Shiningbrow

No such thing as a "safe" Heroquest... And, it takes the Hero out of it.

You're largely thinking as I would (although, not sure about the INT roll... Not without some basis for it). But separating rolls, I think, is important. It's one thing to know the myths (Cult Lore), and a completely different thing to re-enact them such that you get a magical effect. I still like the Rune Spell for HQs that's been proposed (@soltakss), partly for other purposes... But also for this.

In my 2 clacks worth,I'm going to go against what a few others have suggested, and say that growing some form of life within your own body is pre-requisite... Be that mammalian, reptile, amphibian, draconic or Aldryami. Sitting on someone else's egg until it hatches won't do it. Because it's Ernalda, the carrier, grower and nurturer of the unborn inside into full life, not Voria, the actual blooming of life into the outside world.

Q: mechanically, how do your players know a certain HQ? Cult Lore? Rune Spell? Other?

It sounds good... But I still think it'd be a case of "not in my stead". Just like prisons, and rubbish tips. We all agree we need them, but you don't want to have to live near it.

Ha! At least your FLGS which can get a copy is on the same continent!!!

Most obvious would be to introduce a natural predator to the boggles... Cos that's never turned out bad... (or worse)

Sounds exceptionally God Learnery to me!!!

Just a thought... I notice the topic is somewhat generic Eurmal. What about the specific sub-cults. Orlanthi may tolerate Lightbringers, but I doubt many would allow a murderer or thief to live amongst them.

Just a quick question - is there going to be a Cult Compatibility table in the new GaGoGs? I presume yes.. but given the number of deities, how is this being done? Also, is there ever a time where a sub-cult will have a different compatibility to the main cult?

Some ppl find this funny... but I have no idea what the reference is to...

Which makes me think... What about pushing a CA out of the way to get to an opponent/enemy?

I think that's just part of the backlash against the typical black and white mentality, where it's ok to commit genocide upon your enemies because they're evil thing... Orcs, gnolls, goblins, clichéd colour-coded dragons for easy identification. But I'm sure this has been long debated and discussed thousands of times before...

Oh, I don't know... Just giving the players exactly what they want seems a little boring for RQ. Siz 18 iron armour might get you a nice Siz 12 chestpiece, plus some leftover for other uses (including gifting). Also, think of the fun and adventures to be had in finding a good iron-smith! 😄

Interesting that your examples are used fairly similarly. But what about kopesh or rapier? Somewhat less similar... Even a difference between 1 or 2 edges would make a difference. (And yes, I'm more simulationist)

Given the size difference between a dagger and a shortsword, I can understand why...

I largely agree with @Beoferret, and also with the @Baron Wulfraed that the example used is probably the worst one to pick. Let's instead look at most other weapons... 1H mace... 2H spear... Going from one specific weapon to another within those categories shouldn't merit a 50% drop. Even shields... Although I'd probably do 50% if going from large to small, or the other way around. But from Medium, I think the penalty should be smaller.

While true, you wouldn't be doing this in mass melee combat... And I'm sure a Berserked Dark Troll Zorak Zorani won't care fiddly squat for your letters.

Yea and no. What do you do when you have to replace one of them with something else? Surely your shield use doesn't suddenly completely suck if you have to change put your spear for a sword. I think split weapon skills makes the most amount of sense, although slightly less practical. Although some might think the attack & parry should really be about the same level, shield use certainly isn't, and I'd expect a number of other weapons to be different as well, especially if one has extensively used a shield for defense, e.g. with axes, spears and maces.

And don't forget the priority rules... Which I imagine would have had a significant impact, since your opponent was successfully parrying. Riposte for the win!!!

No. When you use a shield, you give less attention to those on the shield side, and focus more on those on the weapon side. When you don't have a shield, you spread your focus/attention around more.

I think the thing here is that it's not really a mythological/religious thing, it's purely political. Orlanthi steaders will say "we own this land from that marker over there, to that marker over on the other side". From that point, anyone who wants to be a part of that stead (clan, community, tribe, whatever) will need to show some loyalty to those controlling those lands - the local chief won't want to be giving lands (and all that goes with it) to relatively unknowns, or worse - to known/suspected enemies. Initiation into an Orlanthi or Ernaldan cult allows one to know the intent of the person (initiation rites should weed out enemies). Associated cult status would presume the same (hence, Humakti). So, a Seven Mothers cultist may not be allowed to have ("own") the land not because of their cult, per se, but because they'd be seen as potential enemies. However, I can certainly see an Orlanthi chieftain giving a bit of the land to a Yelmalian cultist who has proven their worth and loyalty to the clan/tribe/stead/etc. A 7M would have to do a lot to convince any Orlanthi that they could be lived alongside of.... (even without giving them land). Should they at least become Lay Members? Probably, but not necessarily. Certainly, they should show (profusely :p) a great deal of respect to the worshippers and deities (more than mere tolerance). But I don't think it should be a fundamental requirement. (Just as an aside - do remember that Orlanthis tend to be somewhat more conservative and even xenophobic than other cultists... although that is a stereotype that only some will prove)

It might appear to be a "serious upgrade", but also remember as David said, getting that enchantment renewed is going to be very risky, if not impossible - depending on your cohort. And that's if they actually choose to try to get it renewed... IF they ever find out the source of that enchantment... So, effectively, it should be about 1-Use... Of course, you do have the option of making the spell not a Thanatari spell... I can see Humakt using it, as a very quick death-dealer. The last line about "usable in the Create Head ritual" doesn't necessarily make it Thanatari either, just coincidental.

Yes, most definitely can be correct! What shouldn't be correct is skills at 0% that one should have acquired and become proficient with (or at least, marginally competent). That's why many skills have a higher base chance, especially the general world skills (eg, climb or jump).

Is this some sort of trick question??? Issaries effectively have mobile shrines/temples, so you could use that idea. In the RL, shrines are made virtually every day... In people's homes, in New businesses, etc. The appropriate paraphernalia are set up, and a big (or small for a household shrine) ritual is done by the priest/s, appropriate blessings given, sacrifices offered. In RQ terms, basically the same, except Sanctify is cast.