Puckohue

On 4/12/2019 at 9:03 AM, Ochoa said:

npcs for my own Ernaldori 

Could we see? 😀

9 hours ago, jajagappa said:

I often create these

You mean you have more of this? *drools*

On 4/10/2019 at 7:57 PM, Beorne said:

real life issues

I'm jumping on this part of your post: the last year I've learned to play-by-forum at rpol.net. I'd never be able to find time for more than a few sessions around a table a year. I've also found that as I've become older I'm not so quick-thinking anymore (that, or I've become more critical to my initial ideas) which is problematic both rules-wise and for story-telling. GMing-by-forum solves this by giving me time to prepare each post at any time in the day I can find a few minutes. I'm running an RQG-game now and I'm really enjoying it.

On 4/5/2019 at 2:57 PM, Atgxtg said:

APP doesn't get used all that much in KAP

A small addition from the flirting skill description on p.102 : "The Gamemaster may wish to impose a modifier on the Flirting Skill of any character with unusually high or low APP."

This is probably a Sartarite rebel warband. It's mentioned in The Eleven Lights on p. 166 as being part of Kallyr's Candle Dancers: “It is those rebel bands who fought with Kallyr during the Shiprise. My Storm Rams, Orstalor’s Mudhens, Thundercape’s Silent Wind, and Gyffur’s Hidden Gale are amongst them.” says Venharl Stormbrow.

Does anyone have any more information on the Hidden Gale?

p. 7:

Quote

Gamemasters should also note the person with whom each Player-knight or lady is sharing a place setting

Does this have any game effects other than what the PKs do with it rp-wise?

Are the guests who share a place setting sitting next to each other or opposite one another?

p. 6:

Quote

Characters seated in adjacent areas are considered close enough to converse during the feast

As practically every PK (and most GMCs) will be Near or Below the salt, this means there's very little restriction on who's able to interact.

I was expecting the seating to have a little more impact on who you were able to interact with. Specifically, I'm expecting one PK to consider ceding his postition in order to be seated closer to the target of his flirtations. I also expected the seating to affect which GMCs the cards would affect.

Do you think I would break anything if I (within reason) restricted interaction to the same area of seating?

I have two questions from the Book of Feasts.

The first, rather nitpicking question. Page 6:

Quote

Any player character who is involuntarily seated in an area “below” a character with fewer Glory points must succeed at a Modest roll or lose 1 point of Honor.

I discovered this when trying to figure out where to seat the ladies. They often have significantly lower Glory but their "value" might warrant a seat near the salt, for example. Maybe "a character with fewer Glory points" should be rephrased?

Also: from page 7:

Quote

the Gamemaster should fill in the remaining blanks

After seating the eight PKs plus one accompanying wife and one potential wife, the King, the host, the Earl (and his wife maybe), and the two Special Guests noted in the campaign there really isn't any blanks for any other eligible ladies or other guests.

So naturally I'll add a few lines to cram them in, but how many listed names other than the PKs would you suggest? I haven't used the book in play yet, so I can't tell if there would be a problem with seating too many guests on the Feast Record.

No, but here is a fan made quick(er) character generation: http://2ndage.blogspot.com/2019/02/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha.html?m=1

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

Lunar survivors/deserters might form, join or take over outlaw bands in the outback.

They might base themselves in some caves, perhaps, within raiding distance of a certain village...

So... did you ever have a knight convert? I have a player who wants his knight to convert.

Apart from the obvious requirements for appropriate roleplaying, I also think the PK would have to have at least 10 in the target religion's virtue traits.

Is there anything else? How would the PK's family react? His entourage?

My campaign is still in 485.

8 hours ago, jajagappa said:

a Lunar camp stationed ... outside Redbird

Well they're gone with the (dragon)wind.  Those who didn't desert or flee are probably besieged in Jonstown. My campaign is currently in late Earth Season 1625.

Although I love to be able to use all the Glorantha material, it actually feels good to have a few places to develop myself.

I've found some general info on Arfritha Vale, but not so much on specifics like Red Bird Fort or Famous Bell. Does anyone remember if there is anything published somewhere, maybe in some fanzine?

23 hours ago, Steve3742 said:

unless the damage was permanent.

Considering the abundance of magic healing I’d say the only injuries that are reasons for compensation are the permanent ones.

I’ll probably run this soon so thanks for asking and discussing this.

According to the Book of the Entourage the squire is assigned by the knight’s lord, who considers such things as who among the boys should enter the career towards knighthood, and the political implications of the loyalties that will form between the families.

On 2/19/2019 at 11:20 PM, JonL said:

It does seem to have suffered through some rough format conversions. I'll see if I have a cleaner copy.

Did you find one?

Thanks for perspectives! I'm still a bit confused though. In the rulebook it says about the Skirmish of Allington (p. 230) that

Quote

If there are prisoners, the knights take them back to the earl, who takes command of them.

If the PKs are to get the ransom, the "takes command" could mean "put in arrest on behalf of their captors", as it's likely the PKs don't have proper facilities to keep prisoners at their manors.

We're around year 485 and an enemy knight surrendered to the PKs. Another enemy knight was knocked off his horse and fled. The PKs were on a routine patrol under the command of the Marshal of Salisbury.

If ransom is paid for the enemy knight, who gets the ransom?

Who gets the captured enemy horse, equipment and other loot?

What's the approximate population of Tarsh? Lunar Tarsh? Old Tarsh?

3 minutes ago, svensson said:

For a mount to direct its attack at the rider's bidding requires war training.

Yes, but as an example, the RQ:G pregenerated character Vasana rides "a trained cavalry bison". Surely that means war trained?

Another example would be Tusk Riders, where the description in the Glorantha Bestiary says that "Their steeds fight along with them."

On 3/2/2019 at 11:13 AM, svensson said:

The rider may direct a war-trained mount to Charge OR Trample, NOT both.

 

Do you allow a (Lance) charge AND a butt attack?

Around 1990 I ran a campaign in Dragon Pass using RQ3. What I remember: the Apple Lane scenarios, escorting a merchant to the Troll lands in the north (Troll Pak?), heading east towards Pavis, making a stop at the Block. Getting everybody killed attacking a far superior enemy.

I had the Avalon Hill RQ3 books, no more, no less. Tried to understand the stuff that wasn't really explained (like heroquesting) and had a lot of fun. It was as canon as I could.

sorry nvm was the same site with a different url 

46 minutes ago, David Scott said:

It’s a suggestion not a rule. There’s no error in the GM Screen Pack.

That's why I wrote "rule/principle". I should have added "suggestion" - at least I did in spirit. Also, I think you misread what I wrote. The error in the Adventure Book is in the description of the second scenario, where it is stated that it takes place "less than a season after" the first, while if you follow the suggested timeline, it takes place more than a season after the first. It's not a big deal, it's just an error.

Yes, the "one adventure per season" suggestion does need somewhere the PCs can spend their downtime, some sort of local connection. Or they could just hang out at an inn in Pavis or something, I guess.

I also agree on the "experience rolls after each adventure" (as we always used to do it in RQ3) rather than strictly "once per season". So, the point is: RQ:G emphazises the need for downtime more than, say, RQ3 did? That's good, I think. And I look forward to seeing how my players will react to being "sent back" to their community for some OL (ordinary life).

The "one adventure per season" rule/principle of the RQ:G was discussed in another thread, and I'd like to hear more about how you handle this.

The timeline for the scenarios in GM Screen Pack doesn't follow this. The second and third of the scenarios take place in the same season.

There's also an erroneous reference in the second, stating it takes place "less than a season after" the first, while if you follow the printed timeline, it takes place more than a season after the first.

I would have no problem adhering to "one adventure per season", but I guess that if I want to follow the suggested timeline in the Adventure Book, I'll have to deprive the PCs of their seasonal income (or whatever the consequence is, I can't remember at the moment). Not that it'd matter much to them, as almost all of them are stinking rich from game start.

On 12/1/2018 at 4:46 PM, Gryphaea said:

 I can share those if folks would find them useful.
 

Please do!