Austin

1 minute ago, Shiningbrow said:

A) if you're a Lhankor Mhy sorcerer, then you join Orlanth and sacrifice the POW for the Flight

Is it really that easy to just up and initiate into an extra cult? I've not gotten that impression from the rulebook except in very specific cases, like Yinkin initiates joining Orlanth.

If joining a second cult is that simple, that opens up all sorts of shenanigans I've been disregarding!

12 minutes ago, g33k said:

Flight is so generally useful, so tactically advantageous, that if it is AVAILABLE and you don't ALREADY have it, you will need to turn in your Munchkineer's Badge.

Is it reasonable to assume an initiate of Issaries could be a sorcerer? Because they get Flight through Orlanth Adventurous as an associated cult, thus getting a flying sorcerer on the current rules. Otherwise, best bet is to tame a critter or to use an air elemental (which still isn't a bad idea, as that has a variety of applications and you'll want either the Air Rune, or the Water or Darkness Runes in order to learn Steal Breath anyway).

16 minutes ago, boradicus said:

Can spells be constructed from Runes, or do they function more in the capacity of being generators of "effects?"

Sorcery sort of constructs spells from Runes (in Glorantha "sorcery" means something close to "wizardry" in D&D btw), but the system is explicitly incomplete. I'd expect the basic premises to remain in the future.

However, pretty much every character has "Rune" magic, which comes from the cult of the god they worship. Each god has two or three major Runes, and certain spells known by the cult. To cast a Rune spell, your percentage is equal to your rating in the Rune needed. So for most adventurers the concept is that the magic is more... "out there in the world" than "constructed," and through acting like your god you can channel their power.

There's a reason some folks say that every RQ character is a cleric/paladin in D&D terms.

9 hours ago, g33k said:

Why is anyone (everyone) worried about RANGE?

This is GLORANTHA, dammit!

If you don't want the triceratops to trample you... you don't cast from FARTHER, you use magic to fly a meter higher than its horns can reach, right over its back.

Because I'm an egregious munchkin and don't want to waste time/MP/Runes & Technique choices learning Flight.

...

Also because apparently there is no sorcerous Flight spell yet. Hrm.

6 minutes ago, gochie said:

The NPCs in the gm pack, for example, mention the chance of failure for spells, yet have 9 armor plate.

IIRC this is fixed in the print edition. Finished reading through it a few days ago.

Perhaps it's relevant to ask if an animal would be aware it resisted a Dominate (Animal) spell? Would it just be like "whuh?" and do nothing, or would it get aggressive against creatures nearby? How would an animal react to getting spirit attacked? 

3 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

That way ALL the intensity of the spell can go on Range and Duration, none is needed on Strength.

Which unfortunately goes counter to the initial argument, that higher Spell Strength means Countermagic maintenance isn't necessary. Although it'll probably still have more Strength than Control (Entity)'s pitiful 1. As for tap, I don't think we have a spell to tap POW yet, just SIZ and Air IIRC.

16 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

However, sorcery also has the Geomancy spell, so that'd make tracking down said triceratops a whole lot easier!

Yeah? Well, in the shaman route I can do drugs to find my dino--and we all know winners do the drugs, right?

*angsty shaman noises*

(Just joking, of course. )

3 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Or - sorcerous Dominate Animal... which will require quite a few MPs if you don't have the precise animal listed for the spell, but still a lot easier to acquire than either Rune or Spirit magic. And, has the added benefit of a much higher intensity than the spirit spell, no need to discorporate, and can (potentially) control the thing for years!

Fair enough. I'm not sure I'd say that one's easier or one's harder, but I like the Discorporation version better.

The big factors here are safety and Free INT. Base Range for sorcery is 10m. Range 6 (so, +5MP/INT if everything's mastered) is 130m, which feels to me like the start of "safe range" when dealing with big critters, particularly predators, considering the slow cast times. An upside is that at that sort of range, the animal's probably aware of you, but there's a fair chance it isn't interested until you throw the spell. Most of the cool pets have 3D6 POW; let's assume 11 rolled. If you've got the exact species, you can use a min of Strength 6, but still have to overcome the animal's POW with that Strength (25% chance). If you don't have the targeted species in your spell, you need equal Strength--but you probably want to have been upping the Strength anyway in order to get your overcome roll to at least 50/50. Of course, with an appropriate augment that might not be so important...

Assuming you've learned a rare spell like Dominate Triceratops, you only need Strength 6 (+5), Range 4 (+3, 50m--let's live dangerously), and then fill out the rest of our Free INT with Duration. Assuming INT 18, Free INT 17--gotta have a slot for the spell--that gives 8 levels spent, so Duration 10 (+9) available. That's two days. Spell's total cost (assuming we have both Command and Beast mastered, and aren't getting them through other sources) should be 2+5+3+9=19MP.

Of course there's other factors which could be involved--like using a common version of Dominate (Animal), such as the Dominate Bear listed in the spell example, and then building up an Inscription for extra levels, or having crazy-boosted INT from Enhance INT (who wouldn't?) to get the Free INT necessary for a years-long spell, making a Moon Rune augment to get +20% on the roll overcoming POW, etc. etc. etc.

Or I can Discorporate, beat it up in Spirit Combat, then Control it indefinitely. I like sorcery's upside of being able to get any beastie it sees, instead of hunting down a specific Control (Entity) spirit magic spell, but once you've got that spell I feel like the shaman version is simpler and safer, in particular because the creature's not likely to resist your shenanigans in any meaningful way since animals don't really seem able to engage in Spirit Combat.

That being said now that I've run a bit of the math I am quite intrigued by the idea of a menagerie sorcerer if you can get INT & MP stores high enough...

Corollary to my prior post: doing drugs helps you get pets.

Hazia and Moon Flowers (Bestiary p.199) each provide the effect of the Discorporation spell (it says "spell" specifically, so probably not actually meaning the shaman ability with the same name). You could use this to go bully an animal into submission with Spirit Combat, then cast Control (Entity) to command it for two whole minutes. Or forever, if you're a shaman with Spell Extension (but without Rune magic, or just without the Discorporation spell).

I'm not exactly certain how "egregious" this is, but according to Control (Entity) it can be used to control "mundane animals such as hawks, dogs, mammoths, shadowcats, etc." I'm inclined to think this would include "normal" dinosaurs, but not "original" ones which were once Dragonewts according to the Bestiary. This requires the Discorporation Rune spell, although the Control (Entity) spell notes that it's mostly shamans who can use it. Doing so's somewhat safe, though; animals don't have listed Spirit Combat scores (and there seems to me no plausible reason to give them POWx5 like spirits) and most of the cool big critters have 3D6 POW (average 10-11). Plus, according to the Rune spell you can travel up to 5km on one RP, so you should be able to take down the critter before it can find you and eat you.

Having a mammoth, titanotheres, triceratops, or tyrannosaurus as a permanent pet via Spell Extension sounds extra dope. Just make sure to give it a hefty Countermagic so enemies won't dismiss the one-point Control spell and let it run rampant. So two levels of Spell Extension per pet, then. Seems a fair trade. Trickiest part will probably be finding the spirit which knows the requisite Control spell in the Spirit World. Even the non-dinosaur critters have some great choices.

Discorporation Rune Spell is on p.326, and has a different description than the shaman's ability on p. 357. Control (Entity) is on p.258.

50 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

I'm so deadly that only 100% Death Rune will do!

Can't you only go up to 99% in the Power Runes? IIRC you've got to have at least 1% in the other portion.

But the point's still there, and still deliciously egregious. Just checking if my memory broke again

The adventures in the Gamemaster's Screen Pack are a good example of the change in paradigm, for age and expected skill. In particular, Cattle Raid provides a variety of ages and skills. For example, Heortarl on p.91-2 is 16, a brand-new initiate of Orlanth Adventurous, and has only one skill listed under 40% (Speak Tradetalk, 20%). His weapon skills, Sling and Dagger, are 50% and 40% respectively; no Broadsword, Battle Axe, etc. skill is listed. The Orleving raiders, meant to be on a similar skill & threat level to the adventurers, are largely older, with similar or slightly-low best weapon skills. The highest skill is Broadsword 75% for Deseros (30) and Erlanda (27), on p.99-100.

Also worth noting is Arnstal's statblock on p.106, in Dragon of Thunder Hills. He's 13, and already has Sling 40% and Short Spear 35%. So in RQG's simulation of Glorantha, an adolescent can plausibly have skill percentages equal to an RQ3 "professional" (according to @Kloster's post).

Note that the age difference between a starting 21 year old adventurer and the late-20's Orleving warriors does still demonstrate that an RQG adventurer is still someone quite exceptional for their age--since Deseros and Erlanda aren't farmers or militia, but actual, experienced warriors. To compare with the pregens, Sorala--a scribe--is nearly as skilled with a Broadsword as Deseros!

52 minutes ago, styopa said:

I'd use it as written: the skill is 1d6+magic skill modifier as a base. 

That's kind of what I was leaning toward. Most of my confusion was because there's not really reference to a percentage for the occupational experience to get added atop, unlike the other skills.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Sorala does not have the extra 1D6% so I'd take that as indicating no.

I keep forgetting to check the pre-gens for comparison. Thanks for the reminder.

1 hour ago, Kloster said:

For me (and my GM), 1D6+ Mag Mod+10. You start at 1D6%, and philosopher adds you 20 on 1 spell and 10 on 2 others. And you add the modifiers of your magic school (Aeolianism, Lhankor Mhy, Lunar or Malkion).

Once you've generated that 1D6+Mod+X skill, do you then add your modifier when in play? The way I read it, the modifier is used in calculating your initial skill with the spell, and might double-dip.

What do you mean by modifiers of your school? I don't see anything listed in the book (p.388-9). Are you referring to older material?

How do y'all think we should calculate sorcery spell percentages for starting adventurers? My initial instinct was that the actual percentages were equal to the percentiles gained from Philosopher and/or starting membership in Lhankor Mhy. However, as I've been re-reading some of the material I'm second-guessing that because on p. 390 it notes that new spells are learned at 1D6+Mag Mod after the requisite training or research.

So for example, the Philosopher occupation notes they start with three spells, and has (Sorcery spell) +10% twice and +20% once in the Occupational Skills on p.70. I'm trying to see if this would really be 1D6+Mag Mod+10, or just a flat 10% (or 20%) start.

The further correlation of this, I think, is that if those Occupational Skill percentiles don't need to be assigned to the spells gained from Philosopher, you might be able to double-dip spell +%s from LM and Phi to get a better starting percentage. But, the more munchkinny applications can end up on that thread (I just didn't want to clog that thread up with another interpretive debate).

9 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Non-grognard, hmmphh.

Hey now, considering y'all have a thirty-ish year head start on me I feel like I do alright for myself!

2 hours ago, g33k said:

... Except when:

1) the text in question is available for purchase at chaosium.com,

2) back-compatibility is a stated design-goal of the modern edition,

and

3) cut&paste from RQ2 to RQG is broadly evident, and thus likely from CoP to GaGoG.

 

I mean, sure, I /DO/ see the munchkin line of argument... but it's about as durable as a snowflake on midsummer in the Sahara...

GaGoG?

Also, going to leave the argument mostly aside, but I would like to note that I find "go buy a 40 year old PDF" an incredibly privileged answer, which I feel pushes the opposite direction of Ellie's "let's be newb friendly!" thread currently stickied atop the board. Imagine how a newcomer to the system would feel when told "well actually your interpretation of the 2018 rulebook isn't quite right because of this thing written in 1979."

That being said, I very much look forward to getting my sticky nubbins on the forthcoming Gods book(s). ... And inevitably trying to expand this thread when I do

14 minutes ago, Ochoa said:

Sheesh. I can`t come up with a decent challenge for my season one adventurers and you guys are putting this stuff out there...

Don't worry about it too much. A good chunk of the shenanigans/exploits/uncharitable readings in this thread do have loopholes, or flaws which are reasonable for the GM to poke at. For example, the Humakti example means you're totally out of Rune magic, which is a much larger liability than it may appear since things like Heal Wound are so reliable.

3 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

Except if you go back to Cults of Prax

Munchkin Answer: Referring to a forty year old supplement is not relevant to the modern game! Rules as written, Tricksters can insist the party takes a nap.

Plus, as @gochie says, shamans are a thing if you really wanna get your hands on the spell. Just takes a good bit more work.

Munchkin answers do not necessarily reflect the poster's actual opinions.

22 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Would you be so kind as to give us a page number citation of us to scurry after. I gotta check on this but if you were already there.... Lotta pages to leaf through.

cheers

P.73 "Cult Spirit Magic: If your cult teaches spirit magic, choose 5 points of cult spirit magic. The spirit magic spells taught by the cult are listed. An initiate can start with spirit magic spells taught by an associated cult."

On p.75, Chalana Arroy, Issaries, Lhankor Mhy and Orlanth are listed as Eurmal's Associated Cults. On p.74, Sleep is listed as a 3-pt cult spirit magic spell. Therefore, RAW, Eurmali Tricksters can begin play knowing Sleep as 3 of their 5 points of cult spirit magic.

Additionally, I currently see nothing in Chalana Arroy's longer writeup (on p.290) which directly contradicts this reading, although @PhilHibbs's comment is probably accurate.

I guess it's worth pointing out that any of the cults noting CA as associated can get access at start of play to Sleep. Eurmal just stuck out in particular because Tricksters. And, I suppose any other cult would have some notion of "use this spell nicely, or else CA's gonna be pissed" whereas Tricksters are Tricksters. Other cults include Ernalda, Issaries, Lhankor Mhy, Orlanth, Storm Bull and Yelm.

A starting adventurer can choose spirit magic from any associated cult for their starting 5 points. Chalana Arroy is an associated cult of Eurmal. Therefore, Tricksters can have Sleep (better not ask how they learned it...).

1 minute ago, PhilHibbs said:

Ooh, I would have thought that those points would be limited to 18... does it really not say that? 

Curse my selective pedantry! You're right. you can go up to 18 with the bonus points, and then the +2 from Rune Modifier is the next step. So total of 20, not 21, on this method. But, a skill can grow from 15 instead of 16.

On p.53, Determining Characteristics, it states that "if the total [of your characteristics] is 92 or less, you may allot up to 3 more points to your adventurer's characteristics, as desired." On averages, characteristics result in 81 points. So, on average rolls you can get up to +5 points in a single characteristic when including your primary Elemental Rune affinity, to a max of 21. Thus, on a varied array which meets averages, any single characteristic of 16+ can become maxed at adventurer creation.

This mostly seems relevant for POW, CON, and sometimes INT.

17 hours ago, Richard S. said:

Draconic Lore is a skill in core RQG iirc.

8 hours ago, Oracle said:

Also Dwarf Lore and Elf Lore is covered by Elder Race Lore in RQG

Gotcha, my B. When compiling the list, I used the character sheet as my quick-reference, which does not have Draconic Lore listed as a skill. Additionally, it does not have the parenthetical specialization for Elder Race Lore noted on p.179.

Thanks for the clarification. List will be edited.

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Under the RAW, there explicitly IS NO "trance" effect with the melee versions of the spell.

I'd just like to note that IMHO this is entirely good form in a Munchkin thread.  But, I do agree that most GMs would likely impose at least some species of penalty on Extension'd Humakti...

I went through the entries in the Bestiary and collected up each skill I saw which AFAIK isn't listed in the RQG core rulebook. For the most part, I've left out attack skills and skills which just fill in predictable blanks, like Speak Aldryami and Cult Lore (Kyger Litor). Figured that such a list might trigger some interesting conversation.

I've organized it into three sections. Described Skills are those which have a dedicated sidebar elucidating the skill's functions. Adventurer Skills includes all skills listed in "Creating a X Adventurer" sidebars. These are skills which could see use by players at the table. Finally, I used Other Skills to describe anything else. Usually, those skills are just listed in a creature's statblock, but sometimes they have some explanation in the text.

Most of the Craft and Lore skills in Adventurer Skills are on p. 58, Creating a Dwarf Adventurer. I've not cited skills which felt of obvious origin to me (like Darksense Scan).

Described Skills:

• Beast Training (p.52)

• Bloody Cut (p.71)

• Quickdraw (p. 39)

Adventurer Skills:

• Area Lore (elf forest)

• Area Lore (local) (p.29)

• Centaur Lore

• Craft (Architecture)

• Craft (Copper Smithing)

• Craft (Glass)

• Craft (Gold)

• Craft (Insect Care)

• Craft (Magic Item)

• Craft (Masonry)

• Craft (Plumbing)

• Craft (Secrets of Iron)

• Craft (Silversmith)

• Craft (Stonecarving)

• Craft (Tinsmith)

• Darksense Scan

• Darksense Search

• Earthsense Scan

• Earthsense Search

• Elfsense

• Glorantha Lore

• Metal Lore

Other Skills:

• Don Armor (p.43)

• Find Edible Plants (p.113)

• Fly

• Glide Quietly (p.127)

• Hide in Snow (p.139)

• Hide Underwater (p.121)

• Move Quietly (while flying) (p.115)

• Riversense (p.23)

• Run Backwards (p.136)

• Sense Intruder (p.134, 174)

• Sense Life (p.102)

• Scent (p.143, 144)

• Scent Intruder (p.146)

• Scent Prey (p.152)

• Smell (p.133)

• Smell Blood (p.46)

• Smell Foe (p.155, 156)

• Smell Foodstuff (p.62)

• Smell Intruder (p.142)

• Smell Prey (p.120, 124)

• Spot Flower (p.134)

• Spot Hidden (p.141, 148)

• Track by Scent (p.79, 110, 112, 117, 144, 148, 150, 161, 162)

• Underworld Lore (p.77)

• Wind Lore (p.84)

Some topics which come to mind for me are the use of Craft (Magic Item) and Craft (Secrets of Iron). In particular, if a human was to reforge a piece of iron--say, turning a sword into a couple spearheads--would they learn (Secrets of Iron), or something more mundane like (Blacksmithing). I also wonder if an adventurer could learn the Dragonewt-specific skill Quickdraw through training or research since it seems to me mostly physical, not mostly magical.