womble

4 hours ago, Mechashef said:

Is the intention that for one session each ability can:

- Only be used to augment one other ability?

That certainly seems to be the intent.

4 hours ago, Mechashef said:

- Only be augmented by one other ability?

I think this intent is that an ability can only be augmented by one other ability at a time. So you could augment your Orate with Sing in one scene, but later in the session, in another scene augment it with your Earth Rune or your Hate (Lunars) Passion. But you could not stack your Sing, Earth and Hate onto one speech.

I would hazzard a guess that it is 'not a thing' in the Homelands so far revealed. It strikes me as a more 'Western' development, culturally (I'm of the "Sartar is somewhat analogous to Germano-Celtic historical Iron Age culture, and barding wasn't around for them).

1 hour ago, Brootse said:

If STR was removed or capped the problem wouldn't exist.

 

But then increases in STR would stop being useful for things where strength is useful.

You're entirely free to make whatever stats you think proper apply to whatever skills you like. You don't have to compromise.

I'd far rather fight a trained lackwit than a trained genius of similar motivation; the genius will adapt to my actions way better than someone who's just been drilled and doesn't have the creative spark to think outside their kata.

In some ways it makes sense that a giant would be a good crafter: their strength means they can manage things a human-strength character couldn't. Their size should count against them in some way though; they'll struggle with really fine work. 'Tis the problem with a generic bonus.

12 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Worship ceremonies attract foes.  Demons, evil and hostile spirits, broos, enemy clans, …  If you've used up all your MP's, you don't have anything left to protect and guard the ceremony.

I recall from my recent reading (Sourcebook, RQG, 2 x Red Cow and the three Sartar Rising books) statements to the effect that the Lunars don't actively bother Sartarite worship ceremonies because the Orlanthi "magic is at its strongest". Anyone rudely interrupting a couple hundred Heroforming Initiates in direct contact with their God, and their Priests and Wind Lords better have some serious mojo at their back. Or a death wish.

"Summons of Evil' actively calls such foes for the specific purpose of the ritual, so they'd be incorporated as part of the worship event.

5 hours ago, Crel said:

On the note of cows, do the Orlanthi religions have specifics of what's required for animal sacrifices? Ex. in Hesiod there's the story that Prometheus talked the gods into accepting the inedible portions of the sacrifice, turning a sacrifice basically into a nice meat dinner for the humans. Is this the case in Dragon Pass, too?

 Again, from my memory of the above recently read, yes, the Gods take the inedible bits burnt on a fire (or what have you) and the yummy rest of the Cow makes the centrepiece of the post-Worship celebratory feast.

5 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Correct.  And Lunars would generally want to use it on Wildday/Full Moon to get maximum benefit...

They can't use it on any other day (unless their Seasonals aren't on Wildday - no time to dig in and find out). That was part of my point. You can Worship anywhere that's Sanctified, but only on appropriate days.

Y'all are neglecting Ernalda's blessings  . Pregnancy rates can be higher, and perinatal mortality of mother and child (or children - multiple births are an option) reduced by Rune Magic. 180 fertile mothers could produce 90 (or even 180) live births per year, or you only need 120 (or even 60) mothers. At least in the latest incarnation of 'how Rune Magic works' (RQG)... There are plenty of people able to cast the right spells.

Now I'm sure many mothers would want to spread their births out a bit more than every year or two, but would 'duty to clan' following times of loss encourage more to group their pregnancies more tightly (or have 'just one more')? I gather the Romans had awards for mothers bearing 5 or more children.

12 hours ago, Zozotroll said:

The way I read it is, it has to be an appropriate day, then you sanctify it with the spell, then do a worship.  If you succeed in the worship you replenish as per that day.  So yes, the spell alone does not let you replenish, it just makes it possible to do so.  Of course you are not going to do this if you are around a real temple or shrine.  This is for when you are n the road and none is available on a given holy day.

That seems about right to me, as a reading of RAW. An ad hoc Sanctified space wouldn't give you any 'location' bonus to your Worship chance, but there's no occasion listed for getting Rune Points back which isn't at least a minor Holy day. I think it's one of the advantages the big Cults (Orlanth, Ernalda, Seven Mothers and the like) that they have weekly minor Holy days... lesser Cults only get Seasonal and High Holy days, which means their Priests have to be much more prudent about when to blow their Rune Points.

The only thing that is abundantly clear about all this is that the RAW are abundantly murky about how Detect Enemies (and the like) are meant to interact with Countermagic.

3 hours ago, Pentallion said:

Regardless, CM only stops spells being cast on YOU.  Detection cast on the caster isn't blocked by CM.  So the caster can detect you are an enemy and there is nothing CM can do about it.

Except it specifically says in the CM description that CM protects you from (amongst other things) Detect spells. You can choose to discount that, obviously, but it's no more 'correct' than discounting the other copypasta inconsistencies in the spell rules relating to Detect. There are a limited number of spells which don't have a target, just have effects in an area. The subset of those where the effect is 'magical' (as opposed to the consequence of the physical presence of something, like fire) is smaller, and the subset of that subset where the effects affect 'beings' (rather than the environment) is smaller yet. There are no Spirit Magic spells I could see other than the Detects where there's an area effect affecting beings with magic, and I can't see any at all in Sorcery. In Rune Magic, you have:

• Command Worshippers
• Create [Great] Market
• Group Laughter
• Harmony. This one is especially interesting because it explicitly says it " can be boosted with magic points...to blast through Countermagic and other defensive spells." From the reading of the general rules, I'd've said it would be the case for all spells that are trying to cause an effect on beings. The existence of one explicit allowance of this doesn't, to my mind, constitute evidence that other spells cannot be defended against with Countermagic; there are spells which do exclude defensive spells of one kind or another, and the existence of those demonstrates that, in general, protective magic, well, y'know, protects.
  It stands, instead, as a testament to inconsistent editing.
• Peace
• Path Watch (a long duration, large AE "Detect Enemies")
• Summons of Evil
• Warding

Warding and the Market spells are examples of where having CM protect you from Det Enemies while still having the protection registered by the caster would be useful (and provide a further case where Detection Blank would be superior to CM). The Warding doesn't detect you as an enemy (that's an inference made by the caster), so the damaging and alarm effects do not trigger (and a strong enough Detection Blank would mean even the caster doesn't know an enemy has slipped within their defenses).

Command Worshippers, Group Laughter, Harmony, Peace and Summons of Evil are all 'offensive mind affecting spells' that the target may not wish to have affect them. As such, sufficient Countermagic, for long enough, should block these spells' effects. In practice, this probably means Extended Shield spells for most of those.

I'd say sufficient Countermagic effect would protect against any of these spells area effects, even though none of them even mention "Target".

14 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think you used to be able to cast it in RQ2 with someone else as the detection target, but not in RQG.

Ar. Mebbee. Given the historical lack of clarity, I'm not sure delving into older versions (and unearthing any contradictions between them to add to the confustications) is necessarily helpful. For one, the intents may have changed (as they did with Healing/Xenohealing between v2 and v3).

9 hours ago, Pentallion said:

EDIT:  Just read the offending text.  You guys are misunderstanding it.  CM will stop anyone casting Detection spells ON YOU.  ie, if you have CM up and someone wants you to be able to detect something and cast a detection spell on you so you can, for example, detect enemies, then the CM will block it.

Nope. In none of the Detect spells does it allow the caster to use the spell on anyone else. They all say "...from the caster..." Not "from the target".

3 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Looks like a better definition of "enemies", but doesn't answer my questions about conditionally hostile encounters that require a trigger.

Were those questions in the other thread? I'm assuming you mean encounters like the 'urbane highwayman' who has no intention of harming you if you calmly surrender your valuables, but will have his minions shoot you in the gizzard if you're lippy... I'd take those as 'not registering'; a Detect Enemies would produce no result, confirming the robber's "honesty" about letting you go on your way unharmed if you comply (or warn you if he intends to cut you even if you do give up the goods). A suspicious Guard isn't your enemy until you skin your bronze at him...

7 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Nor does it define "harm". Like I said, the party's own Trickster ought to register every single time the spell is cast.

No; an omission. I think it has to include only physical harm (however inflicted). A chiselling conman or beer-watering alewife isn't an Enemy; they don't want your blood, just your Lunars. And yeah, if the Trickster is particularly vindictive, there might be times when they're seriously considering slipping a shank between the Wind Lord's ribs while they sleep.

1 hour ago, Pentallion said:

People coming at you with CM up are detected as enemies...

Making, again, the point that CM "...protects the target it is cast upon against ...Detection..." useless. If Det Enemies only registers as being blocked by CM protecting Enemies, then CM doesn't protect against Detection.

Also, for this edition, I don't think the entry for any of the Detect spells suggests you can cast them on anyone other than yourself. They all say "...gives the approximate direction and distance from the caster..." which means whoever you cast it on, the caster is the focus. And for Detect Enmies, in addition, the caster is the person who is considered when assessment of who the potential detectee is intending to harm "... from the caster of any being intending to harm them..."

Thirdly, the wording of Detect Enemies is thoroughly slack. "...or it detects and locates a specific individual on whom the caster concentrates." Doesn't require the individual in question to be intending to harm them, which is probably good, since they may not even be aware of the existence of the specific person who's casting the spell.

Whole thing needs a rework, including the removal of the "Focused" descriptor (since the duration is "Instant"), unless "Focused" getting an actual definition helps in sorting out the mess.

Which gives me an idea.

Make the spell (Quotation for separation purposes only - this is a suggestion not some sort of attempt to pull Authority out of my wazoo):
 

Quote

 

Detect Enemies

Ranged, Temporal, Active.

This spell gives the approximate direction and distance from the caster of any being intending to harm them, starting with the nearest within the range [50m default for Ranged - Ed] of the spell, or it detects and locates a specific individual enemy on whom the caster concentrates. Each DEX SR, the caster can focus on the next-nearest being (or newly-nearest if movement has brought an ill-wisher closer than those previously detected) intending to harm them, or on a different specific individual.

The caster of the spell does not have to overcome the POW of potential targets to find them, but Countermagic will protect against the Detect if it is strong enough to repel it. A Detect stopped by a Countermagic will not return the direction or distance of the subject of the effect of the spell, though it will allow the caster to know that there is one more Enemy within range than the ones they have so far pinpointed. If the Countermagic is 2 points stronger than the Detect, the Detect will end. Since the spell is not targeted on the being protected by the Countermagic, it will not knock down the Countermagic, however strong it is.

An enemy need not be actively planning to inflict immediate harm to register "intent to harm" (though if they are, they'll count). Any being with a Hate [group] Passion which includes the caster will also register as an Enemy. To be able to focus the spell to locate a specific individual, the caster must have a Hate [group] Passion which includes the intended subject, or the individual must have already qualified as an Enemy to the caster, either by stating or demonstrating their intent to harm, or by the intent being detected magically.

The sensing effect is stopped by 1 or more meters of a dense substance such as stone, metal, or earth.

 

Thoughts?

Anyone with (a strong enough) Detection Blank just gets skipped over. Detect Enemies stops being a mass "Dispel Countermagic". Having Countermagic reduces the information the caster gets out of the spell. The undefined "Focused" limitation is replaced by the defined "Active", but its flavour is retained. The flow of information to the caster is made more manageable.

The above suggestion allows you to confirm an ambush by your enemies, if you see something suspicious and follow it up with a Detect Enemies, even if the ambushers have 'cleverly' put someone with a big Shield spell at the entry to the ambush. You just won't get any more information like you would if the ambushers didn't have any Countermagic-effect at all.

It lets you check out a dubious social situation before you enter it.

22 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Some people only have a POW of 3.

Not many Initiates stay that low for very long, given 2 POW gain checks per year. Admitted, they need to succeed at their Worship, but with 'base' skill and a Temple bonus and a High Holy Day (or Sacred Time)  bonus and even maybe the chance to augment with their relevant high Rune affinity, they'll probably succeed most of the time.

Of note, perhaps, is that if their POW is 2 (because of sacrifice for Enchant/Rune Point/Divine Intervention) they can't participate in Worship without passing out, since an Initiate needs to sac 2 MP for a valid Worship attempt, and if their POW is 1 they simply can't do it.

I think you're correct that this is the way the RAW pan out.

Though 'having to sacrifice a cow' is a great excuse for a feast!

4 hours ago, Pentallion said:

I think the easiest way to clear up the CM debate is to rule that the CM negates the detect enemy.  But the caster doesnt know its knocked down.  All he knows is he doesnt detect any enemies.

Which would mean Detection Blank won't be making an appearance in this version of the game. And would make (what I suspect will be quite common) Extended Shield a near-perfect stealth enhancer. Another unintended consequence, IMO.

With the advent of the RQG currency you don't need to go to a Shrine or a Temple, you need to be on Consecrated ground and make a Worship roll to regain Rune Points. Being at a Shrine or a Temple (or on Cult Holy Days) gives you a bonus to your Worship roll. As does expending additional Magic Points (and that last makes it easy to have a 100% chance of successful Worship). It's difficult to entirely stamp out worship within your slave population if they're from a heavily-Initiated culture like Sartar; Sanctify is available to any Initiate and if anyone's got a votive image at their home temple, they'll get a point to cast it in their quarters (even if they arrive in slavery having blown all their Rune Points and never get a chance to Worship) and then they can bootstrap their Rune Points by Worshipping.

So preventing the slaves from setting up sacred spaces would be another facet of controlling them.

Okay, I'll try again.

Detect Enemies:

Target is the person whose enemies are being detected. 

Positive candidate: entity inside the area of effect who does, in fact, intend harm to the Target.

Potential candidate: everyone inside the area of effect.

We're talking about the first case 'general detection'. " ...gives the approximate direction and distance from the caster of any being intending to harm them..."

Take the general query: "Is this group of folk I can see hostile to me specifically." The Target is the caster. If the 'first' Potential candidate is a Positive candidate with a Countermagic on them sufficient to block the spell, according to the 'only hostiles are even considered' interpretation, the spell is blocked, and because the caster knows only positive candidates' CM is even addressed, they know the 'first' potential candidate must be an enemy, and can infer therefore that the group they are facing bears them enmity. Making the fact that CM blocks Detect Enemies completely pointless.

The same goes for the "are there enemies behind that door": maybe it's pointless for the Humakti to cast it because the ZZ Death Lord behind the door doesn't know the Humakti Target is even there; maybe it's pointless because the Death Lord has decided the Ernalda Initiate looks tastier. But I believe the intent is to detect Enemies. A ZZ berserker is the natural enemy of a Humakti, so the spell should trigger. And yay! The troll's Season-long Shield 5 stops it working. And boooo! the Humakti knows there's an enemy behind the door, rather than just someone with a Countermagic about which you know nothing of their intentions.

Countermagic's cancelling of Detect Enemies should, IMO, result in ambiguity, not simply confirmation that the 'potential candidate' is a positively identified enemy, exactly as if they hadn't had Countermagic up. 

Detection Blank is for entirely different purposes and situations.

And anyone casting Detect Enemy as a general query while there's a fight going on (without a very specific reason) is wasting magic points: the enemy are trying to do you harm already. Detect Enemies is (usually) for before the fight actually starts, to either detect the presence of unobserved attackers-to-be, or determine the intention of entities you can see who haven't actually tried to harm you yet, as far as you can tell.

As it stands, the spell description is frankly shonky and needs significant clarification.

If we hadn't come up with the idea of Detect Enemies blowing down CM, this wouldn't be an issue. You could cast it on a room full of simmering belligerence, and you'd get results of:

Don't know (if there's a CM up on the subject of the spell that can bounce the Detect)

Enemy (if the Detect is strong enough to beat a putative Countermagic and the subject is inclined to cause harm to the Target)

Not inclined to kill the target today (if the detect beats any existing CM weight on a subject who is not inclined to cause harm to the Target) or has enough Detection Blank to stymie the Detect's MP boost.

Because it just goes out there and checks on peoples' intent without being a way of disrupting magical defenses in a wide area, which I think we're all agreed is not the intent. Just say "No," to EMP-Detects.

Detect Enemies should be useful (for example) to find out whether there are any blood enemies in a drinking establishment (in a neutral location, maybe) before entering, IMO. They don't know you're even in the settlement (if they'e there) but have a general, ongoing wish to cause you and your Clan harm. If any of the patrons of that establishment have enough magical defense to bounce the Detect, they should register as "unknown" (and I think should know their defenses got approached - they should also be able to infer something about the nature of the spell: it's either a Sorcery or a largely innocuous Spirit or Rune spell, because they didn't see the flashy cast). If they've got Detection Blank up enough to defeat the Detect, they don't register, whether they're ill-wishers or not.

15 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

The way Detect Enemies is worded the beings detected have to be intending harm on the target of the spell (or the cast if he doesn't pick another target). So if the nearest Countermagic on on someone who isn't currently intending to harm the specified target, it gets skipped.

Which makes the effect of Countermagic as blocking the Detect Enemies nugatory: by blocking the spell, it has announced that the target is an enemy. So, even if a big Detect Enemies doesn't knock down Countermagics, it would still make the 'counter detection' aspect of Countermagic almost entirely pointless, and doubly so if a strong 'first' Countermagic will knock down a weaker Detect Enemies. I do not believe this can be the actual intent.

15 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

...if the nearest Countermagic on on someone who isn't currently intending to harm the specified target, it gets skipped. With a group of adventures, it's possible that no one is currently intending to harm the target of the spell because they are all busy intending to harm someone else. 

I strongly disagree with that assessment. Because it's entirely possible to be intent on harming "everyone in the adventurers' party". I'd submit that it's more likely that this is the case in most instances of ambush or combat than each enemy only and solely focusing their intent on the targets they're currently engaging. "When I've dropped this sucker, I'm going to stab the vitals of their friends too!" How deep into the motivation of the character does the spell look? Is each member a Lunar Kill Squad not wishing harm on all the Sartarite rebels they've managed to get the drop on, even if they're currently only planning on Madnessing one character?

Because some people seem to have missed it: 

Given that "magic makes the world easier to negotiate because you have spells, but more dangerous because so do your foes," pretty much anyone will be at a disadvantage in the world if they don't have a decent selection of Spirit Magic.

18 hours ago, g33k said:

My 1st reaction is that a an entire party of Lunar-Soldier PC's wouldn't have a ton of variety ...

While that might seem true, you could have an officer, a medic, a scrounger, the 'Grunt', a shooter, and maybe a mage. Other specialisms exist... An excellent source of inspiration for a 'squad-based' military game could be the Malazan Marines from Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen. Personalities make con games, not stats.

9 minutes ago, Pentallion said:

Zeus raped Hera to shame her into marriage. Some of the Indian and Greek tales are horrifying seen through a modern lens.

Bronze age peoples don't have modern day sensibilities, nor should they.

Aye. Good old Jove was a serial sexual predator, who got away with it because of Divine status and power.

40 minutes ago, simonh said:

They could always man up and die. They don't have to give in.

If an oath is acceptable enough that it's preferable to death or suicide then it's acceptable. No weaseling. At least that's the Humakti in me talking.

Quite. Your word is your life. Unless it isn't, and you don't mind being thought of as an oathbreaker. How severe an oathbreaker you're considered is probably a function of both the 'reasonableness' of the oath and its context, and the attitude of the considerer towards oathtaking.

Given the Sartarite attitude towards foreigners/enemies and the law, for example, I don't imagine there'd be much disapprobation from your community for breaking an oath made to a Lunar, especially under duress, and more fool the Lunar who didn't comprehend that the oath would be void as soon as the duress became inoperable.