Godlearner

Rules, we don't need no stinking rules! 🤪

13 minutes ago, David Scott said:

Who has time to generate hoards of NPCs, I use what is already provided or just use my cheat sheet, in conjunction with either an NPC and or a squad sheet from the GM screen pack. I've a few simple varieties of those sheets, like a broo one, and a scorpionman one. I really like the simple NPC boxes in the starter set, so I use those for lots of npcs, much like the CoC Keeper and Malleus Monstorum Decks. 

Of course, I would say everyone does that, but the point of the thread is that the rules made certain creatures, whose stats were carried over from previous editions, problematic.

54 minutes ago, David Scott said:

Only if you methodically generate your NPC's.

Love advise that basically says ignore what is written and do whatever.

9 minutes ago, Nick Brooke said:

He’s painted blue to look like his god.

Covered in Woad I would say.

Alternating Darkwall and Lightwall can have very interesting affects on Trolls and Trollkin.

We had people casting Fanatism on opponents to keep them from parrying and casting defensive spells.

1 hour ago, Agentorange said:

but for me using CHA for limiting spirit magic and Rune points feels like a massive fumble on the Design RPG gaming mechanism roll. Sorry ,but that's just how I feel

Bingo. In our games we use Int to limit spirit magic and there is no limit on amount of Rune magic one can know.

The big problem I have with CHA and these creatures is that CHA limits the amount of magic one can know for both Spirit and Rune. 

Have our first review. Thank you Anthony R

The problem with dividing it like that is that it is unequal. You are putting all the "action" in the second half and all the information in the first. Can you really see them as two separate products?

2 hours ago, JRE said:

But once you have more that 5-6 people per side, RQ combat breaks down and you need different rules. And it is ok for me, as that is not the aim of the game. 

This is the main point. The amount and detail you wish to simiulate is strictly on an individual basis. If you feel you need more ,then add more. If most of your combat is against monsters, then you do not really need that level of detail.

1 hour ago, Barak Shathur said:

Another way is the rule for close combat, where short weapons have an advantage (while long weapons have the ability to keep shorter ones at bay).

I do it like this

With SR1 weapons, I may allow an attack or parry, but depending on the situation.

SR2 weapon can either attack or parry in the round (although they could also dodge),

SR3 and SR4 weapons regular combat options.

17 hours ago, Professor Chaos said:

2) So following minimaxing logic why on earth would the most successful actual army of our ancient times have chosen to be armed with a mere 1d6+1 gladius when they could have a 1d8+1 broadsword or a 1d10+1 long spear? 

Because when fighting in formation, gladius is better. That is not visible in RQ because it does not reflect combat on tactical level as well as it does with other things. I have limited weapon use in limited spaces in my games and the players switched their weapon to reflect that. We just do not see character swinging a greataxes is corridors anymore. 

5 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

What I really don't want is a somewhat similar situation to D&D's multiclassing.

There is no benefit in samling RQ sorcery, even with my sped up rules. You either go in all the way, or you do not.

2 hours ago, metcalph said:

The only thing that stops them having a bad reputation is the presence of Storm Bull. 

Storm Bull to Odayla: "Here. Hold my beer."

11 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I think Speedart is better for a hunter than Multimissile. The objective of the hunter is to either kill the animal or for it to escape unharmed. It serves nobody for an animal to run off wounded.

It is a hunter’s ethical responsibility to stop the hunt and search for any wounded animal. However, I am not sure this was the same view in the past when people depended on hunting for survival. A wounded animal was easier to track and eventually take down.

In comparing Speedart to Multimissle we should also compare how much Multimissle since its a variable spell. If we are discussing Multimissle 1 the advantage is to Speedart, but if we are talking Multimissle 4 then there is no doubt that it is better. So, the question is Multimissle 2 better than Speedart? I would say yes, assuming low armor targets, but that is my opinion.

You are right in saying that as the rules currently are, it is impossible to become a sorcerer in game. My solution was very simple, I changed the experience check rules to allow learning at a much quicker pace. I allow PCs take checks weekly.

2 hours ago, soltakss said:

Don't forget the Night Huntress, Yelorna, who grants Silver Track, Shooting Star, and gets Catseye from Yelmalio.

Sure, she doesn't grant Peaceful Cut but is a very effective hunting cult.

Shooting Stars are effective for killing and the rest of her spells are useful in hunting, but her association with Fire/Sky/Light just seems wrong for a hunter cult.

1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

What's your source for this assertion?

Are you kidding me? Its not like I am presenting a scientific study here. Yes, I have stated that small game was hunted with bows, but the major missle weapons used for hunting were spears, boomarangs, throwing sticks and atlatl.

9 minutes ago, svensson said:

Speedart [dmg +3] is a highly efficient

Against a target like a deer with no armor, Multimissle will actually be better. 

6 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Maybe true for bronze age earth and self bows, but Glorantha has comp bows with Speedart which have good stopping power

Our world also has them as well, but they were not used for hunting. 

So hunting using missle weapons such as a bow was not the standard way until the invention of firearms. Most of the weapons used by our hunter ancestors were things like spears and clubs. Use of pits and traps was also pretty common. Bows just did not have the stoping power or the accuracy needed and would be used for mainly small game, birds and fish. 

25 minutes ago, svensson said:

just Waha worshipers

That one

2 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

But the draconic effects don't have such values attached as written. 

Terrify: This effect costs 4 magic points per round. 

Soul-blast: The POW of the dragonewt is matched against that of its target via a blast of green energy. If the dragonewt succeeds, the target loses 2D6 magic points.

For Terrify we have an answer. For Soul Blast I would say its magic point strength is based on its strength of 2D6. If a target has a Shield 4 for example it would stop the Soul-blast if the roll is 8 or less. 

On 11/13/2022 at 11:49 PM, Squaredeal Sten said:

Question:  Are magical defenses such as countermagic or Shield effective defenses against Soul Blast and / or Terrify?

Do you consider that all magic in Glorantha comes from the same source? If yes, then magical defenses should work.