Zit

Do you keep the rule with multiplying the value by 3 instead of 4 for one-shot use enchantments ? If yes, shouldn't this apply to the Create Scroll power ?

For the Create Spell Matrix power, does the user spend exertion points, and how ?

I just want to use the stunts as in the rules, but I'd like to clearly see this answer in the rules. Shouldn't there be a default rule (occupy a slot) + specific rules (martial arts) ?

Or did I miss it somewhere ?

BTW, does a Stunt occupy a skill slot ?

since area is the square of a range, we could simply take the squared range as value for an area (I've been traumatized by my maths studies).

On 6/29/2018 at 5:52 PM, RosenMcStern said:

Otherwise, the attributes cannot exceed those normally permitted for the power in Combat Time

On 6/29/2018 at 5:52 PM, RosenMcStern said:

Ritual casting can sometimes extend the effect of a single-target power to an entire party

Are both sentences not contradictory ?

And what means "sometimes" ? When does it and when doesn't it ?

On 6/29/2018 at 5:52 PM, RosenMcStern said:

Ritualizing a power with multiple Targets can create an area effect. In order to obtain this, the number of targets must be at least triple the numeric value of range.

Is this limitation really necessary ? Why don't you simply allow this for any power without restriction ? The number of affected targets at the same time is anyway limited to the target attribut.

I just uploaded a RD100 package for Sumerian adventures. Don't hesitate to correct my broken English (PM me).

Kick is missing in the weapon table (fist is not). If intentional, I propose to add it.

Ok. There may be some wording to change in the rules to make it clear. it is confusing with the sentence  "If a player rolls equal to or lower than his or her character’s final Weapon Skill, the latter has hit the intended target. Otherwise, the attack is a miss."

So : attack hits AND wins against defense roll damage die (and1d6 advantage if any) against defender.

Attacks does not hit but wins against defense : roll 1d6 RP damage against defender. This case is not explicitly explained

I would bring the paragraphs "making the attack" and "target reaction" in one single section (like "melee exchange" or whatever) and say that if a attacker wins and hits, he rolls as explained (Might an so on) but if only wins without hitting, he rolls only 1d6. Or remove the sentence"otherwise, the attack is a miss"

Basic Combat : if A declares he attacks B and B declares he defends (p. 86 "The defender must declare the Reaction before the attacker rolls."). A rolls and misses, must B roll because he declared so, or can he cancel ?

Let'S says that B rolls anyway his defense  (e.g. to try get some tactical advantage) but misses with a die roll < the attacker's. The attacker wins the opposed roll (both failures but attacker's roll > defender's) : the defender shall lose 1d6. This mean that you can decreases the defender's RP even if you missed your attack, right ?

Toutes mes condoléances, Greg's spirit remains in his monumental work.

Chapter Adventuring : Declaration Phase sometimes called Statement of Intent (p. 38 & 52 and  in the conflict sequence, p.49 in the "End of the round" paragraph)

I'm frankly not sure this is necessary. The current rule is not complicated, and if you want to propose the hit location as a possible option, you have to give a rule and not expect from the reader to find it somewhere else. Or do you intend to ditch the full localised damage rule ?

Using 2 different dice for close or ranged combat is IMHO very easy as well. I'm not sure your proposal to use the +2 rule instead will make things simpler.

I noticed that you're mentioning Exertion Points at the beginning but still Life Points at the end (and Strike Ranks everywhere). Time to update it ?

I cannot find anymore in the rules where it is stated that with a Range Combat Opening Move, the very first action costs 20 SR, whatever it is (aim, defense...). Does it include the opening move change ?

I haven't found the Ultimate Mongol Empire Guide for Legend, only for EGS and Savage Worlds. Where can I find it ?

what about allowing a CHA of 3d6 for any (or almost) creature and apply the -10 when dealing with other species ? The Troll Rune Lord would lead his fellow trolls to the death, and even the Tusk Rider leader, but not humans (may be with an exception for members of the same cult). It makes more sense. It seems that CHA in the rules is sometimes evaluated from the human point of view, sometimes not.

when do you expect the pdf to be ready ?

1 hour ago, Revilo Divad Of Dyoll said:

Truestone is really dense.  But of course, the ground under it could erode away . . .

and Glorantha is not following physics but myth, so there may even be a mythical reason for the block to float away.

I love it as well.

On 7/7/2018 at 12:18 PM, RosenMcStern said:

And pre-casting and Channelling should be described as simplified ways of resolving this without resorting to rituals (and risking Consequences).

Actually I like both rules and we could make then setting-dependant. If you allow rituals, you don't need to introduce channeling, but if you don't use rituals or are not a fan of free-form spells, channeling is an elegant and simple way to increase the powers duration.

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Allowing enchantments with Craft will make any crafter a magician, which is not true.

Smiths are magicians in many cultures. But I understand that this is not about making things better, but about making them in a special way which requires a long and intense attention, so Concentration makes sense.

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

Desecrating the place would require an adventure time conflict, parallel to the ritual effects

I'm sure you can desecrate a place even faster 😛. Does this also mean that you cannot efficiently protect the place in a narrative time scale, except against actions carried on the narrative time scale, since the conflict has to be run in this time scale ?

What about enchantments ? At which Time scale the effects are effective ?

4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said:

The point of a ritual is that of obtaining an amplified, altered effect. Extended duration is just one component of it, or a side effect. Just extending duration is a way of bypassing the Channelling rules and unbalancing the game without adding to fun.

If it is a question of balance, ok, but one can see the Channeling as a simplification of what could be mechanically solved with a ritual casting. I see here two ways to do the same, one of them being arbitrary forbidden by the game designer for game balance. Couldn't you bypass the Channeling anyway just by modifying one effect, even possibly decreasing it, just to be able to cast the spell beyond your channeling limit ?

Just trying to twist and dig into the mechanics to make them perfect and remove anything not clear.

duration :  what if you don't want to increase it but only increase the effect ? Is there any effect rules wise or is it just left to the caster ?

It still do not understand why you discourage using ritual casting for extending the duration.

range & Targets :

Quote

The power can affect a group of targets, or become an area effect

This could be understand as "either a group or an area". And if becoming an area effect, does it affect anyone coming into the area , which is in contradiction with the example in the Target section ?

Enhance range table : you mention range and then radius. Range is one dimensional, radius refers to an area or volume. Clarify.

Range :  the first example shows a power cast on an area. The second looks like a power cast directly on 3 targets, but you mention the radius, which implies an area.

When the enemies enter the protected area, they must make a conflict in the same time scale than the spell (every 5 minutes in the example). This leave them enough time to desecrate the place. And if the power had been cast in narrative time, they would have hours before they are demoralized. Shouldn't it be a Conflict in Combat time ? How can you chose it ? The conflict is against the caster's WIL using his Power rating, as if directly casting it ?

(BTW : you should write WIL instead of Will - I know, this is Word's autocorrection)

It seems much better and structured. I have a couple of questions before I read the second half :

- why do you impose Concentration for the ritual ? Religious magic may require Allegiance. Magic considered as a "science" could use a knowledge skill. A smith enchanting a blade could use his craft skill. A Morris dancer his dance skill.

-... " and the Power itself is always considered an appropriate Trait ". I don't understand this sentence.

-  challenge rating 80 % if the Value of the power is more than double the power user’s starting Resolution Points : isn't it a "double punishment" ?

It would be very nice from Chaosium if they removed the copyright on it and allowed the free reproduction and diffusion of this booklet, which I fortunately have. It is part of role playing story now.

if they are not to be reedited at some time, it would be nice from Chaosium to release them as free pdf, or to allow someone to do it.

Are Durulz mammals ? I'm asking because of the breast armour the duck is wearing.