Austin

1 hour ago, styopa said:

I wish I could upvote this more. Well put.

I haven't read TSR so I don't know about the items this particular Rokari has, but I think one of the first lessons a GM learns is: "never give an NPC magic items that would be unbalancing in in the hands of characters". 

Simultaneously, I've always found the "this magic item can only be used by this bad guy and nobody else"* to be a cheesy way to essentially cheat players of rewards.  Particularly when the game has a penchant for magic items that are otherwise essentially rule-breaking or there's no conceivable way to make them given the game mechanics available.

*as mentioned, I haven't read it so I don't know if this is even relevant to TSR specifically

I jammed TSR in the first few days it was out. Urvantan's got a ton of magic items, but most of them are jewelry with inscribed spells (hence why actually figuring out how the heck inscriptions work matters). So on the one hand some of his good stuff is owner-only (but at least using a method players may be familiar with), but on the other his other stuff is pretty wild (like a Teleportation matrix for 6MP).

Now, Urvantan's supposed to be a "good guy" and supposed (I think) not to die during the adventure, so adventurers seem to be supposed to not get his stuff...

But, y'know... players.

10 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Were you involved in a Compendium Project? Just curious.

9 hours ago, prinz.slasar said:

He's the author of TTOW, afaik.

Yep, I wrote The Throat of Winter.

11 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Personally, I'd think GMs should allow reducing the 3 free Rune Points allocation, to be spent on Runes or Techniques (obviously, 1 is still required for initiate status)...

That seems reasonable to me as well.

12 hours ago, prinz.slasar said:

Imho The Throat of Winter and Yozarian's Bandit Ducks are great and on par with the scenarios from the ADVENTURE BOOK.

Glad to hear it.

4 hours ago, Manu said:

When I look at the 'demons' in RQ:GB, I'm not 100% sure they are spirits.

 

Are they? Do they attack with Spirit Combat? Are they discorporated?

I don't treat them as discorporate. I think that they could be kept in a binding enchantment or crystal, but that would probably require something funky in the summoning. I think they do have Spirit Combat skill and are used to doing so, but that they don't typically do so when in the Middle World. Instead, I see demon spirit combat being focused on when someone discorporates and goes down to the Underworld to poke and bother spooky fellas down there.

IMHO the best way to handle demons is probably to use the GB stats as vague guidelines, and instead to try developing each demon as a unique entity. Obviously this isn't necessarily viable for an active GM with unpredictable players...

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

Why? When you go through cult initiation, don't you sacrifice your first point of POW and get your first Rune point? What would you do with a Rune point without a Rune spell?

I think this is relying on the whole irritating "cult initiation =/= adulthood initiation" thing again.

Which TBF was something I'd had in mind, if I were to ever write up my own variant of "unexperienced adventurers." Probably something with adventurers who've just become adults, or had been just a year or two. Runes starting to solidify (I assume first discovered/revealed during adulthood initiation), able to augment (as the most minor magic a Gloranthan has) and able to cast a couple points of spirit magic, but no Rune magic or cult initiation.

I think initiate-initiate at 17/18 does still work, it's just not what I had in mind for my own variant of this sort of char-gen.

17 minutes ago, Jerry said:

Hi Smokebadger, have you managed to create Roll20 maps for any of the other Apple Lane locations (or even Apple Lane as a whole)?

There's a bunch of maps like this on the Jonstown Compendium which I presume (but do not actually know) are the same creator. Same style at least.

14 hours ago, buckwheats said:

It could be both since we will start with the new Apple Lane adventures and transition to The Smoking Ruins afterwards, if they can be persuaded to it. I wanna give my players the possibility to choose to go wherever and follow whichever play-stile they want. So they could derail "my plans" pretty quickly, if they choose to leave Apple Lane to itself and head in the general direction of Magastas Pool.

1) Semi-munchkin tip: an adventurer's elective skill points (at the end of character creation) can be assigned to any skill; sorcery spells are a skill! This can help your player start with a variety of spells (especially since Lhankor Mhy's cult sorcery spells are pretty specific, and not always immediately useful).

2) I really do recommend starting as a Philosopher, because as a Scribe the adventurer only begins mastering the Truth Rune and the Command Technique, limiting their spell selection. Alternately, you could offer your player to drop starting POW a point per additional Rune or Technique mastered (just like an adventurer can drop their POW to get additional Rune points). I think a big draw to playing a sorcerer is "Ooh, look at the variety of magic I can learn!" and that boils down to getting a variety of Runes/Techniques.

3) The spell Geomancy could be really useful for several of those planned adventures—especially "Dragon of Thunder Hills" and "The Smoking Ruin" itself. I think a good strategy for introducing Lhankor Mhy sorcery to a new player is to look forward to how information-finding spells can be key to the adventurers' success, and then find ways to encourage the player to figure that out for themselves.

16 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Where is that from?

1) As far as I recall, no corporate entity in the Bestiary has a move rate higher than 12.

2) Each strike rank is one "unit" of movement. Ergo, you can't use more than 12 units of movement in a melee round. (p.192)

My understanding is that each Move "unit" is 3 meters; every 3 meters you move adds one to your strike rank. Humans have Move 8 by default, so can move up to 24 meters in a melee round, adding 8 to the strike rank they act in. IIRC there's a sidebar in the Praxian Animals entry in the Bestiary which elaborates further on corporeal movement rates, particularly in the context of chases (and discussing why they cap at 12).

I've been aware for a while that several spirit entities have Move equal to their POW; however, elsewhere Move caps at 12—to indicate that the entity can use a movement unit on each strike rank. How have other gamemasters been handling entities with higher Move rates? For example, disease spirits have an average POW of 16-17, and POW equal to their Move. Do they get to use two move "units" in four strike ranks?

3 hours ago, David Scott said:

I'm not sure where you've got this from. The Magic Rune Box on page 382 sets it out as the only Condition Rune (so far) used in Sorcery. It's a separate rune and as it's the only one of its type, so gives no insight into others of its type (until Mastery, Infinity, luck and Fate based sorcery becomes available). 

Tindalos pretty much answers my point of view. To my reading (and re-skim) of the Sorcery chapter, there's nothing which indicates a sorcerer can master the Magic Rune; I've previously read that sidebar as indicating it is a Rune not typically studied. This reading is augmented by the section Tindalos referenced, which indicates the Magic Rune as a placeholder, and importantly does not use the game jargon "insight."

I'm broadly approaching Urvantan (and the other sorcerers in The Smoking Ruins) as necessitating rules outside the core rulebook for the "how," and that the text basically just is providing the gamemaster with the "what" of what they do. So, in my prior statement I was providing a hypothesis of what unpublished sorcery rules may contain; no certainties involved. After all, RQG's Sorcery is explicitly incomplete.

This is paralleled with the use of unpublished heroquesting rules (especially in "Grove at Green Rock").

Also a small nitpick now that I'm re-reading the passage: "A sorcerer must have an affinity with the Rune or Runes used in the spell..." (Emph. added) should be "must have the Rune or Runes mastered" or equivalent, since an adventurer's Rune affinities (their ratings tied to cults & personality) don't impact what Runes they can sorcerously master, per page 381.

@Joerg My hypothesis about the Magic Rune is that mastering it lets the sorcerer infer any one other Rune in spells; there's an off-hand comment about some Malkioni group mastering the Magic Rune as matter of course IIRC in RQG's sorcery chapter. Sort of a, everything has insight into Magic, Magic gives insight into everything. I also suspect that mastering it requires something unusual, like the Black Arkati's illumination.

Another element I found very interesting in "Urvantan's Tower" was the speed at which Urvantan is described to cast spells. My take-away as I read that section was that he's re-appearing from the God Time (we've already had the spoiler warning in the OP, before Bill et al yells at me) and casting a spell straight away, then dies and re-appears round after round. Per RQG's sorcery rules, a sorcery spell takes a minimum of two rounds to cast—a melee round, then two SRs per either magic point or level of intensity (can't recall which).

This struck me as a narrativist sort of approach to a fairly rules-heavy or simulationist game; thus far, the only resolution I see is essentially a sort of "in the God Time" handwavium. Which may in fact be valid—but as a gamemaster I would have appreciated more information on how this is happening for when my players cry "that's not fair, how do I do that?"

48 minutes ago, Joerg said:

But then Argan Argar is the god of shady deals...

Is this just for the pun? If not, could you elaborate a little on AA's sketchiness? I've not gotten that impression from the core book (pretty much my only exposure). Thanks!

4 hours ago, Joerg said:

Quote

-- Are they still using Lunar coins at this point in time?

Why not? Now it is trophy money, and while the old dies for sovereign coins may have survived the Lunar occupation, melting in all the Lunar coins and re-stamping them would be a major effort in terms of resources. There are more urgent messes to clean up in the wake of Kangharl's fortunate removal from office.

FWIW it seems to me that we call the coins Lunars, and some number (perhaps the majority?) of Central Genertelans call them Lunars, but I suspect a good number of the coins running around aren't "actual" Lunars, but rather whatever silver coin-shaped thing the local elite happen to have around. Sometimes actually minted by the occupying Lunars, sometimes minted by a guild, etc.

I think another important complication in this discussion is that while Glorantha is Bronze Age, and derived from Bronze Age tropes, coinage terrestrially doesn't emerge until the Iron Age. So while we can draw comparisons from terrestrial history, I'd regard them as sketchy at best; although ancient Mesopotamia and Anatolia meticulously recorded a bewildering amount of trade with neighbors both near and far coinage, as far as I know, wasn't a tool they used.

That said, I suspect the Athenian "owl" drachma provides an interesting example:

Around the era of the Peloponnesian War, at the height of Athenian's naval & trade ascendancy, their coinage was extremely good; by extremely good, I mean that the silver was consistently of a pretty good purity, and that the coins very consistently kept the same weight. This was such the case, that the eponymous owl became strongly associated with good and valuable coinage among other societies in the Mediterranean. So associated, that even for years (or, if I recall rightly, generations) after Sparta's defeat of Athens that coinage with an owl in Athenian style still emerged when those societies went to mint their own coins. The owl image became not associated with Athens, in the minds of the illiterate masses, but with a "good coin." So sometimes, if a ruler wanted their coinage to be more prestigious or more highly-regarded, they would mint it with an owl, and then their own city's or nation's iconography on the other side.

Now, Central Genertelans aren't going to suddenly start using a Moon Rune for "good coin" because they know it has magical associations; but it wouldn't surprise me that in the twenty-odd years the Lunar Empire dominated Dragon Pass politics and economics, some association arose with another Lunar image, connected with trade. Perhaps an Etyries non-magical (or minor-magical) glyph, or the Red Emperor seated on a throne (but altered slightly to be whichever local ruler; with the Air Rune instead of the Moon Rune, for instance) is now associated with "that's a good coin, it'll be mostly silver and weigh the right amount."

I think the key element here in Gloranthan coin iconography is that a majority of the population is illiterate. Granted, the literacy rate will be higher among those handling coins—an average tenant farmer living on 15L equivalent/year probably isn't handling silver every year, much less every season, and certainly isn't literate—but non-literate recognition of coinage is still an important goal of the iconography.

So there's a fair chance some element of Lunar coin imagery would be repurposed as "general coin imagery" throughout the Dragon Pass region; less so in Kethaela (given Nochet's domineering influence), and very heavily in Pavis/Prax, where that's the only semblance of civilization at all.

(Note: I've provided this from memory based on reading Colin M. Kraay's Archaic and Classical Greek Coins some years ago, and don't have the book with me to verify the retelling's accurate.)

Just now, HreshtIronBorne said:

I remember rq3 extension doubling duration per point? I still remember having charts on the back of my character sheet where i calculated each point of extension i owned and how long it made whatever spell it got stacked with. 

You're probably right. I played a sorcerer-knight so didn't really pay much attention to Rune magic. Read it, but didn't really play it.

1 minute ago, Akhôrahil said:

Hey, there's always Woad...

(A little surprised my players haven't realized that they can make two pots of 9p Woad per season...)

I'm pretty sure Woad & Thunderstones are High Holy Day only? So, yearly.

43 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

it's not an academic term, though, it was coined by Gail Simone

1) No clue who Gail Simone is.

2) You did say "it's used in academic papers" to describe its frequent use, and most of the references when I skimmed the linked article seemed to be to other folks who are involved in gender studies academia.

I'm not saying the trope's irrelevant, just that it doesn't strike me as assumed pop-culture knowledge. Sort of like if I were to assume anyone I spoke with knew what hoi polloi means; known, but not default.

9 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

You might also keep Extension as a pure duration multiplier. 90 minutes for Extension 5 is a lot less than a year.

IIRC old versions of Extension were +15min per point (I never played RQ2, trying to remember RQ3). But then sorcery would have the only long-term buffs, and we can't have sorcery outshining Rune magic, can we...

8 hours ago, g33k said:

In all cases where the RAW is unclear I  /always/  consider MGF as a primary source of resolution...

Which way seems more fun to you, for your game?

To illustrate & expand on this: I would rule opposite Mirza, because for my game I think it's more fun to reward the players for achieving/acquiring Heal 6. It seems to me that in both rulings, an MGF principle has been applied.

10 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

actual academic works have been written on this subject

Friendly reminder that while many of us have a semi-academic bent, I believe few folks around here are actual academicians of gender studies.  I've never encountered the phrase before myself (although I do recognize the trope, as described in the linked article).

@Akhôrahil, @HreshtIronBorne: if we're in rules-lawyer territory, per @Jason Durall's errata answers on the Q&A spells with the "nonstackable" tag cannot be Extended. Notable spells including this are Peace, Charisma, Bear's Strength, Sword Trance, Truesword, and Earth Shield, though this includes others as well.

(FWIW I'm not sure I'll be keeping with that ruling myself, and I suspect it's an example of imprecise definitions as Akhorahil has complained of, rather than an intended result. I've not yet found an example of actual published text in the core where a "nonstackable" spell was Extended.)

10 hours ago, lordabdul said:

So I like the idea of removing the rule, since it means you can keep your pre-calculated Special/Critical success thresholds... but, errr, doesn't that make high powered combat completely ridiculous? Everybody always does special/critical success, even when 2 evenly matched opponents fight?

I haven't played in a super-high-powered campaign (base skills breaking 200%), but yeah, basically. I have a friend who's been playing the same Wind Lord, a bit on and off, for over a decade, and his base skill is something like 220%; their game foundation is RQ3, houseruled, and combats against equal opponents do often come down to who specials past parry armor first. Or who rolls 96+ first.

@HreshtIronBorne thanks for the head's-up on Fireblade. I'll keep an eye out for that at my table; I can't recall exactly what my players were using--maybe it's just that he likes that spell, but wasn't using it on spirits.

In any case, Truesword + enchanted iron broadsword does still make very short work of spirits.

6 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

1 hour ago, Crel said:

I also don't play with the over-100 reduce at my table

What rule do you use instead?

I don't? I removed that rule, and just use usual resolution. If I have to break ties with a single die roll, I use Mythras's resolution rule (if success level is tied, whichever die roll is higher).

8 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

But that spirit will give you only a few MPs, right?

Average ghost has POW 3D6+6, so 16-17 POW. Spirit Combat POW×5, so 80/85%. CHA 3D6, so 10-11. Spirit Combat damage (if I remember the table correctly) should be 26 to 28 on average, so 1D6+1? Ghosts love to initiate attacks, and if you've got a POW Storage crystal you can bind one into it for freebies if you defeat the ghost in spirit combat. Or, release it once without a control spell (since, depending on the type of spirit, there's no guarantee of having the correct spell) to do a thing. 85% and 1D6+1 is pretty beatable by most beginning apprentice shaman adventurers I've seen. Not easy, not guaranteed, but beatable.

Plus once you goad the spirit into combat with Distraction, your buddy with Bladesharp or Fireblade can sneak up and take a few good chunks out of it. Fireblade or Truesword make super quick work of spirits.

2 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

1. I don't think "why would you allow something that is meaningless?" is a very strong argument, just an indication. Although in principle I suppose you could want to boost a defensive spell if it needs to go in right now - such as saving the life of an unconscious party member with Countermagic up by boosting your Heal so that it penetrates. 🙂

2. You mistake my meaning. That it says that boosting is "typically" used to overcome magical defence, indicates that there are atypical uses of boosting that are about something else (such as, perhaps, boosting the staying power of a spell).

FWIW I'm fairly sure MPs can't "stabilize" a spell like you're suggesting (although I agree that the wording's vague, and should be more precise). Was this addressed in the Errata? I feel like it was, but can't recall off the top of my head.

2 hours ago, lordabdul said:

My initial (potentially naive?) reaction is that you are the one breaking the Glorantha ecosystem by allowing characters to walk around with 60+ magic points at their disposal with, seemingly, easy ways to refill them before the next combat/adventure. I might be missing something about RAW, but I would have never dreamed of having such power unless I'm playing some legendary figure. Is there any precedent for this? Even looking at Rune Lords in the old Runemasters book, they only typically have storage crystals for 10 to 20 POW. Am I missing something?

I think what you're missing is players making their own storage devices. The average point of POW with Magic Point Enchantment (or equivalent spell--which is available as a spirit magic spell or sorcery, not just a Rune enchantment--which is a whole other discussion) creates 5.5 points of MP storage. Early in our campaign, my players each sacced a point of POW to a single storage using the group enchant rules. Rolled pretty well, had a group storage of I think 40-ish MP?

Crystals are nice as POW-saving measures, but hardly necessary for developing MP batteries. All you need for a spirit is POW equal to their number of characteristics (so typically 3, INT, POW, CHA). Now, trapping a high-POW spirit isn't necessarily simple, but once it's done that's also pretty efficient. Especially if you can do it in a temple or somewhere else with defenses, or get a successful Moon Rune augment on the resistance table roll, etc. Summoning an elemental then binding it gives you both an MP battery and a useful tool--and lets you spend just 1 MP on Control [Elemental] instead of 2 RP on Command Cult Spirit to summon it.

4 hours ago, Pentallion said:

I'm his GM and I was annoyed at the obviously broken Sword Trance (which I have since house ruled only doubles the natural skill of the caster) because it makes literally EVERYTHING that doesn't carry dispell magic to be pointless.  Especially with the "reduce skills over 100%" stupidity rule.  I house ruled that BS the hell outta my game as well.

That's a nice, simple change; I'm moderately irritated I didn't figure it out myself. Do you play that Sword Trance just flat doubles, or that they still require MP?

I also don't play with the over-100 reduce at my table, because I think it's silly that Dodge 175% (very achievable with a lucky augment) can auto-dodge the Crimson Bat's ten-meter mouth. It also adds math to play, IMHO, and sometimes I don't wanna tell the players how much they need to reduce percentage. If they're going into combat against an unknown guy with a spear, I don't want them to get that meta-knowledge that he's got 150% or whatever by saying "Oh, btw, reduce your skills by 50."

1 minute ago, jajagappa said:

The ones blessed by Ernalda and Imarja. 😉

Geese is the only acceptable plural of geas and dammit that is a hill I'm willing to die on.