simonh

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Haven't seen it yet, but... if she were Jar-Eel, wouldn't that be, "a bunch of soldiers being chased through the woods by a girl" ?

 

SPOILER ALERT

Let's just say that they are chasing her, and then she catches them.

Simon Hibbs

The whole thing is on Youtube. I've not watched all of it yet, but randomly skipped through and happened on the girl being chased through the woods by a bunch of soldiers. Wow! I'd hire her to play Jar-Eel any day.

Simon Hibbs

Plus of course I imagine the sales and popularity of the game and public engagement will need to justify the time and effort spent. We’re very lucky that most of the Nu Chaosium crew are avid Gloranthaphiles, otherwise I doubt RQ would have received the enormous input of time and energy it’s received.

Simon Hibbs

14 hours ago, Jon Hunter said:

I would argue that non of these define Glorantha, ( not even 2nd edition RQ), what the different rules systems and platforms give us are ways of interacting with Glorantha to give us the gaming experience we prefer.

I think there is a belief amongst some that RQ2 defines Glorantha, and they will attempt to create a hard definition of the game world by using those mechanics.

Sure. I think the RQ rules hold a similar relationship to Glorantha that the Call of Cthulhu rules (minus the mythos), GURPS or any other 'realistic' set of RPG rules do to our world.

Guns in the real world dont have precise range bands expressed exactly in metres, any more than bows and slings do in Glorantha, any more than spells and magical effects do in Glorantha. Likewise the initiative system isnt definitive of the nature of time, you cant extrapolate Gloranthan physics from it, nor can you directly and strictly extrapolate how the agricultural economy works from what few hints we get in the game mechanics.

I'm also with David Scott on magic, in general, raising Gloranthan cultures up to the same level of viability as cultures on our world, not beyond them. There are exceptions of course, but for every Ernaldan priestess or Barntar hero bringing unimaginable plenty, there's a Broo despolier or Malian demon wreaking horrific destruction and despair. Working out how amazingly wonderful all these great magical advantages would be is only looking at one side of the equation.

Simon Hibbs

4 hours ago, jajagappa said:

With sufficient magic points, you could work the RQ3 Enchantments to provide something close to it.  Something like a spell matrix for a spirit magic spell with a replenishing magic point matrix, or just with a really long Duration.

For a permanent effect? You could, but it would be a huge waste of POW. I just dont think this is a problem. If you want an in-world justification, Time and impermanence are cosmic mythic forces in Glorantha. Permanent magic, beyond certain types of enchantment perhapse, just isnt the domain of mortals.

Simon Hibbs

1 hour ago, kaydet said:

For example, I can easily see an Orlanthi hero having a helmet which warns him of an enemy's presence.

Obviously, this would take the form of a Detect Enemies spell, but the duration is short enough that it doesn't really fit the bill. I know I could just make it so by GM fiat, but I was curious if there was a mechanism within the rules to create such an object.

Id make it a spell matrix linked to a power storage matrix, maybe with enough power for a few castings. Thay way you do have to activate it to work, but you can use it a few times per day without depleting personal magic points. I think thats a reasonable set of constraints.

Alternatively you put a spirit in it that knows Detect Enemies and you get to ask it - "Be they true or be they False!"

Both are more interesting than a boring D&D magic helmet precisely because they have limitations and quirks, and have reasons for those, and there are clear methods in the rules for making them. Embrace the system, dont fight it. The logic of the system adds value.

Simon Hibbs

13 hours ago, g33k said:

Fascinating perspecetve, here!  Most fans I've seen hate -- and resent as a "crude and blatant cash-grab" -- these sorts of things.  But on the "customer is always right" POV... well, sounds like this is actually kinda popular...

I think it’s only really a cash grab if there’s no ‘download and print yourself’ option.

Simon Hibbs

I’m sure I remember reading tha Gloranthan bronze is somewhat more ductile than ours.

Simon Hibbs

The other thing to bear in mind is that Call of Cthulhu is the big earner. It's effectively what pays for all of the other stuff Chaosium produces, so quite understandably has to come first. They also have several outstanding Kickstarter obligations to fulfil. Hopefully we'll have a few Glorantha Classics come out in the next few months to tide us over.

I've also got a little side project I'm working on for my own use. No promises it'll ever come to anything.

Simon Hibbs

I liked the season finale, it reminded me a bit of some Saphire and Steel episodes.

Simon Hibbs

I have seen the preview PDF and can confirm it’s cracking stuff. It’s chock full of flavourful feats and abilities for characters that draw deeply from Gloranthan lore to create fun action in the game. For example the Troll drummer hero Hombobabom grants the ‘Hombobabom Thump’ ability, which is basically multiple attacks against multiple opponents, with a potential ‘high hat’ attack at the end. Its a great read, even if you aren’t interested in the game system itself.

I’ve played and own 13th Age stuff. It’s by far my favourite of all the F20 games. It’s not quite at the point where I’d run it myself in it’s original form, but 13G is a distinct possibility.

Simon Hibbs

3 hours ago, Roko Joko said:

@MOB Do you want to create a new forum for 13G the game? 

There’s already a 13th Age forum on the Pelgrane site, but it’s a bit of a ghost town. I’m not a fan of the forum software they use. I would like to be able to discuss 13G here so a forum would be nice.

Simon Hibbs

5 hours ago, Trotsky said:

With the imminent release of 13th age Glorantha (just announced on the blog) is Runequest up next?

Couple of months apparently.

Simon Hibbs

It seems like you're trying to use BRP to simulate all the different aspects of the FATE system. So FATE 'rules' with RQ resolution mechanics. I can't see that working very well.

Personally, I'd forget about FATE and just play the game using BRP rules, adjusting them to suite the Dresden Files setting. You could use the BGB as a base, or one of the editions of Call of Cthulhu. According to John Snead, one of his references for the Enlightened Magic supplement for BRP was the Dresden Files novels, so the Sorcery system from that should work for you right out of the box.

I'm afraid I don't know Dresden Files itself at all, though I did watch the TV series. I though it was ok, but didn't give enough info to understand how magic is supposed to work.

Simon Hibbs

Abebooks is great. If there's anything in particular you come across and you'd like to know if it's worth it, just ask here. Someone is bound to have it or know of it.

On 07/01/2018 at 10:28 PM, Ufnal said:

 

• Would receiving theistic magic from beings in the Path of Hell Tradition be more frowned upon than receiving spirit magic? After all, the charms reflect who you pay homage to, bargain with, receive gifts from - but runic magic reflects your core self and who or what you emulate to receive your powers...
• Would a being that gives mainly runic and little to no spiritual magic be seen by Pentans as one that demands more personal connection to itself? As miserly or poor, seeing as it gives away little powers to its supplicants? As a loner, not surrounded by a host of lesser spirits? 

Oh I like point one above a lot, I can see people thinking this way. I'm not so sure about point 2, it strikes me as a possible slur used by rivals or enemies.

Simon Hibbs

3 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

Zero Point Energy isn't literally zero energy.  What it means is that the minimum energy of a field will fluctuate thanks to our old buddy Werner Heisenberg ...

To be fair the page starts off with pretty much exactly this explanation, two sentences up from the start of that snippet.

Simon Hibbs

2 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

Funny how every explanation I've ever seen has involved myth, not science.  For there being no RW science, it's also funny how so many things on Glorantha work exactly the same as in the RW. 

Ive been lucky enough to discuss this with Greg a few times. That’s exactly the premise he used when creating a Glorantha - that it be a world with many recognisable attributes from our own world (edit - and some other fictional ones) in appearance and mundane details, but built from the ground up based on mythic principles. There’s nothing random or accidental or serendipitous about it, and I really don’t understand why you seem to think it’s surprising. Its deliberate creative intent.

Simon Hibbs

23 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

According to you, it's an attempt at world-building from underlying mythic principles which quite literally denies all science.  I'm still waiting to see any canonical reference that explicitly states that there is no such thing as science in Glorantha, not some conclusion that you've drawn based on some highly questionable premises.  I won't find the word 'supercalifragilisticexpialidocious' in RQ either.  So what?

You don't get it.  I don't need to work out scientific principles.  I know what they are already, well enough that I can tell where there will be violations of those laws.  You're the ones who are coming up with mythical rationalizations for concepts that I have to spend no effort on.

The talk in this thread about science is realy about several very distinct things. There is the scientific method. Nobody here is denying that it is possible to apply this method in Glorantha. Then there are real world scientifically proven principles and laws. It appears to me that you are proposing that in Glorantha the same laws and principles apply as in our world. Is that fair? also, do you agree that the results obtained using the scientific method could be different in a world with different natural laws to out own? If so, then all we need to determine is if Glorantha is such a world.

For my part, looking at the evidence it appears highly unlikely that the same physical laws and principles from our world apply in Glorantha. At an everyday level the results apoear very similar in some ways, but radically different in others. Here are a few examples.

Magic routinely violates the laws of thermodynamic and conservation of momentum. Summoning elementals is the simplest example and should be easily replicable in repeatable 'laboratory' conditions. Multimissile seems pretty unlikely to conserve momentum. Then we have all sorts of flying magic playing havoc with gravitation, measuring density of materials, etc. Clearly the physical laws we are used to and can prove to be universal on Earth cannot be universal in Glorantha.

Now lets look at the world of Glorantha itself. Kero Fin mountain, as described, appears to be physically impossible according to real world physics and geology, it would collapse under its own weight. Magasta's Pool is another good one. Any vortex that big and that powerful would erode itself out incredibly quickly, yet it has stable structures projecting within it over long periods. Then there's the Red Moon hanging there in the sky in blatant defiance if the laws of Gravity. Giants as large as Gonn Orta would collapse, breaking their own bones with their own weight while their blood vessels would burst from the pressure. If Glorantha is a cube, how is that gravitationaly stable? What about the oceans, wouldnt they flow to form huge domesin the middke of the cube faces? How could Yelm's 'orbit' be stable?

I just dont think that saying magic is some sort of negligible exception cuts ice. Clearly magic and mythic explanations are fundamental. They explain the world, their conclusions are measurable, consistent and testable. As such they appear to pass the criteria we apply to scientific theories in the real world.

Science in the real world is all about predictive power. Its the ultimate practical pursuit. We only accept scientific theories if they can be tested and proven. Repeatability is the core requirement. I think applying that approach in Glorantha will produce very different results to doing so in our world.

I hope this is taken generously, I'm not entirely sure what your position is precisely, so if Im taking things for granted a bit please let me know and I'd appreciate clarification. Best wishes.

Simon Hibbs

7 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

I weary of this whole 'there is no such thing as science' concept.  Every time I've ever presented a scientific rationale there's been someone to contradict me.

And everyone’s piling on to contradict you.  

I do think it is possible for Gloranthans to apply rational thinking to understand their world. A Gloranthan could apply the scientific method and get useful results, but the reasons for things in a Glorantha are not the same as the reasons for things in our world. As a result the evidence available to Gloranthans will be different and the conclusions they come to will be different.

Simon Hibbs

23 hours ago, kaydet said:

@Rick Meints I misunderstood, then. I thought that the intention was to release a Runequest publication one per month following release of the main rules.

I vaguely remember there might have been a plan to release the three core books in consecutive months, but that was a while back and, eh, things change. I’d rather the team communicate openly and honestly about their plans than not say anything in case it will be thrown back at them later.

Simon Hibbs

I don’t really get the complaint that Glorantha is over developed. Maybe I have overdeveloped “ignore things I don’t like or care about” muscles.

but there’s tons of stuff all over the most well known maps of Dragon Pass and Prax I know extremely little it nothing about. The ruins in the Dead Place? Monkey Ruins? Pimper’s Block? Tada’s High Tumulus? There are named spots all over the place That are complete mysteries to me. Personally I’ve run a campaign in Karse and made mine up from whole cloth. There are versions on the net, but none of them canonical.  There are vast swathes of history and background detail that are undefined. And if it turns out they are defined differently somewhere? Well, my game varies.

Simon Hibbs

Thanks for taking a look. I appreciate the feedback, I have considered these points but could use having my thoughts on this challenged.

I’m thinking that a 6 is still a 30% chance of success. That’s not bad for your lowest ability, while 16 gives you an 80% chance which is higher than many RQ or Call of Cthulhu characters start with for their best skill. In this system 18 doesn’t leave you anywhere to go. There are ways to fix that, but that’s for mods or extensions and the system should work and be reasonably balanced out of the box.

I’m open to persuasion though. It might be one of things that really need to be play tested. I can sit here theorising, but if an 18 stat doesn’t actualy cause problems at the table, why not?

The problem with Charisma is in most games it doesn’t make any difference to anything. It doesn’t materially affect interpersonal skills in either RQ or Call of Cthulhu and things like Strength and Dexterity have a big impact in all sorts of vital areas like damage bonus and initiative. But in this game, your Charisma is your interpersonal skills. A Charisma of 16 is like having 80% in all of them. I’m hoping that’s a game changer for this stat, but it does depend on the referee using it that way.

Simon Hibbs

Question time: Should I stick with 3D6 stats, or go to allocating values of 16, 14, 12, 10, 8 and 6.

The point of this is to re-visit RPG assumptions about what attributes a game should define and how things should work. I want to have only one way to generate attribute values in the core system, but if you want to roll 3D6 that's brilliant. Go for it. Make it yours. But the provided system should be carefully considered and there for a reason.

A standard set of values means your characters are balanced from the start. Nobody can roll a horrendously bad character, or an envy-of-the-table super character. You're guaranteed to be good at 2 things, fine at 2 more and weak at 2 others. A max of 16 means that although you're very competent, there's still room for improvement so there's something to aim for.

Thoughts?

I recently got into The Black Hack. I was looking for an OSR game to introduce my kids to old school dungeon crawling games and was all set to use Blueholm (the blue book was my first RPG) when I found TBH. I’m still torn between them, but Black Hack got me thinking about how to do a similar sort of thing without the levels and classes, and with a slightly more flexible system. The result should I hope be appealing to the audience here.

The Quest Hack

I tried to stay true to the stripped down ethos of The Black Hack while pivoting away from classes and levels. I’m also looking for ways to give it a hint of distinctive setting flavour, while remaining open to easy adaptation.

There is a swords and sorcery spin on TBH already called Sharp Swords & Sinister Spells, which I only discovered today having already written TQH, but it’s a lot more fiddly and still has levels and classes and hit dice. I’ve picked it up anyway and do like it, but it’s gone a bit far beyond the simplicity David Black achieved to still be the same sort of thing.

So far it’s just a Google Doc, but it’s enabled for comments. It’s reasonably complete but l’ll probably be adding in miscellaneous equipment and the consumables mechanic from TBH. Any comments or suggestions here or on the doc appreciated. 

Simon Hibbs