Grievous

That's a lot sooner than I thought! NICE.

1 hour ago, Tigerwomble said:

I agree entirely with what you say. I suppose i've never played a Glorantha game that has pushed the boundaries of Sartarite xenophobia and intense violence. I'm also unsure how far that can be pushed before the setting starts breaking down. Some settings are designed to be dark, bleak and violent and have the structures in place to cope with the kinds of extremes that might be indulged by players.

Also isn't behaviour that it too 'dark' in Sartarite society perceived as inspired by chaos.

Well, there's absolutely culturally approved (by the Orlanthi) behaviour which we would find at least dubious - such as revenge, feuds, etc. But when they break the rules of the community they can absolutely bring about justice from the community or even bring about Chaos. All these instances would be playing with darker themes in Glorantha, even though in one the dark nature is mainly felt at the table by the players, while in the other it hits both the character and player level. As a GM I love hitting themes/playing with/challenging players on all these levels.

Whether the PCs are murder-hobos who get punished by the clan/tribe/kingdom, or are the ones sent to bring brutal Orlanthi justice to other murder-hobos, I think we're dealing with stories which are uniquely Gloranthan (as compared to, say, your basic D&D) and which can be pretty dark and dramatic. Gloranthan Chaos just seems a(n) (un)natural extension of this, bringing these ideas/deeds to threaten existence itself, and is there for you when you want to make these things more overtly supernatural. Murder-hobos killing things and taking their stuff? Check. Murder-hobos killing gods and rending reality? Check. 

I'm not sure I would call Glorantha a light, hopeful, joyous setting in the classic sense. Sure, it does have those moments too, but I do view it as containing plenty of shades of grey and outright darkness. It is, to me at least, also a very psychedelic setting and in that way can go from bright beauty into mind-numbing terror, or from complex intellectualism into pure absurdity, from religious ecstasy into existential agony, and back again, pretty quickly. 

Looking at the Orlanthi, sure, you can view them as "a robust, life afirming people, who are gregarious and
passionate even whilst under the Lunar kosh", but they are also hide-bound, violent, and xenophobic. They appear one thing one moment, and something else a few moments later and they are in one way one of the more conservative parts of the setting. The Lunars take that to a whole new level and indeed I've been meaning to write something about a more psychedelic way of looking at that culture and their Red Goddess, which makes them out to be very beautiful and very terrifying at the same time.

I think there's plenty of depth in Glorantha for a gaming group to twist the dials in either (or another) direction, I feel. A more light-hearted game can easily be had, just as a much darker, grittier story can be told, while preserving the essential integrity of the setting.

2 hours ago, davecake said:

Tune in next week for when I compare Sandys theory of superheroic runic identity with Aleister Crowleys theory of the Magus and the Word of the Aeon. 

Yeah, that does actually make some sense, too. 

5 hours ago, Scout said:

It's because the orc is trying to kill me

Then the objective here is really to survive. You could use a lot of abilities to achieve this aim. Certainly, using your fighting skills is one (as is, well, running away). A complete success by using your fighting skill here would definitely include killing the orc, but a lesser level of success might not - your fighting skills could buy you an opportunity/moment to escape, or you could convince your opponent that you're not worth the trouble and the orc lets you escape, etc.

I think the old Task vs Conflict Resolution dichotomy is useful to understand here.

Quote

Conflict Resolution vs. Task Resolution

In task resolution, what's at stake is the task itself. "I crack the safe!" "Why?" "Hopefully to get the dirt on the supervillain!" What's at stake is: do you crack the safe?

In conflict resolution, what's at stake is why you're doing the task. "I crack the safe!" "Why?" "Hopefully to get the dirt on the supervillain!" What's at stake is: do you get the dirt on the supervillain?

Which is important to the resolution rules: opening the safe, or getting the dirt? That's how you tell whether it's task resolution or conflict resolution.

Task resolution is succeed/fail. Conflict resolution is win/lose. You can succeed but lose, fail but win.

In conventional rpgs, success=winning and failure=losing only provided the GM constantly maintains that relationship - by (eg) making the safe contain the relevant piece of information after you've cracked it. It's possible and common for a GM to break the relationship instead, turning a string of successes into a loss, or a failure at a key moment into a win anyway.

Let's assume that we haven't yet established what's in the safe.

"I crack the safe!" "Why?" "Hopefully to get the dirt on the supervillain!"
It's task resolution. Roll: Success!
"You crack the safe, but there's no dirt in there, just a bunch of in-order papers."

"I crack the safe!" "Why?" "Hopefully to get the dirt on the supervillain!"
It's task resolution. Roll: Failure!
"The safe's too tough, but as you're turning away from it, you see a piece of paper in the wastebasket..."

(Those examples show how, using task resolution, the GM can break success=winning, failure=losing.)

That's, if you ask me, the big problem with task resolution: whether you succeed or fail, the GM's the one who actually resolves the conflict. The dice don't, the rules don't; you're depending on the GM's mood and your relationship and all those unreliable social things the rules are supposed to even out.

Task resolution, in short, puts the GM in a position of priviledged authorship. Task resolution will undermine your collaboration.

Whether you roll for each flash of the blade or only for the whole fight is a whole nother issue: scale, not task vs. conflict. This is sometimes confusing for people; you say "conflict resolution" and they think you mean "resolve the whole scene with one roll." No, actually you can conflict-resolve a single blow, or task-resolve the whole fight in one roll:

"I slash at his face, like ha!" "Why?" "To force him off-balance!"
Conflict Resolution: do you force him off-balance?
Roll: Loss!
"He ducks side to side, like fwip fwip! He keeps his feet and grins."

"I fight him!" "Why?" "To get past him to the ship before it sails!"
Task Resolution: do you win the fight (that is, do you fight him successfully)?
Roll: Success!
"You beat him! You disarm him and kick his butt!"
(Unresolved, left up to the GM: do you get to the ship before it sails?)

(Those examples show small-scale conflict resolution vs. large-scale task resolution.)

Something I haven't examined: in a conventional rpg, does task resolution + consequence mechanics = conflict resolution? "Roll to hit" is task resolution, but is "Roll to hit, roll damage" conflict resolution?

Source: http://lumpley.com/hardcore.html

12 hours ago, simonh said:

European two handed swords were used in a similar style. They only really make sense if you have really good all-over plate armour otherwise you’re just too vulnerable. Until armour gets good enough, sword and shield are far superior.

Yeah, my skills with the longsword translate pretty much entirely to using a katana. Sure there are differences between the weapons, but it is not a big jump to make. Two Handed Sword just makes sense as a category of skill. Whether it is right to call what I'd do with a katana kenjutsu is a bit of a different discussion and really depends on how you use the term: if you mean swordplay with a katana, then well yes, but if you a particular school of swordsmanship, then obviously no (as I am not trained in a school of kenjutsu). 

As for the Attack/Parry seperation, from a realistic/simulationist perspective I agree that it doesn't make 100% sense (and I'm coming to this as someone who occasionally teaches HEMA, if that it relevant to someone). As a practical thing it all blends together as a way of using a set of weapons (ie. Sword alone / Sword and Dagger / Sword and Shield / Sword and Buckler / Two Handed Sword / etc), but of course, if we get all granular, different people will have different strengths (which might include being good at parrying, good at attacking, etc. That said, I don't think the Attack/Parry seperation is necessarily all bad for a role-playing game, because some level of granularity can be good for the game and it isn't so wildly unrealistic. Anyhow that's a distillation of my practical experience and views of both HEMA and RPGs.

11 hours ago, styopa said:

They have a god that throws lightning bolts, live in steads, and are sword-swinging, cow-thieving barbarians....thus the pretty natural analogy to N.Euro primitives.

As an occasionally stead-living, sometimes cow-thieving N.Euro barbarian who regularly swings swords... I resent being called a primitive! Look, I have an Apple lightning bolt in my hand and I know how to use it! 

That Clearwine map is awesome, but definitely a bit of a paradigm shift. Looks like it could house more than 1500 people too, though. Now I wonder how unique is Clearwine/the "Clearwine-style" intended to be among the smaller Sartarite towns/tribal centers? 

1 hour ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

The new art I’m seeing is spot on and of a brilliant imaginative standard. Accessibility is key with Glorantha. Once you find an artist who gets it, it’s going to sell itself. Glorantha is such a rich world.

So much this. Though there's a lot of pondering about why Glorantha can be difficult to get into, I do think that that is a great point and that good and consistent art will help a whole new generation of fans to potentially get into this.

Well, this is a great time to get into Glorantha. With a new Runequest edition coming up, with a slew of supporting products, things are looking good. We should be getting a PDF for it relatively soon-ish, with the books and maybe more to come later this year. Meanwhile, the Glorantha Sourcebook - a systemless book - just came out on PDF and is a great further intro into the world.

Well color me excited.

55 minutes ago, davecake said:

I agree. There have been a few treatments of 'here is how to run a heroquest' in generic terms, and its good to see some consensus emerging, but a big book full of heroQuests is something that hasn't bee done and would be really great. Especially if the quests were offered with a few variations (including suggested local variations or practical issues, different enemies who may appear, etc), a few suggested game system specific issues, to make them reusable as game supplements. 

I tend to, as much as possible, make it game system agnostic or multi-statted at this point. We have 3 very different game systems that could all use such a book a lot. 

Yep, very much agreed. As part of the variations, issues, enemies, etc. I would really like the book to include examples of experimental Heroquesting too, though. I feel that's an area that needs help and could be presented interestingly, certainly opening up avenues for Arkati/Lunars/God Learner stuff. The high-end Lunar stuff seems an appropriate area for this (the birth of the Goddess, Castle Blue and so on) and would couple nicely with any attention and love the Lunars may be gettings as far as becoming more playable as presented. The Arkati, too, deserve some discussion.

14 hours ago, Ian Cooper said:

@Bohemond Thanks, its always useful to get feedback.

 

>>1) A book of hero quests for a range of cults (or scenarios built around the same, like the Humakt, Raven, and Wolf scenario and quest). For example, an Ernaldan quest, a Lhankor Mhyte quest, a Babeester Gor quest, etc. Especially quests for female PCs in less martial cults.

There is certainly something to be done on Heroquesting in more detail. I'm not sure exactly what as yet. Whilst I empathize with cult heroquests I am not sure that is the scope of a book that helps you understand how to develop heroquests for your own game.

2) A book of drop-in scenarios for Red Cow (especially something that makes use of Snakepipe Hollow)

Possible. An interesting question is that given limited publication throughput should we focus a book on that, or open up something new. Would it be better to use a vehicle like Wyrm's Footnotes to produce scenarios that could be dropped in? That said I am working on a book that will cover the rebellion during the period of the The Eleven Lights campaign, and have scenarios that could be dropped in to Red Cow.

...

4) A Holy Land sourcebook 

The Holy Land is huge. I think we would need to focus on  a place in the Holy Land where we wanted to tell some interesting stories.

5) A Lunar or Dara Happan sourcebook. Something that makes the Lunars playable as PCs in a full way (detailed write-ups of the individual Seven Mothers cults for example)

Yeah, that is a big one. I have some ideas on how we might do this.

Just commenting on some of these ideas: I'm actually less interested in a book that has "create your own Heroquest" as a major focus and would also like to see en emphasis on cult Heroquests, esp. with in-depth discussions on variations, problems, etc. as related to them. This has the double benefit of giving us more on the cults, while on the side showing what we can do for Heroquests that we create out of whole cloth.

Maybe if this book would also incorporate the hook of being from an Arkati and/or Lunar perspective, where we see more options for more creative and experimental Heroquesting it would really open up new ground and be a quite unique book in the Gloranthan pantheon.

More Red Cow stuff - I'm broadly interested. Maybe these should be scenarios the cover the time after the Eleven Lights, moving into (and during) the Runequest era? Of course, as people's campaigns may end up in very different places, I'm not sure about how to do it exactly in the best way. The idea for a book for more scenarios in and about the Rebellion is great as well.

As for the Holy Country: I'd totally "settle" for Nochet, but I'd hope we'd get good insights into Belintar's reign as well, which would give utility for general Holy Country stuff. 

The Lunar sourcebook is something that I really, really, really want to see, so yeah. This is the big one for me.

I guess for all of these there is the issue of whether to do these in the Runequest or Heroquest lines, though for some of us the distinction isn't going to be a deciding factor in whether to buy these or not, but mechanically I'm not too sure. I came to Glorantha from Heroquest, but I'm looking to explore it in the future via Runequest. In fact I will also aim to do an integration of sorts with both systems - for example, doing the tribal/more high level stuff via Heroquest mechanics, while using Runequest for character level affairs. That actually also brings up the idea of doing Heroquests with (ahem) Heroquest mechanics, hmm... but I guess that depends on what kind of support there will be for these things in both game lines.

I have a map drawn which places a Black Fox Clan to the north of Emerald Sword, around Aroka Lake, where you have the Korolainn. Not exactly sure why I placed them there, but the Coming Storm does say that "[t]o the north of the Creek is the Fox clan of the Dinacoli tribe."

Drop the minor deities? Heeeeeeel no. However, the points are valid that those baddies are much needed as well, so I would urge Chaosium to get them to the would-be buyer's hands in some other way. Many ways to do that, of course, but to name a few: a PDF only supplement, or maybe as part of other published scenarios where they are relevant or maybe in another GM's book down the line, etc.

On 4/10/2018 at 10:16 PM, MJ Sadique said:

Secondly, There did exist in history some martial arts which only focus in attacking and completely ignoring any aspect of defence, parrying or dodging. But it's more a philosophy choice from them; To be able to know how to attack without fail, you need to know how people can defend themselves. A lot of GM, as myself, choose to create a rule to reflect this logic ! but it's not in the rules...like a lot of thing

I guess this is starting to go a little off point, but I'm curious what martial arts do you feel fit that bill? Personally, I can only come up with systems that have different takes on defense, accomplishing it primarily via offense, but none that don't do any defense (indeed I find the concept somewhat strange).

7 hours ago, boztakang said:

At which point, the question becomes "What is special about Belintar and Moonson that allows them to remain incarnated for so long?"

The use of the Moon Rune, I venture to guess, or at least the nature of cycles. How does the Red Goddess manage to exist within Time? Through cycles and her essential cyclical nature (which is perhaps tied to her command of the Moon Rune). I kind of think embracing cycles is a sort of hack on Time itself - because they allow you to both exist and not-exist at the same time. Both Belintar and the Moonson do something similar.

Though the comment that the Moonson is the Goddess' penis makes me wonder (I think it was mentioned in the other thread). I'd love to hear some elaboration on that, if anyone has anything to add. 

9 hours ago, Tarumath said:

I agree that the serial immortality of Belintar and The Red Emperor are similar but I think that we know quite a bit about both: 

Belintar takes over the body of the Winners of the Tournament of Luck and Death but their essences are united until the new body is weared down by the essence of Belintar, then the Winner is liberated with full consciouness to a blessed existence.

Winners seems to be completely passive when they are inhabited by Belintar and liberated ones probably become godlings or equivalent in the mysterious otherside of the Holy Country, it's possible that they become extensions of Belintar but we don't really have any evidences.

 

The Red Emperor seems to be a construct of the Egi, maybe not originally (he could still have been the demigod son of the Red Goddess, or maybe it's pure fiction/only symbolic) but the Egi all have to "contribute" to his new body and Sheng Seleris killing some of them made him less stable, so he is probably at least partially a kind of over-soul (wyter in the general sense of the word) of the Egi. (The reason why he is not exactly the same when he gets a new body could be that since Sheng Seleris not all the Egi involved are always the same) 

 

In both cases, I'm not convinced that Illumination or Mysticism is needed.

We don't really know if the "blessed existence" offered by Belintar is just propaganda, though. Also, I don't think in either case (Belintar or the Red Emperor) the host's consciousness is simply set aside - I think there's evidence out there to show both doing political favors for their old kin.

This thread really reminds me that, as much as I love the whole Lunar affair, we really need a sourcebook that gives a thorough overview of the Lunar pantheon and its ways. It is very difficult for newcomers - or I would venture to guess even relatively experienced adepts - to get a handle on the details of the Lunar side of things in a way that allows you to bring them into play, comprehensively and coherently, while trying to cleave to existing canon. We don't really have anything that allows you do that as you can, say, do for the Orlanthi (or maybe even the Westerners, and they haven't really even been a main focus).

You have a great cadre of artists for the new Glorantha stuff. Cool to hear that Andrey is new to Glorantha, but he (and well the rest of 'em too!) should be pretty happy as he's about to become one of the artists that define Runequest/Glorantha's visual style for a whole new generation (or two). Good times for all of us! 

Prolly because yellow looks better in the cover? 

I like that a lot - very stylish. The font has an old school feel, but is still fresh.

Yeah, it is important to remember in regards to any theory that the "map is not the territory", but that said, I tend to think good theories are great things to have and often the reason a given theory is deemed poor is actually a problem in the application.

I like GNS theory as tool to evaluate possible issues at the table. It can give you tools to get at things which you'd otherwise fail to see or misinterpret as something else. I think there is also a somewhat misplaced tendency to think GNS is saying that all players can be divided into one of these categories and that this will be true all the time. So, when people don't turn out to be quite so one-dimensional, the whole theory is placed into question. I'd say that instead of doing this kind of demographic analysis of people, GNS is better used to look at specific moments of play and player preferences plus system features about those moments. 

But yeah, I don't think anyone should consider GNS the be-all-end-all explanation of gaming for all time, but it is one part of the toolbox/manual. Also, not everyone will want to be quite so analytically oriented in regards to their hobbies, perhaps saying they prefer to do the thing instead of talk about doing the thing, so to each their own.

The Brusting survive among the Red Cow as the Sardaling bloodline. Of course, this doesn't mean that a group of them couldn't have gone off to join with Mabodh May-Not-Be-Moved to form the Six Stones clan, but just making a note of it. The Split Waters seem to claim Eoric's Stead and a chunk of land around it. The old Red Cow material just says the Split Waters don't respect the border markers at the Finger and come down to hunt there. Though until now there's been no direct indication of this, they could have some roots in the Osmann clan. There could have been a split/rivalry/feud among the Osmann when they joined with the Drutorae (to form the Red Cow) after being hounded by the Telmori, with some of them going across the river to ultimately join with Mabodh instead. Of course, they are a War clan, so maybe they don't need more elaborate reasons or background to come over to do their thing in Red Cow territory.

Also, the Lissendings survive the Telmori scourge as a Torkani clan instead of being annihilated  or even moved (presumably thanks to living on the other side of the river). They don't seem too likely to contribute to the Maboder to my eyes as they are still shown in their lands when other clans were cowering in forts. The Godori survive as Torkani too, but it seems more feasible parts of them could be in the Black Oak, at least.

Going to look for kin taken as slaves as the reason to go to Prax sounds brilliant and possibly delightfully heavy material for stories. 

On 2/20/2018 at 6:16 PM, Jenx said:

As the person who drew all of those halos, there are two simple answers:
1. They look cool, I like drawing them, so I put them on people.
2. In-universe, I'd say it's a visual representation that the Pelorians use in their religious artwork, so it is included in this as well. The Halos on the Solar pantheon are  a sunburst, and only important figures in that pantheon have them, usually some the highest ranking one or the most important in a grouping. Yelm is basically all halo on there. The Lunars probably use that instead to signify a direct connection to the Red Goddess - notice how none of the Seven Mothers (save for She Who Waits, of course), has a halo, but everyone who comes from the Goddess does.

Working my way through the Entekosiad, I find this mention of halos which brings me back to this thread: "Bisos has received the halo which is characteristic of Carmanian divinities." So, maybe this idea wasn't motivating the halos in the new material, but an interesting aside anyway!