Austin

I'm not sure there's a situation in chargen where you add just 5% to a skill (since the electives are +25% and +10%) but that aside...

I'd rule they get that percentage added atop the base percent. So, the skill on their sheet would go from Conceal 5% (base) to Conceal 10%. Then when actually attempting the skill in play, they'd be rolling with the modifier, so have a 0 or -5% skill chance, which should IIRC mean they can only succeed if they roll an 01-05 for auto success (provided conditions aren't impossible), with the full 96-00 range a fumble.

I've always tracked skills on their own, and then added/subtracted the modifier in play. I'm not sure off the top of my head if there's text which supports a particular approach. But in most situations I believe the 01-05 range always succeeds, just like rolling 96+ always fails.

13 hours ago, frodolives said:

The spine of my copy of RQG feels like it's only a matter of time before it separates from the covers. Is this a common issue, or did I get a bad copy?

I've not had an issue, and I've beaten my first printing up pretty bad. Haven't used second printing enough to say (shelf copy v. table copy).

11 hours ago, lordabdul said:

One of the first problem I can think of is the replenishing of Rune Points, since you have to wait for a holy day for that.

This has come up in my game, and something important to remember is that adventurers can gain back RP by participating in an associated cult's holy day. Part of my player handouts are the last page of the GM's pack calendar--the whole year on one page--and a typed list of their cult's holy days, and the seasonal holy days of their associated cults. Also, a few cults (Ernalda & Issaries off the top of my head, maybe Eiritha as well?) have a minor holy day weekly, giving members of those cults more opportunities than others to replenish RP. Orlanth gets two seasonal holy days (one fixed, one floating), and has a ton of associated cults, as befits the king of the gods, whereas Humakt has none as the god of separation and Death, and only gets RP back on his seasonal holy day. If most of your party worship deities with many associated cults, it's easier to maintain ongoing play.

My own game's somewhere between seasonal and ongoing. Ideally it's seasonal, but as you mentioned/worried about enough screwy stuff happens that it's pretty much a constant stream of nonsense, bouncing between broad narrative strokes and shorter actual "adventures." Ex, my campaign's set in Pavis, so the broad strokes are marketplace stuff, what each player's basically doing as their day-to-day life (going around the table asking a sentence or two, for flavor/fluff more than challenges), hearing rumors and events, and we moved into more "adventure" time when the party decided to try helping Belvani reclaim rulership of Sun Dome Temple.

Another factor to keep in mind is adventures which take a long time in-game. In my experience, this has mostly happened with traveling to a location. For example, in my game the Dragonrise just happened, and the party volunteered to go investigate. Which means they need to cross Prax and get over there, which will take at least a week or two. That's time when most adventurers won't be able to find a temple to worship at for Rune Points. And then the trip back...

24 minutes ago, metcalph said:

Remember Yelmalio has many forms, one of which is Elmal.

Fair enough (though my gut says a Sun Dome Temple might be queasy about admitting an Orlanth initiate...), but not what I intended as my main thrust. Sorry if I was vague.

What I wanted to get at is trying to understand the general principle for multi-cult membership--for example, do the cults need to be A or F toward one another on the chart, or merely N? Or does each and every cult basically have its own list of where it allows cross-membership? (And therefore we just need to wait for GaGoG.) Orlanth and Yelmalio just happened to be the example in this case. Because while the membership section says the cults must be compatible, I don't understand where that line is drawn on the chart.

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

Orlanth is neutral to Yelm and Yelmalio. And yes, it IS possible to be in both Orlanth and Yelmalio.

As Initiate of one & Lay Member of another, or as Initiates of both? What're the "compatibility" requirements to be an initiate in two cults. I've found the description on RQG 275 ambiguous. Does it just vary from cult to cult, loosely organized by the Cult Relationship chart?

Also, if you're an initiate of both Orlanth and Yelmalio, do you have to challenge yourself to riddle contests?

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

https://boardgamegeek.com/rpgissuearticle/20423/rune-blades

White Dwarf (Issue 39 - Mar 1983)

Did... did you just remember that? 😮

@Imryn I think you're looking for a degree of internal consistency which is, by designer intention, not present in most Gloranthan games. That's been my impression for quite some time. I suggest choosing a metaphysic which best suits your game milieu and letting that sit.

3 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

So news of the transgression would have to travel at (let's call it) the speed of sin. How fast does news of sin travel to the deity. The gods are not omnipotent, so I would imagine that it could not be instantaneously transmitted (unless there is something in the mythos that would explain this, like incredibly great speed or...

The way I think of the geas bond is like this: you're on the surface of a lake, floating with a life vest. The straps constrict you, but you're easily supported by the cushions. Yet if you twist the wrong way, you might break those straps--and drop plunging into the deep waters.

Another way I like to think of it is that the geas bond is like a binary connection with the god. Humakt either knows "One" or "Zero." If one becomes zero, the geas was broken and the gift disappears. Sort of like the "does the initiate have faith?" bond which gods are said to know IIRC; they have it as a Yes/No, not as a sliding scale. They can acquire more information from prayers, but otherwise it's just a binary choice.

13 minutes ago, Imryn said:

Using two different pools does not apply, because the way it is written in the RAW the matrix is created by a POW sacrifice. There is no RP used in the creation, use, or recharging of a matrix.

I think it applies by analogy. Even if there aren't any "pseudo-RP" or whatever in the matrix, the matrix still holds the magic of a particular god. The analogy I was trying to provide is that using another cult's matrix with your cult's spell is like casting from two different Rune point pools; it's still mixing cult magics. The magic is a particular god's because the enchantment spell was gifted from that god--the Rune Master who learned it had to sac POW to that god to learn the enchantment.

Again, I admit that without actual text saying "Thou Shalt Not Call Upon Two Gods at Once" it is a bit of a moot point.

14 minutes ago, Joerg said:

If a traded spell is a delayed spell that you can regenerate the RP for once you handed it over, what is to stop two munchkins from the same cult trade their identical spells to have additional castings on call, over and over again?

Honestly, you're 100% right. And I'm quite confident that's the RAW. Text is p.340:

Quote

The Rune points used to trade a Rune spell can be replenished in the regular fashion. To cast the received spell, no Rune points need to be used and the caster uses the relevant Rune rating of the person who provided the spell.

AFAIK there's nothing to prevent munchkinism in the mechanics.

2 minutes ago, Imryn said:

I think that trading a spell should count as a use of the spell, so if you trade a spell you previously gained through trading you would lose it.

Agreed. I was thinking more "I've gathered up a bunch of Shield 2, Extension 3's, and slowly kept casting Spell Trading to hand them to my fellow adventurers. Now that we're doing a really scary mission it's time for us to turn on the magic." Plus, because of the Spell Trading's requirements, you're probably continuing to stockpile extra uses of all sorts of nifty little spells. I imagine just having a stockpile of Multispell and Divination from various deities is probably quite good. (Gee, I'll use my Chalana divination to figure out what plant will heal my buddy, my Issaries divination to figure out if Uncle Harmast got to Boldhome safely, etc...) Or getting a spare Soul Sight, too. Even with the possible restrictions on trading special Rune magic the common magic you can stockpile--and save your RP for special spells--is quite good.

10 minutes ago, Imryn said:

I feel that same way you do, but the RAW has nothing that prohibits casting an extension from a matrix and a spell from RP. The source of the magic that created the matrix is only relevant for recharging it, and recharging it is not limited by anything but availability of a proper temple.

I'm looking around for the bit of text which says you can't cast a spell using RP from two different cults at once (ex can't do Spell + Extension using your own RP pools for Orlanth and Issaries) and all I can find is a snippet about separate pools on p.275, "Membership in Multiple Cults" which isn't really enlightening. Maybe it was in Rune Fixes, or was just stated by a dev at some stage on the forums?

The argument being, because you can't do Orlanth Shield + Issaries Extension, and because a common Rune matrix requires replenishing from a specific cult, therefore the common Rune matrix is effectively that cult's magic, and can't get stacked with another cult's magic. This would still allow Orlanth Shield + Orlanth Extension Matrix. But without that text, RAW you're right.

8 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Unless the player is an egregious munchkin, of course, then the gloves come off. Damn munchkins, hate 'em!

If I recall correctly, you're the one who opened up this thread of worms...

I generally agree with Phil on this one--the wording could be stronger and more precise in the text, but I still don't generally think you can combine an Extension matrix from one cult with a spell from another. My jury's still out on if you could combine an Extension matrix with its own cult spells. I see nothing against it, but something just feels screwy about it to me. I figure the matrix can't refill until the extension's done, and the spell you cast can't refill until then too, both due to the Rune Fix where Extension'd Rune points can't be replenished until the spell ends.

I think this is why the spell trade is relevant. If you trade with your Wind Lord buddy for Shield 2, Extension 3, he can replenish those Rune points at normal pace, and you can replenish whatever you traded away. And, IIRC you can trade a traded spell, so you could pass around a few copies of that, given a lot of time to prepare (like over a couple seasons) and then have the party cast it before going and raiding Snake Pipe Hollow. While the stacked Spell + Extension might be a little wobbly (though I feel pretty confident it qualifies as "one use" of a spell since it's one "action" basically), I think it's solid RAW that the points come back normally, which is the main loophole.

43 minutes ago, Imryn said:

The description (RQG 335) does say "Once used, the user must take the item back to the proper temple to be recharged with a successful Worship ceremony." but for common rune spells any temple can be the proper temple.

I feel like the cult from which the enchantment spell was cast is still the cult which the matrix is affiliated with, even for common spells. It wasn't made with amorphous magical energies--it was made with the magic of Orlanth, or Ernalda, or whomever. I think this is highlighted by the sidebar about Heal Wound on p.330, which discusses how the common Rune spells still behave distinctly for each cult.

On 6/11/2019 at 1:35 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Correct, and not a discrepancy. Babeester Gor cultists are very intimidating, for example. It's a skill that they naturally tend to acquire, but it is not a skill that the cult values and rewards. So they get the skill, but it is not a "cult skill" for the purposes of advancement.

I agree with this. The Gor sisters are freaky. This was more something I noticed and figured could be of interest to discuss.

That being said, these are skills described on p.73 as "starting skills taught to [the cult's] members" which implies to me that they ought to be skills the cult values in the sense that they're intentionally teaching it rather than amorphously acquiring it (like Christians learning to sing, kinda, as pointed out above).

Though the notion of new Gor initiates sitting in a classroom learning to glare appropriately does bring a smile to my face...

15 minutes ago, Imryn said:

Why not create a spell matrix for extension? One time permanent POW sac for a reusable extension that doesn't lock out RP seems like a good deal to me.

Great idea. I feel like we don't have the grounds to say Yes! or No! on if you can use an external Extension on a spell (although IIRC we do know you can't combo RP from different cults, therefore Extension on one side & Spell on the other is out), but you could certainly build up a Spell + Extension matrix over time, since you don't need to complete an enchantment all at once (p.334-335, in the Matrix Creation Enchantment description).

So, Spell Trading.

A factor which has come up in my game, which is relevant for munchkinnery, is that Issaries has a minor holy day every week, getting back 1D6 RP. So as an Issaries you've got tons of opportunities to use Spell Trading, even with the spell's caveat that "No cult trades special cult magic lightly;" for example, the "Earth goddesses" and "nomad gods" require a High Priest(ess)'s approval or negotiation (RQG p.340). However, the example on the following page implies to me that there are some cults willing to trade on a fairly leisurely basis, at least among Issaries' associated cults.

Over time, I imagine you could build up quite the storehouse of Heal Wound, Multispell, and maybe Divination toward different cults, in addition to rarer chances at special Rune magic.

Now, if we wanna be extra Egregious, I can see an argument that a Spell stacked with Extension would count as "one use" of a Rune spell. After all, it's all cast on the same SR, at the exact same time. Getting this through trading has the upside that your Rune points aren't locked out during the Extended spell's duration...

I noticed something interesting recently: the starting skill bonuses an adventurer gets in the adventurer creation chapter due to their cult aren't always from actual cult skills. Most often this is Sing, but there are other examples like Intimidate for Babeester Gor and Maran Gor. This was relevant for my game because I had some players checking these lists for their seasonal occupation/cult skill checks. In addition, adventurers may add "+20% to one of these starting skills and +15% to another" (RQG p.73) during adventurer creation, which seems a bit odd to me because there's often a lot of cult skills which may not necessarily get a starting percentage, where those bonuses could be added (and which I'll probably allow in the future with my own players).

Mostly thought it was interesting and figured I'd share. Table comparing the Adventurers chapter & the Rune Cults chapter is below.

I think this is so Egregious that no GM would possibly permit it, buuuut... couldn't you technically get back characteristics lost to sacrificing for RP, shaman abilities, etc. with Restore Health? Relevant text is p.338, "This spell restores characteristic points that have been lost to disease, to the effects of the sorcery spell Tapping, or to other sources" (Emphasis added). Again yes, I don't think there's any chance in the Underworld you could get away with this in an actual game--clearly other sources means external Bad Stuff--but if you're looking to be Extra Egregious, maybe playing an Illumined trickster, seems like a neat way to start an argument .

Just wondering, what are the odds that Chaosium might make this (or other old PDF-only material) available in print, or Print on Demand? For those of us who prefer hard copies to PDF .

4 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Sorry,  I was referring to all Rune Levels, my bad,  Priests, Rune lords, and of course the god-talkers  (which you have given your thoughts on, thanx) who may or may not be RLs or RPs.

RQG p.277: "An allied spirit is an initiate of the cult and can sacrifice for Rune points, just as a normal initiate. Allied spirits cannot be Rune Priests, Rune Lords, or God-Talkers." The text doesn't seem to specify how many RP an allied spirit begins play with (but it must be at least one, since they're always an initiate).

2 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Without being nasty, alas you are on the wrong side of history as well as MGF here. If a woman wishes to play a Princess Diana of Amazonia why ever not. She shan't achieve said stats if she must roll as a member of the distaff side.

I'm not sure we need to jump straight to "Wrong side of history!" from someone positing a question on how to model sexual dimorphism in their own game. As for MGF, isn't that best decided table-by-table? (Not to mention I'm like 90% sure Wonder Woman's got a wee bit more than STR 21...)

I've been letting it muddle in the back of my head for a bit, and I think the OP potentially raises a variety of interesting questions, provided the shared premise "we can talk civilly about sexual dimorphism" holds true. Here's where I'm at so far.

Modeling characteristics seems to rely on two sorts of measurements:

1. The average characteristic generated (10.5 on a 3D6, 13 on a 2D6+6) by a given roll.
2. The minimum and maximum rollable characteristic on said roll.

In my prior post, I disagreed with @styopa's assessment of INT between males and females based primarily on the second criterion. If males roll 3D6 and females 2D6+6 for minimum scores of 3 and 8 respectively, then there's some portion of males which are, simply, blithering idiots to a degree not extant in the female population. On that model, about 26% of the male population has INT equal to or less than the lowest 3% of the female population (assuming I've done math right ).

Of course, this all is reliant upon another premise: the basic physiological and psychological capacities of Gloranthan humans are the same as the basic capacities for Earth humans. I think this premise is reasonable. First, let us assume a "good faith" argument that any given characteristic model will have exceptions--persons who lay outside the scope of the model. For example, many NBA basketball players are larger than SIZ 21 (listed as 6'10" or 6'11" on the Humanoid Size table on p.9 of the Bestiary). So, I'll be working from the assumption that even a good model only accounts for, say, 95% of the population. Outliers always exist (and often go on adventures!). Second, there's nothing in RQG which makes me believe Gloranthan humans are substantially different in their innate capacities from Earth humans; cultural differences exist, and of course magic and spirits and dragons and gods exist there and do not here, but humans still seem, to me, to be presented as very us-like. Further, such a presentation is the norm in the fantasy genre as a necessary feature for the audience's transfer into and acceptance of a secondary world.

Finally, a major challenge to modeling sexual dimorphism within RQG is that in some cases there's not really a quantifiable way to measure the capacity, or the characteristic, or map one to the other. For example, there isn't a clear way to determine between CHA 17 and CHA 18 in a real world situation (and I think it's reasonable or necessary that we can't actually make that distinction). There's a certain amount of abstraction involved in characteristic modeling which cannot be overcome. STR and SIZ, as styopa addressed, are able to be quantifiably measured and accounted for; further, we have given measurements within the game system for varieties of SIZ. They also make an interesting argument regarding CON. But characteristics like INT, POW, and CHA aren't really quantifiable; while we may use IQ as a measure of intelligence on Earth, I don't think it can really be mapped to RuneQuest characteristics in a meaningful way.

A few thoughts of my own for modeling dimorphism, if I were inclined to do so...

1. I'd give males +1 to STR and SIZ, and females +2 to CON. Perhaps ironically I would do so because I prefer, ultimately, to view RuneQuest as a game, not a simulation. It's a story-generating engine which should encourage interesting choices. The males option increases their average SIZ+STR to 25, just enough for a +1D4 damage modifier, while the females option adds two Hit Points--boon enough in its own right. I think this encourages decision-making without necessarily penalizing either choice. It seems to me that large characteristic roll differences (like 3D6 v. 2D6+1, 3D6 v. 2D6+6) suggested in the OP both too strongly disincentivize choosing a particular sex, as well as providing an inaccurate model based upon the given ranges of those rolls.
2. To most accurately model characteristic variety, why would we be slavishly attached to rolling D6s? For example, a roll of 4D4 has a range of 4 to 16, but a similar average to 3D6 (10 v. 10.5). 5D4 creates a fairly interesting spread for INT, with min 5 (for blithering idiots) and max of 20, and an average of 12.5 (near our current 2D6+6). I don't have a full array to suggest, but it seems to me that if we're looking to work from a simulation perspective, the best array of characteristic rolls would be developed by a series of small dice rolled many times--D3s and D4s--with a small additional modifier on top to denote sexual divergence. For characteristics with a great deal of variety, like STR, remain with D6s or go even higher.

3 hours ago, styopa said:

INT: men 3d6, women 2d6+6 (IQ tests tend to put women around 99.5-101.5 vs men 100 in the developed world.  In my PRACTICAL experience, this understates the difference in real-world use.)

I don't think this successfully models the characteristic difference you're aiming for, because while both males and females on this model have the same maximum rollable INT (18), their minimum rollable varies drastically (3 and 8, respectively). Further, the difference between a 99.5-101.5 and a 100 average is minuscule; IQ isn't an objective measurement, but rather an average based upon tested subjects which occasionally needs to be controlled for a wide variety of variables. For example, a 100 IQ child does not exhibit the same cognitive functions as a 100 IQ adult. My understanding on IQ is that it is best considered in the context of a standard deviation, generally 15 points. So, substantial differences in functioning can be seen between persons of similar age and culture at IQ 85 and IQ 100 after brief conversation, but the difference between 95 and 100 likely isn't obvious.

9 hours ago, 10baseT said:

But with RQG, it's not there nor have i heard anything (besides a potential RQG type of Miskatonic Library).

I don't know from where, but I recall an official-ish comment on these forums that something similar to the DM's Guild or the Miskatonic Repository was being set up. Who knows when. Hopefully then, the cup of scenarios shall runneth over. The gods know we need it.

My hunch is that a big challenge involved is basically licensing out Glorantha on the pseudo-OGL terms involved in something like Miskatonic, due to the high degree of integration RQG has with the setting. It's difficult to write setting-agnostic material. Further, my take on why there's such a great width of material for the above-mentioned sources is that you don't need to really negotiate licensing issues, etc; you can just write and go at your own pace, which attracts a good amount of independent authors looking to try their hand. (Naturally, this does mean that the quality of a random DM's Guild module, or similar, is never guaranteed...)

1 hour ago, Imryn said:

Is this really the way its supposed to work or am I mistaken?

1 hour ago, Bill the barbarian said:

If that is the rules as intended it is new with RQ G. The reason in past times that Humakt had no associated cults was because of his mastery of death. None of the other gods understand the incredible responsibly and honour that goes with this "understanding" To initiate to the cult used to be a cutting of ties with clan, family, and tribe so that they could deal holy death for the cult if needed without bringing kin and law/outlaw into it. Much has changed, but this changing... seems drastic.

My gut says that we won't know for certain until we've got Gods & Goddesses, unless a dev steps down from the golden desk and informs us. My take is that to be a member of multiple cults, all cults involved must see one another as "Associated." Naturally, YGMV. I remember conversations where others believed all cults had to be "Friendly." As I recall it, I don't believe RQG's text provides an authoritative solution to this problem.

5 hours ago, klecser said:

Is the level of detail of mentioning the Dragonrise doing more to risk overwhelming at a starter table than just jumping right into an adventure?

While there really is too much detail generally with Glorantha to introduce without inducing migraines, I'd start your table with the Dragonrise. Don't get into the politics of it, not really (unless someone asks, of course!). I'd treat it sort of as a video game cutscene--here's the cool, over-the-top hook, the biggest baddest flashiest magic anyone's seen in centuries, and no one's sure how to feel about it. But right now that doesn't matter because those assholes on the other side of the hill are nicking our cows and generally being the slimy little jerks they've been since their trickster took a dump on your great-great-grampy's porch.

The Dragonrise is a really cool, exciting hook, but I think the consequences of it are too much to dig into. Give it like two minutes, say it almost ate the bad god's Red Moon, that the earthquake probably knocked down some homes for a personal touch (IIRC everything within ~30km got shook according to the Glorantha Sourcebook so I think that's most Colymar lands?) then move on.

So I started running the scenario I'm using stuff from this thread for, and something came up which I'm curious how other GMs would handle.

Create Fissure.

As was mentioned in passing above, an earthquake definitely can cause problems for monumental construction, like temples. While a natural one (well, as "natural" a quake as exists in Glorantha...) is beyond the scope of what adventurers can achieve, the Create Fissure spell's scope definitely could damage or destroy a small temple.

In my session, while my players were attempting to figure out how to destroy/deactivate the temple, one of them suggested finding a priestess of Maran Gor to assist. The Issaries initiate does a Spell Trade for Create Fissure (offered 1D6 points and rolled a 6), then unleashed it on some of the soldiers encamped nearby, defending the temple.

They almost chose to strike the temple itself--the Create Fissure 6 is 30m long, 6m wide, and 30m deep--and I'm glad they didn't, because I'm not certain how to handle it. On the one hand I'd say yes, strategically placed that would certainly do significant structural damage to a large building. (The description notes a D6 damage to a structure's "armor points," but those are undefined elsewhere.) But, would a temple have protection against that sort of large-scale magical attack? I felt like since it was a sacred ground, maybe the caster has to overcome the wyter's POW to affect, but I wasn't really all that sure how to handle this moment.