Dissolv

4 hours ago, David Scott said:

"The activated wands connect invisibly to form a barrier detectable only by magical means." (page 347). The only way the diagonals can connect is by a "roof".

But no reason to think that they necessarily connect to each other in parallel. It could be a serial connection, which actually better explains why destroying one breaks the warding. 

I believe it shakes out this way:

1. Warding can be dispelled (clarified in RBoM by removing the "enchantment" label)
2. You can teleport through it (Teleport clearly beats it in points, even if you believe the countermagic would impede it.)  GM choice if you suffer the damage or set off the alarm right now.  I can definitely see both ways being argued. 
3. Enchantments (which warding is not) cannot be dispelled.  This is apparently so commonsense that it was never explicitly stated as it was in previous editions, only implied. 
4. Decision about a "roof", or "floor" to the warding is likely a GM to GM decision.

1 hour ago, Kloster said:

Because it is an Enchanting ritual.

Alright, you seem like a RAW kind of guy, so I'll ask without any intention of being disrespectful.  Where does it say that you can't dispel an Enchanting Ritual? 

p.247 -- Spell Terminology:  Defines both Enchantment and Ritual.  Neither definition includes inability to dispel.  Instant spells ARE defined as not subject to dispel on the very next page.  Warding of course is not instant.  Under Enchantment I note it says that it "usually" requires the exchange for points of POW. 

p. 249.  Enchantment section, clearly states that an Enchantment requires that the enchanter lose something permanently -- normally POW.   It does talk about symbols being required, and if those are destroyed, then so is the enchantment.  So a bit of a contradiction already, but at least that last part tracks with the warding sticks.

I mean clearly, I have always, for decades now, played that you cannot dispel an enchantment.  They are, as the rules state, a permanent change to the world.  Enchant a Bladesharp 4 matrix into an Axe, you must break the axe to break the enchantment.   But darned if I can find that stated anywhere in the RQ:G rules explicitly.  If I were to go full RAW on RQ:G, right now it would look a lot like magic items and bound elementals and such can all be dispelled.  I do not think that is the case.

Warding was always previously dispellable, as per the RQ2 quote I put above.   It also fails the contradictory statements about Enchantments because nothing permanent is required to make a Warding "as permanent" as a spell matrix.   So it isn't the "ritual", or "enchantment" tag that makes Warding dispellable in my view.  It is simply the fact that it is only fueled by Rune Points, not POW.   This is not in the rules per se, and if this was a tournament system, it would be a problem. 

However I do think that is the right way to play it.  Permanent POW sacrifice gets you a permanent change to the world.  Warding doesn't meet that criteria.    Spell Matrix Enchantment does. 

1 hour ago, Kloster said:

If the RBOM tell it is not anymore an Enchanting ritual, as soon as it is available, it can be dispelled, but now, RAW, it can not.

But RBOM is available.  I bought it.  I don't have some type of advance copy. 

I should have searched before I asked.  Apparently the reason that I remember it being dispellable is because it always was.   I found this:

@David Scott  posts a comparison of the RQ2, RQ3, and RQ:G text for Warding.  Relevant part from RQ2:

"The Warding spell lasts until the wands are removed and any attempt to remove the wands by anyone other than the caster will trigger the defenses. It can also be dispelled with the appropriate strength of Dispel Magic. "

In my copy of Red Book of Magic, it is no longer even an enchantment.  It iust "Ritual, Stackable".   

I think you can dispel it. 

Why can't the Warding be dispelled?  I have always understood that for a permanent change to the world you have to use POW to fuel the enchantment.  Yet we have always played Warding like a regular Rune spell, using Rune points. 

I can't find in the rules why it cannot be dispelled, unless it was intended to be fueled with sacrifice of POW, like other enchantments????  Help a brother out here - -I even found an exception to Warding (by name!) under Detect Trap.  But nada under Dispel. 

Should this be a permanent POW loss spell, and therefore undispellable? 

12 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I'm not sure how you meant that, but ... Philosopher is the occupation that gives sorcery, and LM is the only cult that clearly specifies it. 

Just literally.  The player rolled up the occupation "Philosopher", and chose the cult of Lhankor Mhy. 

12 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Your players can't do that? 

None of them even own the rule book! 

23 minutes ago, Runeblogger said:

A further question regarding Warding: would you say that you could circunvent it by teleporting into it?

I would totally allow that.

57 minutes ago, soltakss said:

I have always played it that it hits you when you cross the boundaries, either way.

So, yes, if you have a long, thin Warding you can be hit twice by crossing it. Even better if you fall over and hit it on the way down again.

☝️

We have always played the same.  Warding is the ultimate defensive spell, if you have the time to set it up and conceal it.  It is also a primary target for Dismiss and Dispel magics.  If the enemy doesn't have those with sufficient power, they had better have a way around, or they are not going to have a good time.

4 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

So, the problem wasn't the rules themselves, but in sticking merely with that list only... And given there are rules for creating new spells, I have to presume that was the intention.

Yep, it says right on p. 390:  "This section lists and describes a sample of spells that might be known by sorcerers in the Dragon Pass area."    If one of my players was keen on sorcery, that's what I would have to be doing right now . The sole sorcery users is the Lhankhor Mhy philosopher, and he treats them merely as adjunct abilities that he happens to know.  I believe all of his casts so far have been with minimum intensity, range, and duration, for example.  Also spirit magic keeps encroaching on this ability to do otherwise.  It has clearly won out in the struggle for free INT.

So luckily that's off my plate and I can wait for the "Glorantha vision of a sorcerer".  It might a lot of the Glorantha vision of a Dwarf in that it is very thematic, but not appealing to game by most.  But that's okay.   They shouldn't all be Gimli and Gandalf (or more likely from long time players of other fantasy games -- Tim).

I took a harder look today at the Sorcery rules in RQ:G.   My idea was to make a hypothetical Ethilristian support sorcerer of the type I had posted about above.   This meant to me Death and Darkness runes to start, with apparently Summon and Dispel techniques. 

VERY quickly I was forced to give the sorcery rules an INCOMPLETE grade.  There are only two Darkness spells in the book, and one of them is actually Cold based.  Given Sir Ethilrist's association with Darkness this just wouldn't do.  I could make a good buffer style character, with some incidental weapon and lore skills that would be a good party member, but certainly not a sorcerer dealing with darkness. 

Ultimately we still haven't seen this editions sorcery rules, is my take.  I do still expect a tremendous thirst for POW, magic points, and Intelligence.  And a definitely Ars Magica style of play.

Just because sorcery is poorly suited to the rigors of a fast paced melee combat doesn't make it a "fail".    It certainly may not be your cup of tea but as a GM I have to be careful of a well played sorcerer because of how they can dramatically raise the overall power level of a party.  5 Warrior types, add one more  = 6 Warriors.  5 Warriors and add one sorcerer willing to work the rules = the power of 10 warriors.  And that's to start. 

Example:  Boon of Kargan Tor Intensity 1 gives +1d3 damage.  A newbie sorcerer with 13 free INT can cast that for a week.  Since a sorcerer can meditate to temporarily "forget" a spell to free up Free INT for situations like this, and can easily work with low skill values through boosted skills and repeated attempts, he is amazing buffer right out of the box.  In a week he can prepare a party of himself and up to six other adventurers for a very solid new party adventuring run.   There also isn't a stacking conflict with spirit magic, so if the newbie party warriors want to, they can boost themselves further with say, Bladesharp 2.  This is party altering.  That extra +1d3 may not sound like much, but it is extremely common to wound something within 2 points of the location being reduced to zero, and this single spell will push the warriors over the edge very consistently.   The sorcerer may be a total novice, but he has done his job, and can now focus on experience checks, pow gain rolls, role playing, not getting murdered hanging out with his crazy fighter type buddies.   And Dampen Damage can turn that Poleaxe wielding Troll berserker into a minimum damage hitting puff ball without even overcoming POW.    That requires intensity 4 by the way, and can be done at range.   There are some extremely good spells even in the core book.  What is lacking are spells that blast the opponent.  Honestly, quite a few Rune Cults lack these too, or they have them, but they are extremely Rune Point intensive.  Ever try to Lighting down a giant?  That takes a LOT of Rune points to pull off.  However we are mostly talking about combat here, and there are definitely sorcery spells that will tremendously swing a combat.

And unlike what a Shaman can bring to the table (which is also immense), the sorcerer can scale with time in grade.

After some adventures our novice sorcerer now has a spirit in a crystal, and a 17 POW.  He has made a 4 point matrix, and can afford to boost his group's primary melee weapon to +1d6 damage, and now for 2 weeks.  Later on, if he focuses magic energy on this, he can go with +1d6 for multiple seasons, or even +1d3 for multiple years.  No other magic type can pull that off, and there is a very reasonable case for a skilled sorcerer of this type being pretty popular with warrior cultures.  There is also the option of a short term +2d6 boost in the case something really nasty comes along.  Nothing like a Great Axe wielding Storm Bull berserk doing 2d6+2+1d6(strength)+2d6(Boon)+4(bladesharp).  This is the sort of thing my experienced group does all the time and it tears through lots of bad situations. 

I envision this sort of warrior buffing being something that Sir Ethilrist's Black horse troop is benefiting from, with the magic points coming out of the wyter, and the sorcerer only having to gain the POW to enchant up his focus item. 

Now in actual combat, a RQ:G core rules sorcerer is clearly pretty "meh" once the fight starts.  The spells likely have to be juggled frequently to keep free INT high enough to cast a meaningful spell at all in fact.   There may be periods where the sorcerer declares that he needs to meditate.....for hours......to pull out some knowledge based spell while in the middle of a vampire infested cavern.  But that might be okay, as what a sorcerer can do with a party of beefy friends is very much something that a GM has to keep in mind, lest it start to seriously snowball.  

Although a lot has changed from RQ3, I expect the same sort of long term, slow burn, strategic play style from a RQ:G sorcerer that is definitely different than a "fireball" type wizard.  Much more of a Gandalf the Grey planner type, who has cast mild boosting spells on the fellowship, and now draws his sword if he must fight.  Outside the mechanical aspects, there are also role playing considerations, and this being Glorantha, it is a good thing that a sorcerer requires a different mindset to play.   And just when the players settle into that -- Heroquest time.  Since I plan to use Heroquests to grant rule breaking boosts or abilities, a sorcerer might be the one who benefits most of all.

Honestly I was very bummed way back in the day when the Heroquest rules were promised, but not delivered.  That was the heydey of my Runequesting, and I ran multiple long running campaigns with different (and overlapping) groups of people.   We had some very good times and pleasantly passed a lot of impoverished youth or just sleepy small town days with this wonderful hobby. 

As the campaigns went on, I had to make up my own stuff as I went along for "Heroquests".  At first I didn't even have the concept of "performing the Lightbringers Quest", or punching through to the Gods Plane, or such things.  I took my cues from Greek Mythology or snippets from Wyrms Footnotes (thank you Sir Ethilrist!)  Without clans performing big ceremonies, most things were quite literally travel adventures.  The players had to actually find a hole to the Underworld and travel there, often climbing down hundreds of miles of caverns, gradually breaching the magical barriers.  Or they would go to troll lands, have a bunch of Trollpak adventures, and if they passed the tests they were allowed "all the way down".  Things like that. 

So for me, originally, Heroquests were very long, dangerous adventures to exotic locations with semi-worldly, or otherworldly inhabitants.  For those of you who played old school D&D it would be much like running the Giant modules, and then the Drow Modules, to culminate in a other-Planar adventure taking on Lolth in her home plane.  Heady stuff!

But to make it even more Gloranthan, I found it had to be personal.  By which I mean personally transformative.  Often the characters most impacted by the event would never play the same way again.  They would be freed of some limitation, or be strengthened in some way that was far more than would be gained by normal play, no matter how many skill checks and POW gain rolls were made.  The characters would emerge changed.

To my surprise, the players were equally as transformed by these epic adventures "far from the fields that we know".   Often they would go into the big adventure a fairly passive, reactive type, accepting whatever the adventure of the week would be, and trudging along like a good hero should from quest to quest.  After some of these big marathon sessions, they would often have a serious eye-opening moment "you can do that in this game????" and would start interacting with the world much more actively. They might take on roles as Rebel leaders, or try to toss Halcyon Var Encorth (sorcerer version) off of Griffin Isle.  They might dare to challenge the Gods themselves for their community's right to live.   All of these my players have done, but only after one or more very epic quests.   I think they would mostly be called "This World Heroquests" nowadays, but there were definitely some extra-planar hijinks in there. 

It doesn't have to be super high powered either.  My favorite one to this day was when one player joined the Zarings and initiated, as an adult into their ways.  He had to survive a winter in the wilderness armed only with a dagger.  We played the whole thing out, with him struggling to craft javelins, devise small traps, craft leather, survival for lean-to type shelters, the works.  His sheet was covered in experience checks constantly.  Wolves treed him, but he learned he could swing from vines and run on branches, escaping them like a squirrel.  His character toughened up and became so talented that when Orks found one of the hated Vikings and tried to hunt him down, he deftly out maneuvered them, Jungle Book style, ambushed them with stealth and Javelin skill, and finished the captain off in heroic melee, wielding a wood and obsidian sword he had crafted himself, with only his own leather gear and dodge skill to defend him.  After taking the Orks metal gear, bows and arrows, the rest of the winter was a snap.  However the character had been massively transformed, and the player was hooked on the game system in a massive way.  This was his third adventure. 

So that's what I want from a Heroquest.  So I understand how hard it is to make rules for this sort of thing.  By its very nature it is personal, hard to easily convey the necessary impact of the event, and tough to peg the risks and the rewards too. 

I don't want a by-the-numbers "how to perform the Lightbringers Quest every time you think it might help.  The Dragon Pass and Six Ages games suffer a little of that, honestly.  You cross to the other side a LOT.  Then again, I was utterly unware that the idea was to retrace the footsteps of the Gods.  In my campaigns, you were always carving your own path, so the accomplishment was never dimmed because someone else had done it first (even if they were divine).   The rewards I gave were always things unattainable in normal game play.  Increased stats, minimum skill success raised to 40% (that one was amazingly abused by the player who took it), sometimes an item, but typically magic items were not glued to the hero's sides in my campaigns.  They were more like one time solutions for a specific problem, and then the Rune Masters went back to "normal" Iron gear.  The rewards made the characters personally better.  One guy got the Ki critical skill from the Nihon rules, and was pretty happy with that.   These days I would even root the reward even more in the role playing, like always a positive encounter with <Elder Race> as a reward.  That type thing. 

End of the day, when the players do something like Heroquesting, I want it to spark wonder and mystery and even fear.    The character should be changed at the end of the adventure -- possibly strengthened, possibly massive weakened as they pay a great price for failure/success.  And the player should be inspired as well.  I want them to really feel it, and see at the end that they have really accomplished something important.  It is tough to make rules for these sorts of thing.  It is equally tough to do without rules for these sorts of things, and a lot of it really is in the hands of the GM and the players, ultimately.  That said, I LOVE the two published Heroquest adventures in the Death of Orlanth era.  Still a bit scripted, but I would totally like more of that please.

I am not opposed to the mechanic at all.   A young, talented sorcerer can cast more than an older, settled magus........IF he has left his magical enchantments behind.  A magic ring, or other jewelry of power is a classic trope.  Thoth-Amon had a heavy reliance on his magic ring, and only once he recovered it could he challenge Conan. 

On the other hand in another Conan story -- I think this one written by a secondary author, there is a wizard's apprentice who abandons his master and rapidly grows in power "bursting doors, leaping from hill top to hill top" with his lover.  The wizard sends a magical hit squad after the apprentice because while he presently is no threat, he fears what may become. 

So it works "well enough".   The upshot is to make the sorcerer just like the Shaman, and the Priest -- utterly dependent on the resource of POW. 

Some sorcerers are just going to be better than others, and that's okay.    Work on your other skills and you will still wind up with a better overall character. 

Some say bloat.  Some say quirky charm.   If the game was streamlined to make everything and everybody equal, it would be astonishingly boring.  Also, this is a RPG, not a computer game.  Balance is neither necessary, nor appropriate, nor possible. 

My Yelmalio player attends every meeting, actively role plays at every opportunity, takes "good" risks during the game and winds up rewarded with the Spear of Sunshine.  He is now the butt-kicking bad@$$ of the party. 

My Humakt player attends most of the meetings, plays very risk averse, avoids dangerous things like heroquesting, and relies mainly on the power of the cult Runespells to be "powerful". 

(Note: Not real players, just examples)

Where is the balance here?  What does that mean in the context of the night of gaming?  Can the Humakt player slay more things than the very successful Yelmalio player?  Quite possibly, but not necessarily.  How do they stack up against the trickster player with Puppeteer troupe powers?  How do you measure that -- some meetings are completely free of combat.  Others may be skullduggery, cloak and dagger missions.  How does the glowing Yelmalian player deal with that -- is it imbalance? or a fun and likely comedic evening of roleplaying?  Clearly the trickster player will "have an advantage" in this specific situation, but what will she do -- steal it straight or subvert the mission at the expense of the other players?   How does her power in this sort of scenario "balance" against raw hack and slashery?

Some campaigns have a natural slant towards one type of gaming mechanic.  Combat is very popular because it is exciting. Everyone loves a good action movie.  RPG's are the same way.  But too much hacking and slashing makes Johnny a dull boy, and once out of pure combat the "balance" is totally lost.  Which is good, because balance is really only a good concept for multiplayer video games, or competitive board games. 

Some of my players' most powerful characters were some of the crappiest (objectively speaking) roll ups, but were played well, and went from zero to hero.   One of my closer friends (sadly now passed) specialized in doing this, and looked for oddball character concepts to champion.   Anything he played would be actively improved as he went, while many other players just sort of passively waited for rewards from the adventure.  His characters always wound up better in the end, the longer the campaign went, the more pronounced this was.

Balance is an illusion.

Ah yes.  A bit of a mixed bag on which would be considered more powerful by a random player.  Certainly the Griffin Island one was a campaign changer.  (But in a much lower magic environment, so it was like finding Excalibur).  In Glorantha, especially at the power levels of RQ:G, that seems to lose some of the impact of a "fabled weapon forged to fight chaos".   I mean, which chaos exactly?   Some random young spawn broos without access to (non-chaotic) magic or metal?  Sure.   Ralzakark and the horrors of Dorastor?  Maybe not quite enough to tip your Rune Lord over the top there chief. 

The Windsword was Bladesharp 10, was it not?  Somebody learned that somewhere. 

More spells are needed. 

Right now the basics of hand to hand combat are mostly covered, but there are a lot of neat effects that could be added.  The idea that you get spells in Runequest to make your crops bloom and bear extra food, or can cause vines to grow into a useful shape like a bridge, boundry between feuding neighbors, or even an impromptu cattle pen is very Gloranthan.    We don't actually have enough of that just now, with ceremonies, wyters, and powerful spirits filling in those types of effects. 

Are half the spells just copies?  There are some that very similar, truesword, trueaxe, etc.  But those seem a lot fewer than half.

Good find.  I recently had to sort out how to handle this as my PC's steered two War clans into conflict with each other.    As a preamble, the Two Pine wyter magics were restored by the PC's restoring the seven tributes, one at a heroic time.   Along the way three large scale conficts (for clan warfare) occurred.  The first one saw the Emerald Sword use their Wyter, while the Two Pine were still trying to get all of their tributes together, giving them a big magical edge.  However they were outnumbered by the  Two Pine and Red Cow alliance.  Here I ruled that the Wyter gave the Emerald Sword Bladesharp 4, Protection 2, and unending stamina (immune to fatigue) to all Emerald Sword fighters, so long as the battle line held.   Pretty basic, but it is a clan Wyter of a fairly small clan, so there you go.

The second time the two groups were on collision course the Lunars intervened and enforced the peace.  After three days of negotiating both sides decided that a duel between clan champions would settle the matter.  However the Lunars substituted a ringer of the Yanafal Tarnils variety and he out magicked (Full Moon) and then hacked down the Two Pine Humakt champion, dealing the PC's efforts in the region both a tactical and a strategic set back.

The third time the Players finally got to see the Two Pine wyter effect that they had worked so hard to restore.  It was the great Telmori war and it was Wildsday.  Again fudging things, and deciding that it was a primarily Humakt powered totem originally intended to help fight Telmori , I went with Bladesharp 6, and Countermagic 2 to all members of the Shield Wall -- but not the support priests nor the skirmishers.  Humakt despises them.   In hindsight I might have gone with spirit screen as the Telmori make strong use of shamans, but since the Telmori are presented as being very strong in spirit magic in my campaign, Countermagic works too.   I considered having it cause all the bronze to act as enchanted metal, but that seemed too focused, and useless in every regard other than fighting Telmori. 

This is warfare with up to hundreds on each side -- small potatoes war.  Larger, more magically military units, Tribal Wyters (of a war like tribe), I would start to dip into Rune magic, act as a source of shared magic points, or more likely some type of "outside the rules" magic.  The Lasdag Lions have their wyter that keeps lookout on the march, and can turn into an actual Lion during battle.  Something like that, but thematically appropriate to the clan/tribe/unit, would be much better than just "everyone gets X spell". 

Now that this is a thing, I am definitely going to consider what the unit magic(s) should be in military conflict.  Especially for the more elite units of the Lunar Empire. 

3 hours ago, soltakss said:

That doesn't mean that you bought it. You could have just seen the Table of Contents somewhere!

Rest assured.  I bought it. 

4 hours ago, soltakss said:

In that case, may I recommend the Electrum-selling Secrets of HeroQuesting, a summary of my nearly 40 years of Gloranthan HeroQuesting?

?  You reacted to my post mentioning that very book, and even citing which page the Hero Soul rules were on.  😄

8 hours ago, soltakss said:

Exactly, I'd much rather wait for the official rules that build something based on conversations in a gaming session.

That ship sailed in the 80's.  My campaign is right now, and I would like to make the first Heroquest as memorable as possible.

Credit where credit is due.  The Jonstown Compendium "Secrets of HeroQuesting" does have the Hero Soul in it (p. 65) along with some nice (but loose) mechanics for it. 

Since my crew are gearing up for their first heroquest (the Eleven Lights!) I'm busy reviewing published options and weighing how I want to handle the situation.  It will be my first GM'd heroquest in decades, and since there is a new edition, and totally new players this is an important precedent.  (None of them will even be aware that there aren't official rules for this. They think from my stack of books that RQ has rules and lore for every possible situation). 

Right now I am strongly leaning towards the awakened Hero Soul mechanic from the Secrets of HeroQuesting, with a bonus for each player based on their role, and if they can survive the experience.  This would be in addition to the point of the Heroquest in the first place.   My general philosophy is that you can't do these sorts of things and remain unchanged.  You are either strengthened.....or lessened.

Looking forward to them!

7 hours ago, MOB said:

Unless the god chooses you. There are plenty of unknowing/unwitting/accidental Chosen Ones in literature and mythology, after all.

That is a fantastic plot arc!

I would think that this is very possible in a holy site to that deity.  Maybe on the hill of Orlanth Victorious a mighty thunderstorm sweeps through and lighting strikes a nearby tree.  Moved by the event, the person in question dedicates him or herself on the spot. 

Then comes a long journey learning the mysteries of the Thunderer, but that is another tale.