Kloster

5 hours ago, Ian Absentia said:

To be particular, Mythras does address this situation specifically relative to its Combat Styles, shifting the difficulty one grade harder with an unfamiliar combination.

This is especially the problem I have with this kind of rule: when you know how to use a shield (a specific one), you know how to use it, whether in combination with a sword, an axe or alone. I agree the rule can be interesting, but it feels wrong to me.

1 hour ago, Runeblogger said:

In Ian Thomson's fanzines published long ago by Tentacles Press, there was a second group of settlers who were granted the lands south of Duke Raus'. They were several Carmanian families. I expect other grant lands to be granted to some Lunar officers.

There are some (not much) informations in 'River of Cradles), including one part on  the Carmanian settlers (and their, iirc, different plow).

13 minutes ago, Scotty said:

Not part of the Core rules. See Memorizing Spells in the Q&A.

This I know. I am asking why, in the core rules, you have Spirit and Rune matrix, but no Sorcery matrix. What is the reason behind this choice?

3 hours ago, Scotty said:

A type of enchantment that can hold spirit or rune magic. See:

• Spell Matrix Enchantment (Spirit magic). Spirit magic only, available to Aldrya, Daka Fal, Mallia, Seven Mothers, Telmor, Thed, and to associate cults Eiritha, Chalana Arroy, Ernalda, Yelm, Yelmalio, Kyger Litor, & Odayla.
• Matrix Creation (Rune magic). Spirit or rune magic, rune levels only, available to all RQG Cults.

 

As a matter of fact, why no sorcery?

49 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

there are two way to answer @PhilHibbs questions:

- a pure gameplay perspective: what is allowed, what can do the players

- a background perspective explaining "why" players can do or not. That is what I m looking for.

I need both, but am more interested by the first as, for me, RQ (even RQG) is not automatically linked to Glorantha, and the 2nd answer depends on the world you are playing in.

14 hours ago, g33k said:

It's my own Stupid, but I know I'm not alone in having lost a gas-cap by leaving atop the car as I drove away from the gas station.

I choose "on top of the car" because it's *exactly* at my own eye-level as I pump the gas; it's presumably the LEAST "over-look-able" spot for it (I have tried "balanced on the slot where the handle of the gas-hose sits" but that's usually too streamlined, and the gas-cap falls off).

Fortunately for me, all the cars I have owned are idiot-proof (for that specific point): The gas cap is opened ... with the ignition key. That way, if you forget to put back the cap, you have a half pound thing that stays between your key and where it is supposed to go. Hard to miss. My main Stupid is checking all tires pressure ... except for the back up one. When you get a tire puncture, you have a problem (I am not speaking of the old beetle where the windshield washing system is powered by the pressure of the backup tire, ensuring this one is never ok.).

6 hours ago, Mugen said:

I'm quite confident it exists as an option, but not as the main rule.

You are right. I fact, this should not be a surprise, considering the (main) author is JasonD, who explained us he came to BRP through SB.

25 minutes ago, Mugen said:

I was in fact just expressing a feeling, based on my own experience of the evolution of BRP (and BRP-related) games.

I may be wrong, and perhaps a poll might indicate most players prefer splitting attack and parry.

On the evolution of BRP games, you are right.

On the evolution of BRP-related, I don't know (I don't have any).

On the choice of players, I can only speak of my own group and we all prefer separate skills. For other players, I don't know and thus can't speak for them.

On the original question, I don't have my BGB on hand (I have only the book, and not the pdf), but I seem to remember it uses separate skills, thus my answer.

2 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Fair point. But one does not preclude the other.

Of course.

10 minutes ago, Mugen said:

Sure, but nowadays, most people don't want different skills for attack and parry. 🙂

We sure don't play with the same players, not speaking of myself (I have already explained that after 12 years of fencing, I know that I am a far better attacker than defender).

Thanks for the info. I didn't knew (but it is still a bit far away from me: only 2 in France).

31 minutes ago, DreadDomain said:

Ok better yet, an updated PDF ready for a third printing! 

No, it has to be in addition: People that have not bought their book directly from Chaosium don't have the pdf, but they also need the errata. I know of 'bits and mortars' but it is not available from outside US. 2 of my players have the book (1 in english and 1 in french), but none of them has the pdf. And we need a searchable file, not a web site, because we don't always play with a connection available, and we need to know where to look in the WoD.

17 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

No worries, Kloster, as Andre said, it is hard to keep up with errata... In the core book, it states what I said. Mind you the core book I used was first printing and I did not check WoD or the other (later) edition of the core book... (hope I will not have to double check or triple every ruling I make with WoD but I fear I might). 

No problemo. I also have problems with using the WoD. But my book and pdf are second printing. This is why I am asking for an official errata file, not a web site.

Another advantage is that the default skill is much higher. If you are not using the same skill for attack and parry, your parry with shield will be much higher than with your sword. In addition, if you are using SR, you can not parry with your attack weapon in the same SR you attack with.

14 hours ago, AndreJarosch said:

Your special and critical is NOT reduced with the skill reducion. 

14 hours ago, Ryan Kent said:

I interpret the text to mean the converse.  "As with other skills or abilities, the final modified value is always the one used to determine the chance of special or critical successes, as well as fumbles."

I read it the same way as Ryan.

14 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

This is correct.

Sorry Bill, but I can find Ryan's text, not the other.

20 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

I'm inclined to ignore the >100% reduction entirely and just rely on the higher special and critical chances to break the tie.

I ignore it completely. First because it feels wrong to me, and then because it reduces the probability of specials and criticals, and then because it cause such questions and problems.

2 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Harm does not imply kill; theft would qualify as well.

I think the same.

8 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Not obviously, I am just reading it as written. They did not specify threat of physical violence, it say harm.

Ditto.

9 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

If you steal from me, that harms me,

Yes.

9 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

if you wish to malign me, that harms me as well,

Yes, but I am not sure it would qualify.

10 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

even if you want to tell the truth about my misdeeds, that will also bring me harm.

Yes, but I am almost sure it would not qualify. At the very least, as a GM, I would not rule it automatically. It would depend on the motivation.

3 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Good luck to PCs trying to sneak up on that.

Not automatically. If you want to sneak to enter discreetly in the temple, you are not an enemy, because you want no harm. The matter would of course be different if you want to kill said guard.

1 hour ago, Stephen L said:

Largely they get their weapons as starting equipment, and have them repaired between adventures, which I assume to be much cheaper than a replacement cost.

I already had several times my broadsword destroyed in 1 session. In one case, it was in 1 fight, and repairing it is not possible in the middle of the fight. But you are right: repairing between adventures is much cheaper than buying a new one.

2 hours ago, Stephen L said:

Otherwise, there's little advantage to using a shield.  You might as well take a two handed weapon, and do loads of damage.

Your characters have too much money. Replacing a broadsword, or even more a greatsword, is far more expensive that replacing a large shield. In addition, you can try to deflect thrown weapons.

2 hours ago, HreshtIronBorne said:

That is how we have played them anyways. 

Same for me.

I just had a check on deadcrows forum and no availability date given. I think not yet available.

1 hour ago, Mechashef said:

I interpret that as the visual effects being moderately obvious.

Except for some spells that are obvious: Fire(blade/arrow), light, (light/dark)wall, ...

1 hour ago, HreshtIronBorne said:

The optimal option here is an allied spirit casting Countermagic for you once you go into your Sword Trance. 

In fact, or anybody else, like the example of the second rank casting Fireblade on the 1st rank of Humaktis.

8 hours ago, Godlearner said:

We have always allowed people to roughly identify the spell types by allowing targeting of "spells that protect against damage" or "spells that enhance strength", etc.

Whatever, Fireblade is damn difficult not to identify.