Jusmak

By a short look and sample, I would by it.

I have seen that 'dance' before. NEVER, EVER DO THAT AGAIN! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-25VXew-OV8

I am also intersted in online play and and any setting will do, lunars as well. I have just spent 3 years just either playing solo or reading Glorantha material. Not too many chances to play tabletop game, living in coutryside now. I live in Finland, so europian timezone. Not sure how well I do with onlineplay, because of languageskills, but then I may exel as a troll, balazaring or another not so fluent in common. But, PLEASE, let me try, if timing happens to work out.

Funny thing was, that skill decrease rule did not matter, when playing RQ6 in Korantia world. I did not have opinion how that world should work or behave. Most easy and simple way to deal with it, is to have it as optional rule and not use it. I think it works quit ok up to 130 %, but even then it makes opponents at skill level up to 40 % too weak. Underdogs should have at least a chance, was it a young giant or playing character. If typical skillrange is between 60-120, that may be fine. Spells like bladesharp, shimmer, fanatism, berserk are a bit too easy ways to make things go a bit broken. Instead using skilldecrease, I like more doing harder maneuvers at higher skill level, like aimed blows, and include unarmed combat into fighting. Only reason to use skilldecrease is to have highlevel fights more interesting and bring % skill into scale, where throwing a 100 sided dice matters, and not only wait for critical or special. Other way around is to start from lower values, and there is no need for a rule for a long time. But when somebody eventually gets there, benefits are... fights may actually get more dull. If skilldecrease rule is used and chracters progress even more, things may get worse than they were. I like to think more about tactical differences like knockback/down. There you effectively do parrying harder. Then you do the difference between combatants skill by playing and not by rules.

I agree with this. This rule in a way makes glorantha too safe for heroes. I used to play RQ so, that every encounter is always a risk, no matter of skill level. If risk/tension is taken away, it is nomore RQ/Glorantha and fun. I came into same conclusion, when tried RQ6/Mythras. Great troll with attack 70 % should still be a threat to consider to anybody. It is just, because of my nostalgic memories, that trolls are always dangerous. Now it takes only one character at 170 skill to make that troll helpless as an infant, which a bit violates my image of Glorantha, and how dangerous adventuring in that world was. One memory, when my high level ogre warrior was skulking at streets, there came beggars trying to mug and rob him. He came to meet them and eat them... At first round my ogre fumbled and part of his plate chest armor just falled. At same round there came dagger attack, which happened to strike chest... Luckily, there was a friend nearby to help and carry poor ogre away. If there was that skill decrease rule used, ogre's fall would not have happened.

RQ is just a game, and how skills are presented there is a matter of game design only, not a matter of reality. I teach different martial arts. When boxing covering, blocking and dodgking are all taught separetly as are jabs, hooks, uppercats. You could devide every move to it's own skill, because every move must be learned separatly. There is no shortcuts to learn each separate move. Power from jab does not carry to hooks, or into defence. When person learns more, by good timing attack and defence may be one move. But before that it is unlikely rookie can defend himself from heavy blows made by trained fighter, those just go through defence into body. Counterattack is reaction to attack, so it can be seen as defensive action. Attack is anyway always more important, because without ability to knockout person or win a fight, fight gets longer and eventually you'll lose it. But without good defence, you'll be koncked out sooner, if opponent is hard hitter... What can gamesigner do, when attempting to catch mechanics and chaotic essence of combat situation? Fail. So, they do instead something, which could be fun to play in rpg for some people. Anyway RQ3 works for me quite well now as it is. There is enough room for imagination and describing. It teaches well, that every fight is a risk, and some intelligence is hoped from players. It seems, that more designers write about combat simulation, more they travel from realism. This old engine runs still better, than many newer from realism's or playability view, and I will not change it for cinematic views. It is still the story, that matters.

I thinks same. When I want to play heroic game, with lesser dying chance I could try 13th age Glorantha or Heroquest. And when I'd like to play well flowing, simple and realistic game, I'll choose RQ3. There is indeed inbuilt strategies inside RQ3, which are not self-evident at all, and which need a bit houseruling. Even 1 -handed weapon attack & parries are officially corrected in errata, it makes a slight tactical difference, if one handed weapon could only attack or parry at same round. It may not be bad thing after all, and may put player to think more tactical possibilities. Me neither understood possibilities of unarmed combat during closed melee. I value much more, that there are melee combat tactics build into core system as choices made beforehand, than "pick a effect" as for example in Mythras. There is no need to be effect on every landed strike anyway, I miss normal hits in that system. I want to plan my moves beforehand, and not just fall into changes of dice gaming. That in mind close combat tactics could be written more clear, like charging in, closing opponent, knock back, and maybe add some more like blinding (by throwing a jab, item into one's face).

At RQ3 reaching 100% skill is always meant me pinnacle of skill, when in other systems it is different. Skillcheks are not done, when used in everydaylife, unstressed conditions. Carpenter can make a chair with 15 % skill, without skillcheck. Horse can ridden without skillcheck. Actions at normal condition may not require skillcheck, or at least is not worth for experince check. Masterylevel at animaltraining is reached at 50% skill. Soldiers are called veterans at 50 % combat skills. If character never fails his skillcheks, when using those during stressful, pressured situation, I call that mastery. And for me it kills most of exitement to roll dice. Then it comes to gm to make up difficulties to every situation, every fight. Yes, I do like mudcrawling. Mastery is not so exact number, but comparison to others skills. So my path was also to make in harder to reach skill 100%, AND also lower demands for priesthood. Two attacks at round may also done at 90% skill. Playstyles may differ and I do like play RQ3 more, when skills rarely are more than 50-75 %.

I got Heroes and it was most helpful. There are contradictions in other sources, so this one made more sense. For example in Cults of Glorantha book "Basmol Strenght" -spell was much altered, whole berserking effect taken away. I was a bit confused what people are talking about, when talking about basmoli berserks, no berserks anywhere I can see, until now. Also it became clearer, if novices may get a runespell free during holy day seremonies, POW sacrifices does not need to become so costly. For a playing character this makes much more sense, and one point runespell may be THAT lifesaver for a starting basmoli hunter.

My effort bringing blasebo as example, that science does not know much about it, if almost all it knows is to agree it exists. When there is small amount of data conclusion are more probably false, but that is anyway called "scientific truth." Anyway there are many ways to react to claim and many possiblities to explain unknown. What is really known, and how useful that information is... Like brainscanning giving some evidence of thought/emontional processes. It just shows there is activity, nothing else, rest is interpretation. Science is quite open for false interpretations as modifying results into wanted direction. Sorry to hear about your daughter's condition. I was in similar situation at 1995, I got diagnose, which means nothing, no cure, pains were constant, at that time there was no management strategies. I needed to find those strategies all by myself. I did so. Science did not, and still does not into extent that there would be no pain. I do not know any other person, who has made himself complately painfree from that diagnose, which is pure crap, because number of wrong assumptions, conclusion made at very start of research of condition. If doctors keep it that way, cure is never found, which I think will be so. I had already my days of agony. It took 7 years to be painfree, and slipping badly from my own "management strategy" will bring pains back. Mystical cure is name for a thing, that is not understood. I tired all, that came by, but answers did come from any one of them. While things like, what people think about science in fantasy or real world is quite meaningless to me, when there is real things to worry about. I just want to wish better days to come for your family. Patience with testing, and hope for future. It may take several years, but answer/right strategy may come.

This is something I am interested with. Who and when has managed to draw a function, and explained how it works, because thats new to me? No beliefs and experiments but a formula, a function, a math, which is accepted by scientific community. Which molecule, where, how have effect on target molecule? If something has an effect on physical world, it must have way to be calculted by physics, right?

This remind a bit different catch games played when I was child. Manouvarabilty was key element even then, when dodging away catcher. It is actually quite similar, when nowadays training boxing. Dodging there is intuitive, instinctive movement in situation, where is no time to reason anything and no time to actually react in very short distance. Nowadays father to 3 year boy, and sometimes thinking resambles to animal world. Not only catching plays, but climbing too. He is really a simpanse. Some things comes so naturally to children. There was no rune magic for novices, only spirit in Cults of Glorantha under Mikyh & Hykim, but since Joerg's imput I became thinking Basmolis could benefit from a bit more writeup. RQ3 RAW does not serve so well for basmoli or ideal of basmoli hunting. Game like sable antilope move 9, impala move 13, then human move 3... Heroes vol 1. is on it's way to give ideas for modifications. Until that, it seems to serve well enough to study spears and hand to hand combat giving both human and beastside expression in field of battle and hunt. While stats are normal human stats, I gave basmoli cultural skill points like balazarings have in Griffin mountain to stalking skills, climbing and started to play short hunting trips. That actually worked well enough. It's othervise annoying to have negative skillmod % from great size and pow, when playing primitive hunter.

Hmmm, not sure what is really debated here, but myths, folklore and a concept of science seen something more than another attempt to explain world is interesting subject enough. I like folklore as well as scientifical rational. As scientists are studied RW does not actually exists as we perceive it, but is a a projection of our very limited senses. Science in my liking makes very honest attempt to solve out how universe works, as have religions attempted to tell same tale by unchanging myths. Scientifical truth are told to last approx. 7 years until it's old, and new discoveries about the matter are found, new explanations get more common ground. And still mythical explanations survive in RW. For example traditional chinese medicine is absolute, pure crap in point of view western medical science. However in some situations it does actually work better, even it's philosophical explanation is strange or crap for educated western doctor. For example anaesthesia made for a surgery made only by few acupuncture needless. Is that process of magic, when there is no scientific explanations? Science has it's limits when there cannot be found means to measure something, like emotions, thoughts. How about placebo effect? Science cannot explain it's mechanical functions, but only seeing it's results. Is it actually work of magic, if spirit healer makes really good use of it with results unachievable to modern medicine? What is magic actually? Shamans do work still these days and are even part of healthcare in Tuva Republic. When there is so much unexplained in RW, and scientifical truth actually number of theories agreed by most scientists, which is open to debate and change. In similar way fantasy world's functioning is good to be based on common agreement, which is open to debate and change, if it's wanted to be living. People can play their own myths, which are theirs alone.

While this kind of image became more or less into mind from lions' hunting methods, I got worried about survivability of character. It seems that basmoli berserker is formed by heavy use of divine/rune magic and character needs to be runelord to do that kind of feats. Beginning character with only fighting claw and loincloth may prove too challenging task to survive wildlife. I do not want to think this is the case, why numbers of basmoli are that few. Humans are just too slow and weak to hunt lion's way, without heavy use of magic. Small animals are in general just too slow, exept armadillon, turtles and I cannot imagine attempt to leap bull's back would end very nicely for a human. Human would need a tree or cliff jump on larger animal, and more probably just takes damage from fall, 1d6 to random hit location... Or is it just me received too many injuries lately? But, when heading to runelevel and sacrificing enough POW to get basmoli teeth, claw spells. Oh, just checked runemagic is available at acolyte level as priests have, which I interpreted meaning renevable spells... So, it does not take forever. For keeping character alive and hunting successfully, for that reason spear and javelin, but when maturing maybe leaving use of those. Bladesharp, mobility (gives better strikerank also), but how about martial arts? Does primitive cultures practise those or is it mainly product of civilized culture? That double dice, which skill gives to natural weapons, can be seen as aimed successful hit to more vulnerable spot, like neck or joint. Lion often suffocates victim by biting throat. For a beginning character double dice is handy, if he wants to be successful in hand to hand combat without real melee weapon. But when it comes to spells like lion's head, claw does it double also that natural weapon dice 1d8 => 2d8? Actually managed to find Heroes vol.1 #4 from Wayne's Books at price 3,99$, but postage is going to be 21 $, ouch.

I ended up making a bit more like cheetah basmoli character, trusting more in speed than strenght. Although, when figuring out primitive hunting style, I chose her atlatl and javelin. Atlatl is not actual weapon, but a laucher, like any bow flying bolts or arrows. It has no damage dice itself, but damage modifier. When using atlatl in game, do I use atlatl just like any weapon, it's own attack chance and javelin just like ammo? I think it would been a bit better way to deal with like those other lauchers, to give it straight away own damage dice. Anyway, you cannot use it without ammo, except as improvised weapon wooden stick. I have actually learned to use it in real life and it's far better than javelin alone. Do those two need to be in separate skills? If person studied atlatl, he knows something about throwing javelins too. Basic line of throw and balancing weapon to fly are not so different. If character makes foci of multimissile 4 into atlatl, does it give not only four magic javelins, but +d6 damage modier them all, or just the original? It is not very well written there, if damage mod. should be calculated or not?

Well, here is to two views and a bit more strict definition, word fanatism meaning "being overly exited of something". While fanatism does not include aggression in it's core definition, other interpretation, cold bloodness does not iclude excitement, which is strong emotion. If both views are false at base, there is a challange to keep debate sensible very long. Leaving maybe only one option: to do whatever you want with it without need to be debated.

Did you give them particular touch for cultural weapons or base% for skills like balazarings had? How do hunters imitate actions of great cat? Preferring larger game, stalking near and use of javelins instead of bows? Maybe battle claw as a ritual weapon... If you have ideas to share, be welcome to enlighten me!

Thanks, under Hykim & Mikyh, got it. Need to sometime find out those Tales of reaching moon.

Hi! I do not recall, where I found source for basmoli hunschen, cult, spells, other things like that. Does somebody recall, where to find?

Oh, yes. Fanatism as a concept of being "overly exited of something" may not be most common phrasing and simplest to catch. While not holding greater amount of aggression itself, it sort of brings that kind of image with context of combat. Light ragemood is easy to comprehend here. If I become overly exited of something, it is very rare that I call my self being fanatic about something. I may be obsessed, exited, interested. Those I call fanatic seem to me absolutly crazy about something and going into ragemood, if their views about that something are any way attacked or even set in doubt. (like debates about diets) So, by experience concepts of fanatism and ragemood are not so far from each others.

There always remain rules, which are open to interpretation. There is always the right one, which suites best for invidual or small group. If one derives fanatism as word/meaning from hot temperament rage, where parrying becomos irrelevant action or more cold blooded, single minded focus kill somebody, its's easy to see people are not speaking about same thing, but complately different. For me fanatic person, who is not parrying, is in ragemood. Otherwise forgetting one's defences, I cannot find many reasons for it. Cold blooded action does not forget defence. When defence is lowered happens mostly, when a person is in rage, or overconfident. I do prefer seeing/visualizing ragemood as a reason to forgetting defence. Being overconfident in combat situation is same as being careless and stupid. It does not sound very heroic action. If one makes all out attack, it is in other rulesets described same way, person losing ability to defend for greater opportunity to attack. Then it is much about timing your strikes. There is no bonus about timing your arrows same way. But... fanatism is a spell, not real life simulation about doing all out attacks. So it may be used any way. If used with bow, I would bring shielded opponents. I have houseruled, that crouching/kneeling behind shield covers doublehit locations, crawling behind shield without constant visual contact covers all.

I really like this as idea, and quartile tiers of development. It is a bit like seeing scale from 0-100, as absolute, where 0 means character knows nothing and 100 about everything of matter. So, there skills around 50 is more like, what mathematic gaussian distribution naturally shows. Only, that both ends are actually limitless. Does players enjoy playing that way, needs just testing a bit. That way it is at least easier to damage opponents weapon, when parrying missed hit, spells like bladesharp remain more useful longer., fumbles occur a bit freaquetly. From playabilyty's view, I don't see much against. Game will work better. Then there is this question, illusion of development, to what end. People will cluster at 50 skills, making them a bit similar. I think something has do at character creation. Enough variation should be done there, and maybe lowering development tier one decree at professional skills. I would move pressurepoint from skill development into magic, just making Glorantha a bit more magical. In RQ3 starting character had usually about 1-3 points of spirit magic, and spells capped to be maximum 3 points. If character gets at least one 3 point spell certain and other 2 point spell, I think gaming is fun and going fine.

When I played role(chart)master, It was quite clear, that game handled skills over 100% much better, unpredactibility remained. So, I think, that RQ maybe is not at it's comfortable zone, when gaming reaches hero-levels, skills over 100, scaling issues. Maybe skills could indeed start from lower numbers, and mastery achieved earlier, say around 75 %? What would happen, if prieshood could be achieved, when five needed skills are at 75 instead of 90? After all, by having large numbers in attack skills leads only, that fighting is against more experienced opponents. Same can be done otherway around, and have a bit more unpredactibilty in game, larger fumblerange for example, which I do like much in RQ. Heroic feats, divine magic at hand, but gaming itself still would have enough randomness to be intresting. Idea, that it would be really hard to achieve skill level 90%, and after that attack split into two sound good here.

This may be a bit off topic, but it nice to hear how others have experiences skills around 100%. About gameplay and enjoying the game going over 75 % skill rates may make things more dull than enjoyable. However the aim is to be runelord or something, and that point maybe doing more political gaming. Some may ever retire at that point. How gaming differs around 25 -45% skills, when fighting baboons and trollking, instead of around 90 %, when fighting greater opponents. I found out, that with RQ3 rules fights around 25-45% skill levels are suprisingly exiting. It may be, because I have played experienced characters much longer. Same spells, skill boosting, weapon boosting, great sword, which slays or debilitates normal foes easily with one blow if hits over 100%. When starting new character, primitive herder. Only Man and his spear. It's not bad life, to have simple life. Taking care of cattle. No too much hassle about spells and boosts. When playing RQ6 starting combatskills were around 60%. If boosting is made easy, it may lead quite soon into a bit too certain successlevels. If that comes soon to reducing skills, I wonder if starting values are made too high. As earlier example pointed out about even 90% skill dropped to 05%, it maybe is not good development. When doing combat sports, every skilled fighter is always dangerous, if defence breaks somepoint. From logical point of view, if some person is simply better than other, does he actually affect other's skill and make him worse, or just finds out easier undefended places to attack = special and critical attacks.

I find this problematic. Scaling skills up over 100 makes game too boring without reducing. Exitement is gone with 5% failure rate, if combat becomes waiting for a special... Or is it? Passions boosting skills up over 100, does those actually improve game or lover it? When I played Rq6/mythras, I reduced, when I played RQ3 I did not do reductions. Those became a bit unnecassary hassle. There are ways to make things intresting (dark, multiple opponents, narrow corridors, weapon brakes), which bring a bit more into game itself than static boosting.