creativehum

Hello, This is off-topic, but could you defined the differences between these two concepts for me. In my head they blurred over the years to be the same thing. But clearly they are different.

In HeroQuest: Glorantha the text for the consequences of defeat (p.64) and the benefits of victory (p. 69) that these modifiers apply only to the Player Characters ("the heroes"). This makes perfect sense, as it seems like it would prevent the Referee from having to track additional modifiers for his NPCs. Moreover, the values of the NPCs/Obstacles are whatever the Referee wants, and are of value in that they are relative to the abilities of the PCs. They can be fixed as long as we're tracking the bonuses and penalties of the PCs. This is probably obvious to everyone else. But I wanted to check.

To pick up on Baroque's first post.... Let's say I'm using the HQ system in the setting of Shadowrun. The team is making a run on a well secured data centers. If I understand what people are saying, one could make one Roll to determine if the team gets into the center. If the team fails, then they can't try again. The failure means the Referee describes the events of the raid in such a manner that it's clear the team is having to high tail it out, and they simply have failed to get in. Am I getting this right? On the other hand, an example with a series of chained tests. I'm not saying this is what the rules say, but I began imaging how such a raid using the HQ might play out and it seems viable: The team needs to get past the external security measures around the data center. The Street Samurai rushes a position of Lone Star guards. We make one role, determine the result, and then narrate the fictional results based off that range of mechanics. He gets Marginal Defeat. Let's assume for the moment that our focus here isn't that he gets hit and takes damage, but the tactical position he wanted by storming the Lone Star guards is not only lost but turned around. He ran for the guards, trying to get there before they could react, but they raised their weapons and started firing. We narrate that he ducked behind some crates. Not only did he fail to get to the guards and take them out, he's pinned down behind the crates with a -3 penalty for any actions he takes in efforts to advance on the data facility. It's a lingering penalty till he shifts the situation in some way to remove it.The rest of the PCs have yet to act, and we can continue with the PCs taking action, hoping to get lingering benefits as they move forward. But the raid is a series of contests that either move the PCs closer to their goals (along with benefits for better victories) or slow them down or route them (with penalties). I know that we might use the Extended Conflict here. What I'm specifically asking about is using the system as a series of linked Simple Contests to build out a moment-by-moment action sequence using the consequences of defeat and benefits of victory in a compact manner to build a terrific combat sequence. Am I talking crazy talk here? Because it seems to me this could work. Thoughts?

Hi there, There is so much I love about the HeroQuest system, going all the way back to Hero Wars. Yet I find myself confounded sometimes by the assumptions laid out in the game. This isn't a fault of the game. This is me not see, I think, from the same perspective the game works from. So, for the example above, are you saying that if the Player rolls a Marginal Victory for his player the player (or the Referee) describes how the character grabs the far edge, and then scrabbles to pull himself up as the rim of the pit crumbles? That there is no second roll made to resolve the issue of not having made it safely across, and that, it is exactly like any other victory but that the Player or Referee adds some additional description to justify the Marginal quality of the roll? I think this is what you are saying. But I want to make sure.

Hmmmm... I have a feeling Jenx, jajagappa and I are pretty much on the same page and that I might not be making myself clear. And so, the following: 1. The portion of HQG that I'm talking about And then, of course, all the passage that follow about the three runes you choose that: "reflects the dominant aspect of your soul" "defines your dominant temperament" "your magical temperament" And then the next section discusses how "Your Runes have a distinct impact on your personality..." So, that's the stuff I was talking about above. 2. There Should be Tension With Behavior Expected of Runes and Gods What Jenx wrote right there, I love that stuff. Characters should go against the expected behavior of Gods and Runes if that's what they want. That sort of stuff is awesome. What I'm not keen on is the stuff from point 1 above. Yes, I understand that one can make a roll against it if one wants to "act in a manner contrary to the Rune." But the point is, it's not just a Rune, it's who you are, as defined in the points listed in 1. In such cases the PC is always acting against himself or herself because the Runes, as described in the character creation section, are innate in the PC and the default. This is different than Traits in Pendragon, in which a Knight is never determined to be one side of the Traits or another, but can move in a fluid manner over to time to have a higher value in either direction. 3. Conflicts of Between Temperaments and Flaws and How the PC Want to Behave are AWESOME Sounds great. I love Distinguishing Characteristics and Flaws as points of conflict in any RPG, and I think they work great in HQG. However... 4. By Not Using the Thing That Rubs Me the Wrong Way, One Avoids Those Things Okay, great. You don't use the things listed in my point 1. Great. We're on the same page. 5. I Have No Trouble with Runes and Gods Expecting Behavior Please note that I am excited and pleased by all the points raised by Jenx and jajagappa in the quotes I have pulled. All I was talking about is how the Character Creation rules dictate choosing three runes out of the gate that determine the character.

Let me be clear: I utterly believe one can justify the Rune As Character as a solid piece of Glorantha logic. As a piece of metaphysics it all makes sense. I'm talking about this in the context of RPG play. In my view, some rules, some settings, some utilization of some settings (and this is what I'm talking about here) are more fruitful for RPG play than others. I like my Players to have choices. They need to have agency. They might well choose to follow the path of Orlanth all the way to the end. But I want them to have the choice to betray the behaviors of Orlanth out of anger, a sense of betrayal, love, whatever. This is how new things happen within the world of Glorantha. Characters switch sides, betray gods, take on new gods, make new, unexpected alliances. It in the myths, it's in the history of people of Glorantha. I bring this up not to argue against all the solid points you brought up above. I'm speaking within the context of RRP play. Those choices that characters made in the stories already written in Glorantha are the kinds of choices I want the Player Characters to have. And I believe that RPG play is better when Players have this sort of agency available for their characters.

I read the design notes blog posts linked earlier, so I suspect so yes. But in reading those I saw references to Pendragon, which is what tipped me off as to why they had been rubbing me the wrong about about the "fated personality" aspects of Runes introduced in HQG--such a mechanic is the opposite of how Pendragon Traits work. I understand this will be the way Runes are introduced to new Players (via Character Creation). I just think It's too heavy a burden for some players to have to decide everything about their characters at the start (some players aren't like that) I think it robs the sense of discovery and drama in terms of choices for their characters. With Runes stamped upon a PCs soul like that, one is told, "This is who you are," which precludes the discovery of "Who will this character become?"

Again, thank you for the thoughtful and informative replies. Here's where my thinking is on a few things: First, I made the same mistake about the use of "initiation" in HQG that this poster did from a thread from 2012. i assumed that being initiated with Runes meant one was initiated with Rune magic (that is, into a cult). But apparently these two things are different. So that's on me. But this thread helped me dig down further and I sorted it out. Second, I do think, even in the Glorantha material as presented, there is a distinction "the every day world" which is relatively mundane and the higher magic available to certain people in Glorantha. I say this knowing that there is everyday magic all the time from farmers and housewives and such. But we know that once upon a time there was no seperation between man and gods... and then Time began and all that changed. We know that in the Middle World can only tap the powers of higher magic through rituals, HeroQuests, and Runes. Other than that... no dice. And so, to my point, I want to make sure that distinction holds. But this point is on surer footing since I can to understand how I had made my mistake about initiations. Third, with all that in mind, I have an answer to the question from my first post: "Are the runes PCs start with in HQ:G the same runes that PCs once sought out in RQ? That is, do the PCs start with what they once had to work to get? Am I understanding this correctly?" The answer, in terms of pure fiction, "Yes, sure." In a practical sense for RPG play, the answer is "No." The Runes one starts with in HQG are about one's soul and temperament and can be used to Augment mundane Traits. The Runes one gets by Initiating into a cult (as one got them in RQ) allow all sorts of other abilities and powers. (Even if the lists of benefits is short and incomplete in the text of RQ, those magical benefits and Rune magic are still there.) Fourth, to be clear, this is the text I was referring to when I spoke about acquiring Runes in RQ: I like this section from HQ because I think it frame things nicely for an RPG experience. I understand Glorantha is bigger than this (and has become bigger since the publication of HQ2. But I think there's a real value in having, for new players to a game (and new players to a detailed world) a handlebar or two to grab onto. And those paragraphs provide it. Note that nothing in the quote above contradicts anything in HQG. The quote is simply an arrow for the focus of ambition and action in early play. How one choose to become so proficient as to attract the attention of high priests, sages, and gods is completely up to the players, of course. But at least the player know they're going to be working, in the early stages, toward getting themselves initiated and being blessed with the runes that come from that to increase their power and become very important indeed. Six, I realized one of the reasons I went down this road is because I'm not that crazy about the "defining personality with Runes" thing. I really love the need to behave in alignment with the god's expectations as an initiate. I prefer, however, that there might be tension between who a character is and the god he has sworn to serve. Notice that in Pendragon Traits don't dictated behavior. (Not, at least, if you're playing the game right.) But in the system in HQG what your runes are, and hence your behaviors, are who you are--in your very soul. These runes of initiation into adulthood define and limit behaviors. I know some people like this. But it isn't more me. Watching a character bend toward his or her god over time in an effort to remain loyal, or watching a character finally snap in frustration at his or her own shortcoming is something I'd love to see. But that'll be hard if the PCs soul is, by definition, already in alignment with the god's runes. (I understand that one or two of the PCs runes might cause trouble for an initiate if they mismatch with the cult the PC joins. But no matter what, the Runes are there to nail down and define the PCs innate personality and soul. It strikes me (and probably only me) as too much of a stick, lacking the leeway found, again, for example, in Pendragon. Seven, which finally ties all my questions together: I like the idea of the Players coming to understand how the gods, runes, and cults interact and having dreams of gaining the attention of the cults and gods, behaving of their own volition and effort, to act certain ways, add traits if need be, cement them, and so on. As Jenx points out, there is the fictional world of Glorantha and then there is the RPG interpretation of Glorantha. How one organizes the RPG experience can help or hinder the ability of Players to learn the rules, understand the setting, and so on. As a Narrator, I love the idea of letting the Players have some time to get their feet wet, come to an understanding of the rules and setting, and make plans based on those understandings. For me, initiating into adulthood within the Storm Pantheon would be amazing... but I'd let them sort out what sort of person their character is as they go. Again, that's me. Not try to get anyone to buy into it. But this thread has helped me see how this all fits together and how to make it work for the game I'd like to run. Thanks!

I find this fascinating. I haven't read any other RQ books but the core rulebook (so I have not ready Cults of Prax an Cults of Terror). And you're saying that the list of gods in the core Hero Wars rulebook (which was the first Glorantha book I ever read) has more gods than were listed in the RQ product line? This makes sense, I guess, as there were many gods! Even more when you add in Thunder Rebels! (That's why, when I cracked open HQG, my reaction was, "Wow, this book is light on gods!") But one of my concerns is overwhelming players with too many choices and too much to do out of the gate. As a big fan of King Arthur Pendragon going years back, I always found that first session of getting knighted on the first adventure a big deal for the Players. It drew them into the world and made them feel as they were part of the culture and events through their own action and experience. And, as you note, the HQG rules explicitly state that starting before initiation is possible. I have found that some players don't know their character right away, and need a session or two to find out who they are and how they relate to the people and the world around them. I'd be inclined to do the "create-as-you-go" for their Rune temperaments through the choice of Rune Keywords as play occurs. Finally, with the concerns of "too many choices" in mind (my concern, maybe the concern of no one else!), one of the things I liked about HW was the use of lists for the Affinities. While I love (love) HQ's flexible nature to handle any inputs and creative possibilities for conflict and action taken on the part of the Players via their characters, there's something to be said for structure and limits. The lists of affinities in HW are a clear list that say, "Here are the kinds of things that are associated with this god. This god is like this, and grants this kind of magic." Thus, the Players can see clearly the potential of a god's affinities and the nature of the god itself. They might be considered training wheels at first, with a looser set of interpretations based on them later. But I do think, for a group new to Glotrantha, such limitations are helpful.

I just checked the HW book. Each god is listed separately, and under each god the god's Affinities are separated into groups with the icon of the group's respective Rune icon. (Feats have no Rune associated with them.) I haven't compared the lists of Feats and Runes in HW:G and no idea if the affinities and runes match the lists in HW:G. I'll add that there is a solid description of the Runes in the HW book. But it is of course not as detailed as in the later HQ:G books. It may be that I'm reading RQ2 with an unfair hindsight. But while you are correct that acts of initiation are not spelled out, the matter isn't obscure. It seems to me to be a matter of a) the player gathering resources to make his best bid for success into the cult; and the having NPCs offer the opportunity to the PCs. While I appreciate that HQ:G nails this all down concretely in character creation, for reasons stated above I am intrigued with holding that off and making the learning of the mysteries of the runes being something earned through play.

I must have a weird edition of the book. I'm looking at it right now and I see Orlanth Rune spells on page 69, Kyger Litor Rune spells on p. 72, and Black Fang Brotherhood Rune spells on 72. Note that I'm not claiming any kind of comprehensive list of rune magic (clearly not). But it does seem to be there. Can you tell me more about this? I ask because Hero Wars certainly seemed to go into great detail about what Affinities and Feats were available to initiates. I had assumed that to become an initiate of a God was to learn a rune... but perhaps I was wrong about that. Not challenging you. Honestly curious. (Again, each edition lays out different bits of knowledge and ways of expression all things rune!)

By the way... I understand that Glorantha is a place rich in magic--even made of magic. And that everyone having magic is just par for the course. However, after mulling all the material for some years now (and working backward from Hero Wars when I first picked it up), I think I want to slow down the magic and mix some mundane with it. I was just beginning to grok the world when all the more recent Glorantha stuff came out and blew up my growing understanding of the setting. But what I've realized is I really like my original understanding of the setting. Here is my thinking on this: 1. Jumping into the deep waters of the current Runes Come with Character Creation seems to be deep waters indeed for players new to Glorantha. I'd rather they have some time to acclimate themselves to all the in-setting culture, myths, and more before they're worrying about committing to Gods and affinities and such. 2. I like the idea (per what I've read in RQ 2nd and Hero Wars) that the initiation into the cults is a Big Deal that the PCs earn. Yes, there are priests who know this stuff. That it is something to be earned helps with that. It also gives the Players time to sort out what sort of God they want to initiate into after they get a sense of both the world and their character. 3. I like the tension between the mundane and the magical. My instincts tell me that if everyone has this stuff (especially without effort) then it seems less magical. I like the idea of the Gods and the Runes and the Rites being a bit of a mystery and the Players (via their characters) coming to terms with understanding these thing, moving toward them, becoming part of the tales and myth as they come to understand the world through their adventures. The tension makes mundane life matter because it is mundane, and the mythical life matter because it is larger than life. 4. As a Referee I read the chapters on character creation and the use of magic and honestly, perhaps because I haven't been thinking about Glorantha for decades, it makes my head spin. Not because of the great sums of mythical material (that I can handle). But because it seems so chaotic and flying all over the place, with everyone casting so many spells in so many ways. I, too, need some time to get my feet wet. And I think something with a few more rules and limitations will allow me to find my way with both the game and the setting as I introduce both to the players. I understans YGWV, so I'm not sweating any of this stuff. Nor am I trying to convince anyone of anything. Just explaining where this thread came from.

A note: On page 67 of RQ 2nd a section begins called Sample Cults. The examples are limited but the first is Orlanth. The description includes divine aid and magic gained from runes ruled by Orlanth. So I think at least RQ 2nd covered this subject to some degree. While it is true the PCs didn't go hunting runes, the point of the game was to gather resources and power so they could join a cult and get access to the magic gained through the runes associated with that cult. it's set up very much like Hero Wars -- though HW is much more thorough in the list of cults.

Cool! Can you point me toward the design blogs? (And sadly I was busy with other matters last year (hit by a truck -- really) and completely missed the RQ Kickstarter)

Hi! And thanks for the replies. i'm not sure of the above statements are true -- at least as they regard RuneQuest 2nd ed In RQ 2nd once one becomes initiated one has access to runes and those runes give you access to specific magic. (At least that's what I saw when I read the rules this morning.) I think Hero Wars stayed somewhat in line with this thinking. And it was with HQ 2 and the more recent sourcebooks that things changed to give the pcs the rune powers right out of the gate. But I think I'm on track now to building what I want. (A mix of RQ2 and HW where pcs have to gain runes through work and initiation) thank you for the replies!

I was a latecomer to all things Glorantha, so there are things I'm still sorting out. Here is one question I have, which leads to further questions: In RuneQuest the object is to adventure, be noticed, become a Rune Lord or Priest. From what I understand (which might be wrong), PCs did not start with Runes and gathered powers from the Gods with time and effort. In HeroQuest: Glorantha, however, as well as Sartar: Kingdom of Heroes, the PCs start with Runes tattooed on the bodies which bestow magic upon them from the start of play (because the PCs revive them now for reaching adulthood) Questions: 1. Are the runes PCs start with in HQ:G the same runes that PCs once sought out in RQ? That is, do the PCs start with what they once had to work to get? Am I understanding this correctly? 2. If so, why was it changed? 3. How does this play out for people? What are the advantages and disadvantages for each method? 4. Does anyone using the HeroQuest rules and new source books utilize the rune quest logic of earlier editions? Thanks!