Akhôrahil

Which are the areas that do use Elmal in this position (or the whole tribe ring structure from the Guide)?

I think @Eff referred to Guide p. 33: "6-9. Orlanth’s four thanes: Issaries, Lhankor Mhy, Chalana Arroy, Elmal"

I don't think so - for one thing, you're interacting on a Hero Plane which isn't the same thing as the Gods World, and for another, you would only make a small contribution to all the other rituals and heroquests done over time that support the status quo. Perhaps lots and lots of alternate-outcome heroquests will slowly change the myth, but even then, it's not a Compromise breach. Back it up the Secret of the God-Learners though, and you're cooking with gas!

No-one ever rushes in to defend Zistor. How is this fair?

I'm not convinced it works like that. Rather, once the Compromise has started to break down for other reasons, then the gods are no longer as restricted. I think all breaches of the Compromise (Nysalor, Red Goddess, Zistor...) have been initiated from the mortal side of things?

Elusu in the webcomic does this well. One thing about clowns is that they seem to be a bit lightweight - they're more playable, but they also actually know and respect the lines (they break the rules, but they know which rules they are allowed to break). They're a lot like jesters, saying and doing the things others can't, but maybe would like to. All-out tricksters don't work like that - nothing is too far, no rules count, you will betray your boss some day. Presumably, this higher risk means higher reward for those who employ them. I'm thinking HQ/QW might actually work better for trickster characters - there you can get away with more and improvise harder from your abilities, while in RQ, your toolbox is a lot smaller. One the key things about the trickster is that they get to propose - or even perform - things that need to be done but others can't because of quaint notions like honor and propriety. They're the ones doing the lateral thinking.

80% Truth rune - just say no!

I'd say it's about style and expectations. D&D 4E has this "make a wishlist that the DM will deliver in magical loot", but I don't think that works as well in a simulationist game game. Plus it can be fun when the players find an oddball magical weapon and try to find a way to get something from it, even if it's just gifting it away to someone appreciative. And you're just not going to get a broadsword from that Lunar - it's far more likely to be a curved blade. Some armor types can be resized (to smaller, at least).

True (this is in Thunder Rebels, for instance), but it was fairly quickly walked back as a research error (I believe it was sourced from Medieval plows, and then retained or even enlarged in the heavy Lodril plows). Looking at Thunder Rebels, a Stead has an absolute crapload of cattle, whereas I think you can get away with 6-8 cattle now to support your two oxen, and those cattle can even be borrowed clan property. "Typical Orlanthi clan", RQG rulebook p. 406. It doesn't give class terminology, merely rent structure, but you can deduce a lot from it (I calculated GDP per capita, clan GNI and "gross domestic ransom" from it 🙂 ). I think it's implied that live-in family members share in the rank. I believe I've even seen it explicitly, but can't source it right now. But it's pretty obvious that your unmarried, live-at-home daughter will share in the household rank for tickets such bride price. Also, again you couldn't possibly fill out the Carl/Free numbers otherwise. I think that's right. "Carl+" or "Free+" will be a majority, so it's more that you also have a smaller underclass than that Carl/Free is an elevated position. It's akin to middle-class today.

Is this dumb enough? I assume it is the case in an earnest way. Basically, that both come down from the original goat people before the chaos taint. The shared lechery (also shared with Ragnaglar) is hardly a coincidence.

That's how I run it.

I mean, there are two ways to hold your Hide of land - free or rented. If rented, you're a cottar. If free, do you have your required armaments? Very likely yes - the requirements here are minimal. If for whatever weird reason you don't, not a carl. If free land and armaments, do you have a plow and two oxen? Note that you don't need to own the necessary cattle to support your ox-team, those can be borrowed from the clan and you sustain your oxen from this borrowed herd. (If you don't fully own the plow and team, you might be just a half-carl.) With free land, the plow and ox-team, and the armaments, you're a carl by definition. I agree that this isn't a nuclear family - the minimum for a stead would be your large house (since we can no longer just say "longhouse" here) and some outbuildings, an extended family and some servants, and frequently other families either in the large house or surrounding dwellings. Carls make up a very substantial part of the population, so they have to come from somewhere. RQG has 60% freeholders / 40% renters in the clan example. The Fyrd (excluding auxiliaries) being about 20% of the clan population would indicate at least 40% carls.

Interesting, I see this basically as the definition (yes, you need some basic armaments and an ox-plow as well, but that's the easy bit), and that one hide that you don't have to pay rent on to a landlord is the crucial part (paying such rent means you're a cottar instead).

One situation where it frequently comes up in BRP is this: GM: You find this truly excellent magical weapon. PC: Meh, it's not the exact type of weapon I've trained with, so it's useless to me. How can I trade or sell it?

Used to have an outie, now she has an innie.

I assume this is multiple parry penalties?

There's no Humakti in my group, but if there were, I'd be inclined to turn it more into something like Arrow Trance, where your skill actually matters. One of the weird outcomes of Sword Trance is how it makes your access to Magic Points vastly more important than your actual Sword skill when you have prep time (just a few rounds will do). Who cares if your opponent has 200% in his Sword when you have 100%, if you have 20 more MPs to spend? Going by the rules, any Humakti duel is likely to be decided by who can scrounge up the most MPs beforehand to get the overwhelming Sword Trance. This is kinda unexciting. (Yes, Dispel/Dismiss, but that just means you need even more MPs for your defensive boosting of your Sword Trance.)

Sword Trance does have some unexpected outcomes - since your Sword skill is pushed through the roof (and RQG has the opponent skill reduction), it means that once the Sword Trance goes off, your shield becomes meaningless except as something that might catch arrows passively. Greatswords are amazing already - for Humakti, they’re a no-brainer because of how negligible shields can become for them.

Weapon Styles was a nice system, IMO.

The greatest trick Eurmal ever pulled was convincing the world he exists?

Demigods and minor godlings aren’t a Compromise break, surely? And Idrima is more like some embodied elemental spirit than even a demigoddess.

So does Orlanth Adventurous.

Of course, possession is nine-tenths of the law, and a lot of this might be a legal fiction, ceremoniously maintained. If an Earth temple tries to strip a tribe of its ancient lands, it'd better have the military backing required, or it's not happening. Your second quote supports this, too.

If the target is completely unaware (as opposed to in combat and just not seeing you), I don't think an automatic crit in melee is unreasonable. Otherwise, it's probably just a matter of no defensive roll. Flanking isn't a thing in RQ, apart from the multiple defence rolls penalty.

Dragons seem pretty stuffy - they could use some more Eurmal! Laugh a bit!