creativehum

Hi David, Thanks for the answer. If you don't mind, I'm still digging in on this. I understand that if all the PCs are not from the same clan it isn't relevant. (For the record, I'm planning on starting a game with everyone in the same clan.) I also understand that a small portion of the Clan Generator might overlap with the RQG Character History section, but that is an easy enough matter to deal with. (In fact, I'm probably setting the start of my campaign in 1580. I'm really interested in the question, "Do you get involved in the troubles of the world if they are still far away?" So I'll be rebuilding the Character History section anyway.) So, when you say the Clan Generator (and I'm assuming we're talking about the clan generator found in Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes as well, yes?) is not compatible with RQG do mean on a mechanical level? Or that the historical elements are off? The value for the Clan generator were two-fold for me: It brought the mythical, strange history of Glorantha right to the players in a direct manner, allowing them to interact with it through the choices and questions rather than me simply narrating a bunch of information at them. It also gave me clues about the kinds of things they, as Players, might be interested in -- which gods, which enemies, and so on. By listening to their answers, I can find enemies, goals, and conflicts to place before them that they've told me will hook them. So, as a tool for play I see the value. But I'm curious if there's anything in the historical record of the questionnaire that will bump against more recent material. Thanks again for your response.

Why do you suggest ignoring the clan generation? (I ask because I found it really fun when I set up a game years ago. I also understand it is up to me to use or not use. But I'm curious what David thinks about this.)

you know what this place is too much work

A couple of thoughts of duel wielding being the default: First the rules say a trainer must be found, at the discretion of the Referee. So, if the Referee says a trainer isn't yet available to the PCs, then the PCs will not be starting as duel-wielding combatants. Then the PCs, if they want this ability, have to seek out a trainer, and get him to take them on as students. (I'm seeing some effort (if not adventures) in this.) Second, the PCs will have to raise their off-hand skill starting at 5% (with Manipulation modifier). This means that training up will be a slog. Apart from downtime/seasonal training the character will have to spend time attacking and parrying with a low chance of success. For a few fights. This means, if I'm reading the rules right (new to RQ) lots of broken weapons and incoming blows with extra damage from opponents. It is for this reason I think there are very few duel-weapon trainers. It's hard to get good at it... and risky to try to get good at it. So while becoming a skilled duel-wielder will undoubtedly be a good thing to become, getting there is going to both take time and be risky... if the PCs are even able to begin training toward this goal at all.

The answer was actually a question asking me if I already knew the answer to the question, assuming for some reason I knew the answer. Strangely, I did not already know the answer to the question I had asked. I wasn't referring to the speed of the reply.

I hear you. And I said much the same a week or two ago. But one of my approaches these days is to meet a game on its own terms and see if it has an approach or something to offer I might not have thought of on my own. "If RQG has a lot of results that leave a conflict unresolved," I ask myself, "what might that do for me? How would I referee that? How should I approach that to make that work?"

I presume not, since Dodge is an option in place of a parry, and if you can't parry you can't dodge? (I'm inferring and guessing here, but that's what I came up with.)

Hi @Jason Durall Thanks for the above. This might have been answered in a revised PDF, but I haven't downloaded yet. If I'm wielding a weapon in each hand, can I attack and parry with that weapon in a given round? (Which I can do if I'm fighting with only one weapon.) Or was the text in the first PDF correct that I must choose to either attack or parry with a given weapon if I have a weapon in each hand? Thanks!

Exactly.

Note that in my example the guard is not moving off to continue his patrol. The Orlanthi is not safe yet because the guard is aware of something and the situation is continuing. I never assumed the guard was wandering off. That would, as you say, make it clear the Orlanthi had one the Opposed Roll. And he hasn't yet. I would consider this a perfectly reasonable way of reading the situation. So I want to be clear, I don't think I'm really disagreeing or arguing with you. Ultimately, though, all of this is going to come down to the situation. Not the situation anyone on this board might type up in a few sentences, but an actual, in-play situation, full of details that three to eight people sitting around a table might be holding in the heads, full of details that were just mentioned at the table, as well as details that might have been mentioned eight weeks of play earlier that suddenly seem relevant. The value of the Opposed Roll tie is that it begs everyone at the table to add more content as the screws tighten, things could get worse, and the situation is still teetering at the edge of resolution. Again, I don't see the matter as a stalemate. The key word is "unresolved." There is a situation, it is ongoing, and since there was already tension of one kind or another (why else have a roll?) the fact that it is extending means things can get worse. Which is grist for the adventure mill and in my view awesome.

For me, in the race example, a Tie means simply the race is not yet resolved. I think the "yet" part is a really important part how I am interpreting and using the rules. Instead of the Conflict ending in a Tie, I assume the tie is ongoing. So if Opposed rolls are made for a race and we get a Tie, instead of showing what happens at the finish line (which would be the resolution of the event) we actually zoom in somewhere along the race, where we see (and describe) the competitors neck and neck, or giving ground and losing ground back and forth. The race is ongoing, we see what the situation is, and then determine if any new details are added to the conflict: Does the governor who has money on the NPC tell a magician to juice his man so he can win? Does the PC cast magic to improve his odds? Does the fact that the PC is losing to this man, and thus perhaps putting his city or clan at risk, provoke him to roll a Passion because he must win? What I'm seeing in all the examples I've been running in my head is that while the combat system of RQ is quite precise in terms of inputs and outputs, Opposed Rolls with temporarily unresolved conflicts are invitation to add more details to the station as inspired by the situation and the results of the roll.

Not speaking for Jason, but I've come to my own understanding on this. The text in book says a Tie result "means the situation is temporarily unresolved." It doesn't mean the actions of the charters are "tied" -- simply the die rolls. If "the situation is temporarily unresolved" it means simply the situation is ongoing. Let's assume the Spot vs. Hide is one guard looking in the Lunar Captain's 's chamber for a Orlanthi scoundrel. In this case a tie means the hidden character may still yet be discovered, and the character searching has no yet noticed anything out of place but still might. In addition to the details Jason mentioned, it means that any other details in the fiction continue to press on the characters. If more guards were called to help in the search then they will be arriving soon... and the Orlanthi does not have a chance to escape unnoticed since the still searching guard is blocking his escape. This means, in the next round, the Orlanthi could try to hide even better, or he might try to break for it before the additional guards arrive, and so on. The key for me is to assume my job as a Referee is to keep other events and pressures impinging on an unresolved situation, increasing the stakes the longer it goes on. When it comes to Two Losers we have: "Neither party achieves their intended goal." This means that the Orlanthi failed to remain hidden (he makes a noise, alerting the guard, and must somehow reach a new place of safety) and the Guard failed to find him (so he's still searching, but now much more alert). Or I'm assuming that this means the Guard wanders off and someone else finds the Orlanthi. There are countless possibilities. The key (for me at least) is to add in, "Okay, what interesting new details can be added to the situation to make the next roll or decision fresh."

No. But now I am. How hard is it for people to answer questions around here? Is it something in the drinking water? And thank you for the link to the errata. As one might guess, it was exactly what I was looking for.

Thanks for the reply. And for anyone: Leaving aside any corrections from RQG, were there any fixes made to the PDF that were not made to the printed version? Is there a list of the typos to the printed version anywhere?

Out of curiosity: I know the PDF was updated with corrections. For the printed version: Did it have corrected versions as well, or only one printing?

To be clear, I posted something like this point on another thread. I know I've gotten caught up in someone worrying about something not making sense in RQG only to find out it was explained elsewhere in the rules. My goal right now is to shut the fuck up and finish reading the book before getting caught up in any more discussions.

Also: The way the different categories of Runes are applied and work in different ways, so there sense of the categories being more than a label but a real difference between categories. Really, really smart stuff.

Yeah, some part of my brain thought... "What if I was Jason...?" "Oh, shit!" So, yeah. Bravo. I got to the first pages of the Runes chapter last night. Runes for Inspiration! Runes for Personality! Conflicting Runes! Runes for Personality Disputes! This stuff is gold! As King Arthur Pendragon is one of my favorite RPGs ever you can imagine my delight. But it isn't simply tacked on. It brings the runic energy of Glorantha as a living force in all creatures right to the forefront of both the setting and the rules! I was so excited about this stuff. Thanks!

Dude. It's all good. And edited to add: So do I.

I know I've been pushing hard against the text of the new book. I know I've been asking a lot of questions. I know sometimes my own frustration has made me phrase things in ways that don't make me happy -- and those phrasings can't be sugar whispers to the ears of everyone who worked on this new book and this new line of an RPG classic. So I wanted to make something clear: I know how hard you guys have worked on this game. I know how hard you worked on this book. I know how hard it is to write RPG text. (Like, really, I know.) You have produced a new version of a game that has existed since the start of the hobby. And has gone through a half-dozen variations over those four decades. You've obviously put a lot of work and love into the book and the plans for the line. If there is frustration in my posts on occasion (and I suspect this might be true for others as well) it is because I sense there is a lot lot joy and wonder in these pages and there is a lot of work on my part to pull it out. I want to make sure to get what everyone else is talking about, and has been talking about for years. I want to get all the terrific details and magic and culture resting in the book and waiting for me to bring them to my friends. And if I have desire to do this it is only because the game system is rich, the setting is rich, and you have built a book that brings both of these things closer together than they ever have in any previous edition of RuneQuest. So, I want you to know I appreciate all the work. I appreciate all the effort you are making now to get the game released in print, to answer our question, to ponder our questions, and work diligently to make the best game and game line you can. Wanted to say that. Thanks.