ruling, that all spent rune points are lost permanently.

    I guess (no book to hand at the moment) that standard rune magic just looses the rune point on a fumble, but is recoverable at a worship ceremony? 

  5. Spell Trading p82. Final bullet point:

    ”The original “owners” of the spells can still cast them after trading them, provided that the spell was not a one-use spell and that all other requirements for the spell (Rune points, cult status, etc.) are still met.”

    This suggests contrary to the new explanation of one-use spells p9 that the spell cannot be cast again after trading by the original owner, is this correct? 
     

    Should it not be explained (as on p9) that it’s the Rune Points that are permanently lost and not the spell? The spell can actually be cast again by the original owner provided they have rune points left to cast it ( all be it at the high cost of permanently loosing the rune point)?

     

  6. One Use spells , p9. Bullet point 3

    “If the roll is a fumble, the spell is not cast, but the Rune points are spent permanently and cannot be replenished. The spell can be re-attempted again if sufficient Rune points remain.

    Shouldn’t the last point here apply to all casting results (pass, fail, fumble, & critical) and not just be signalled out for the fumble result? I can see why it’s more pertinent to mention it with the fumble result, but it leaves a bit of room perhaps to question whether this also applies to the other casting results or not.

  7. On 12/30/2020 at 11:14 PM, DreadDomain said:

    Sure, I can like or dislike the ruling and play it however I like at my table but that's irrelevant to my point above.

    Yes I agree. It makes the ride smoother when you’re digesting all the rules to know what exactly it’s supposed to be modelling.

    My two clacks worth, I’d put a little paragraph in to explain what’s happening thematically, emphasising 

    • the unique dedicated runepoint and why it is so,  frex what makes it so special to the god to only be awarded as one-use

    • that only this rune point can be used to power the one use spell.

    • the dedicated Rune point can’t be used to power other spells, unlike other rune points. 

    • that it’s the special rune point you need to re-sacrifice for, and not the spell itself, who’s casting rituals are not forgotten. 
     

  8. 6 minutes ago, Stephen L said:

    The whole poo throwing thing is also a detriment to acceptance in the better circles of society...

    People just need to chill with a ripe banana. Throwing poo is the most direct and effective form of communication. It’s the pinnacle of Praxian civilisation, of which the baboons lead by example.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  9. 8 minutes ago, Stephen L said:

    Possibly, but don't forget there are disadvantages.  They're not fully bipedal, hence using a 2H spear for a charge, and then dropping it to fight claw and fang.  I would impose penalties on a baboon who wanted to use e.g. sword and shield, as it wouldn't feel natural to them and they'd find it very uncomfortable.

    Also I'd make armour uncomfortable for them as well, perhaps doubling the effective ENC?

    Listen (perhaps heretical to some apes who deny the connection to the inferior weird smell masking humans) we all know baboons evolved from the primitive weaker hairless humans. They wear their armour in shame, to cover their ugly hairlessness. Humans are lucky they don’t have permanent penalties on their charisma for being the weedy, bold apes they are. 

    There’s only one top banana in Prax, and we all know who that is. 

  10. 1 minute ago, Bill the barbarian said:

    Be sure to do a bit of research to the greatest baboon of them all... Mello Yello

    Will do. He’s the troop leader. This is the dawning of a new age of the baboon! The monkey ruins shall rise again! 

    • Like 1
  11. On 12/21/2020 at 12:40 PM, MOB said:

    329034380_TheRedBookofMagic-ImagewithTitle.png.cc1c5199bb0fd578e8cc0ac26725fa6d.png

    We speak with RuneQuest creative director Jason Durall about The Red Book of Magic, our recently-released "ultimate guide" to spirit and Rune magic. Jason explains how this book is designed for both RuneQuest players and GMs.

    https://www.chaosium.com/blogthe-red-book-of-magic-an-essential-runequest-expansion-for-players-and-gamemasters-alike

    Where’s that picture based? Is this the Holy country somewhere? 

  12. 17 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

    The description also doesn't say anything about (quoting the Well): "You should dedicate the Rune points to the spell when you gain the spell, when you first gain the Rune points (through POW sacrifice), or when you regain them through worship."

    One-Use spell p 12. 
     

    • Yes this is an important thing to mention ( if the explanation in the well is correct). Otherwise people may presume that they can use the associated rune point on other spells in their knowledge and vice-versa, as with standard Rune magic and the Rune pool of points.
       
    • Also ( after reading the Well clarification) the wording whether you lose knowledge of a spell or not after casting, should perhaps be taken out of the bullet points completely and added into the general description to save repetition. Currently the way it’s mentioned in the bullet points makes you question whether it may in fact be possible in some circumstances to lose knowledge of the spell. Which is counter to the clarification in the Well. It’s not 100% clear. 
       
  13. 1 hour ago, DreadDomain said:

    Close but not quite the same.  In one case, I can sacrifice a POW and learn another rune spell. In the other case, I must choose One-Use spell again when I sacrifice my POW.

    Yes, but I was talking just in terms of the one-use spell. You can’t regain the one-use spell associated rune point through standard worship or sacrifice, and have to instead re-sacrifice POW, as you would if you were learning a new spell. 
     Mechanically it’s the same process as learning the whole spell again, but thematically you’re sacrificing for that special unique one-use power from the god in the form of the rune point.

    I guess it’s the divine power that is important and is emphasised in the rules with Rune Points, not so much the mundane gestures, and sounds that are learnt to channel it, which won’t be forgotten once learnt. 

     

  14. 1 hour ago, DreadDomain said:

    Perhaps but it still not what is written in the books.

    Not really, The in-world effect is simply to have the spell (not the RP) restored/reset with worship.  No need to have an other mechanical effect tied to it. Still you bring a good point. The new description remains vague about the loss or not of the spell but also if and when you can recast it. Now, it is clearly indicated under fumble but remains silent about the RP being tied to the one-use spell. If it is the case, it is a pretty important detail to mention. There is no way to guess this from the write-up.

    Close but not quite the same.  In one case, I can sacrifice a POW and learn another rune spell. In the other case, I must choose One-Use spell again when I sacrifice my POW.

    If it is the case, when I sacrifice a POW and learn another rune spell (which is what I understood)

    I agree that they really need to get this down coherently and without ambiguity. The text as it stands hasn’t achieved this yet. This is the opportunity to clear up the matter, shouldn’t have to rely on the Q&A  when there’s an opportunity to clear it up in print. 

    • Like 3
  15. 2 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

    While this interpretation/clarification was made a while ago and documented on the Well, I suggest it is now superseded by the RBoM. The brand new published write-up of one-use spell does not even vaguely mention or hint at dedicating RPs to one-use spell when learned. Nor does the core book. Not to mention the mess of now having to manage how your RP pool is divided between your one-use spells (you might have more than one) and your general pool.    

    The write-up in the RBoM might be somewhat vague about losing the spells or not while cast (I believe you do not lose it) but the fonctioning of it is simple, easy to implement and does not involve any kind of extra special tracking of RPs. Sounds better to me.

    Jason Durall was pretty clear in the Q&A that the rune point gained when you learn a one-use spell is tied to the spell. Otherwise you could just use your other remaining runepoints to recast it multiple times. That’s how you make a one-use spell in RQG.

    I guess whether it’s the spell, rune point, or both that disappears after using isn’t really important as the process to regain it is the same either way. But he did say it’s the Rune Point thematically that’s what’s needed to be re-sacrificed for, and not the spell. 

    • Like 2
  16. 4 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

    Err, yeah. The new description is odd. Three of the four outcomes - fail, fumble, and critical - explicitly say that you don't lose the knowledge of the spell. The other, for success, says you lose the RP but it is silent on whether or not you lose knowledge of the spell! It doesn't say that you lose it... but the others all explicitly say you don't.

    Thanks I was just trying to articulate that. Maybe copy and paste this in the corrections thread? 

    • Like 1
  17. 59 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

    Actually, I am confused again. I thought it was clarified that when casting a "One-Use" spell you loses the RP (they do note replenish) but kept the knowledge of the spell (you do not have to resacrifice to learn it again). The section does not explicitly said that you lose the knowledge of the spell when you cast it but the last two bullet points strongly imply it (otherwise, why mention it for these two cases specifically).  

    Actually you’re right I skim read and saw the bullet point on fumbles and thought it had been sorted. The bullet point on critical suggests that you could potentially lose the spell as well as the rune points. 
     

    The ambiguity remains.

×
×
  • Create New...