Kloster

16 hours ago, Erol of Backford said:

I'd purchase one for sure. it looks amazing!

It's good, yes. I agree I'm french, so have no problem with the language. I just had a try with deepl translator and the result seemed good to me.

5 hours ago, Darius West said:

Given that pretty much every Praxian major deity hates chaos passionately, I don't see how their followers can ever justify allying with broos, or scorpionmen, or any chaos creatures.

IIRC, the praxian side in Moonbrooth had some broos.

@radmonger, you appear to quote me, but that excerpt was from Jeff. I don't know why but my post appears differently in Edge and Firefox.

27 minutes ago, metcalph said:

Pretty sure Humakt would be hostile to Yanafal what with the business of being kerb-stomped by his devoted warriors at the Battle of the Four Arrows of Light.

I think any relationship between Irrippi and Lhankor are best explained by Sayre's Law ("Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.")

According to @Jeff in

, we have:

"Humakt is in general neutral towards most deities, except those that misuse Death or sanctify betrayal. He's friendly only to Orlanth and Ty Kora Tek. 

Humakt views the Red Goddess as an enemy and the Seven Mothers collectively as hostile. But Humakt is neutral towards Yanafal Tarnils - Humakt's opposition to the Red Goddess is not because of Yanafal Tarnils but something else, perhaps historical, perhaps cosmological - likely both."

30 minutes ago, metcalph said:

I think any relationship between Irrippi and Lhankor are best explained by Sayre's Law ("Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.")

You wrote earlier that: "They also shared the same temple in New Pavis.  IMO Irrippi and Buserian Sages can worship at the Lhankor Mhy Temples and get rune points replenished.  They just can't sacrifice for rune magics that are alien to Lhankor Mhy (such as IO's Madness) or for rune magic from LM's associated cults. " (on which we agree). If Irrippi can worrship at Lhankor Mhy temples, that does mean they are at least neutral, and most probably friendly.

On 4/15/2023 at 4:36 PM, radmonger said:

- some lunar cult is accepted as one of the deities worshiped by the clan, on one particular day of sacred time. On that day, all the initiates, and some of the rest of the clan, worship at the clan shrine to that deity.

As 7M is (collectively) neutral or friendly with most of the cults (Enemy with none, and hostile 'only' with Eurmal, Maran Gor, Odayla, Orlanth, Storm Bull, Waha and Yinkin), this seems a high probability. IIRC, in addition, Humakt has no problem with Yanafal, Etyries is associated with Issaries and there is not too much problem between Irripi Ontor and Lhankor Mhy.

7 minutes ago, Kloster said:

I am not speaking of naval battles, where most of the dead drowned, and losses were unsurpassed.

Just for the record, Greek trireme had a crew of around 200 men (including 170 rowers, according to Herodotus). In Artemisium, Greek lost around 100 ships of a fleet of 271 (around 35%) meaning around 20 000 dead, and the Persian lost around 400 ships of a fleet of 1200 (still around 35%) and around 80 000 dead. As it was not too far from the shore, the number of death may have been lower.

In Salamis, the Greek lost 40 ships of a fleet of 370 (10% losses), meaning 8 000 death and the Persian lost 200 to 300 ships of a fleet of 1200 according Herodotus (25% losses), meaning between 40 000 to 60 000 death.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

Though some of Caesar's campaigns against fellow Romans had quite low casualties. I seem to recall fighting in Hispania against Pompey's troops that were a war of maneuver with few casualties for the defeated. (Probably in part so that big Julie could recruit the survivors into his armies.)

Yes, some of them had very low losses, but some were more ... bloody: In Munda (Caesar vs Gnaeus Pompey, the optimates led by Pompey lost half of their men. In Ruspina (still between Caesar and Optimates), Caesar lost over 30% of his men. I am not speaking of naval battles, where most of the dead drowned, and losses were unsurpassed.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

It seems to me, that the Greek city states considered other Greeks to be part of a category of we Greeks, rather than being an other.

Correct.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

That may have contributed to the much higher ratio of Persian casualties at Marathon.

I think the very high Persian losses were caused by the impossibility to flee, being blocked by the sea.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

The Romans initially seemed to divide the world into Romans and others. Now once Rome started acquiring allied states, they had three categories: Romans, allies, and others.

Correct.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

Fighting others, usually makes it easier to inflict heavy casualties.

This, I don't know.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

In addition, for various reasons of tradition and superstition, the Romans contrived to interpret all of their wars as defensive wars.

Very true.

11 hours ago, Bren said:

I think that their defensive claim probably encouraged infliction of higher casualties on the vanquished.

This, I don't know.

1 hour ago, Bren said:

In the article the author checked his numbers against battles with lists of the fallen, which were done by name. That seems like a very accurate method of counting. Do we have such accurate lists for Rome's battles? I believe there is pretty good evidence that Caesar, for example, overestimated enemy casualties in his Commentaries. So potentially the loser's casualties are overestimated.

For Roman losses, the main sources are historians (Livy, for example), but also the annual census, and the archives of the legions, including pay. But Caesar's Commentaries are a masterpiece of propaganda, glorifying the author, not an accurate description.

1 hour ago, Bren said:

My impression is that Classical Greek city states had a level of formality and, I guess civility is the word, in most or many of their battles. Once the battle was over, a truce was declared so that each side can collect and bury their dead. I don't recall the Roman's doing that. Their wars seemed to follow more of a total war model. If the Spartans had conducted war in the Roman fashion, there would have been no Athens or Athenians at the end of the Peloponnesian War. Historically, Carthage didn't survive the Punic Wars. If war is conducted differently, casualty ratios could easily change.

Romans had similar traditions, but their view of the end of the battle was not the same.

All of what you say is correct, and I took a bit too extreme examples.

Let's take another example: Battle of Cynoscephales. For the Macedonians, around 8 000 death for 22 000 men (around 35% death) and for the Romans 1000 death on 30 000 (around 3%). In Pydna, Macedonian army had over 20 000 death on an army of 43 000 (again around 35%-40% death), and the Roman one supposedly 100 death (seems far too low) on 35 000.

On 4/2/2023 at 9:53 AM, DrGoth said:

Variation, yes,. but the highest victor loss reported in that paper was 10% deaths and the highest loser death percentage was 25%.  So a 30% for the victors feels a little unlikely.

As far as I remember, Roman losses vs Hannibal in Cannae or Lake Trasimene were much higher. According to Livy, Roman losses in Cannae were around 50 000 on around 80 000, not counting alae sociorum. This is over 50% death and around 80% losses. Those 50 000 death represent also rougly 5% of the adult male roman population. I know Rome is iron age and not bronze age, but I don't think the figures would have been very different with bronze weapons and armors.

13 hours ago, Agentorange said:

Our own physics apply all the time:  if people fall off stuff they fall downwards and if they fall a long way they squish - there's rules for it. If people stay underwater they drown it's in the rules, the seas are salty, fire is hot and burns, snow is cold, gravity works people don't just float off into the air. Skills such as Treat Disease are a clear holdover from bacterial/viral models of infection - you can't "treat" a spirit. Rivers run downhill ( mostly ) if you go into the hot  desert/wastes you dehydrate and die of thirst - there's rules for it

see what I mean ?

Yes, the reasons behind (the rationale) is different, but most of the world physics are identical.

22 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I would strongly urge everyone to ditch this rule and just round in the standard way (closest integer, up if .5) for everyone. Otherwise you get senseless outcomes like enemy D4 / 2 (typical DB for thrown weapons) being different from player D4 / 2, and as you suggest, crit/special/fumble calculations become even more tricky.

This is what we do.

12 hours ago, DrGoth said:

I'm guessing the one in Orange you mean is

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_cadastre_d'Orange

It's a much much smaller scale than the other two

Yes, this one of them.

On 3/11/2023 at 9:18 AM, DrGoth said:

No actual Roman map survives,

In fact, there is still some roman maps remaining. I have seen at least 3, located in south France (Nimes, Orange and Rhone valley), and I think a fourth in Vienne (France, not Austria).

Heroquest(ing) rules

29 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

And SRs

 

and stirrups

2 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

It strikes me that a day in Glotrantha is 24 hours just as the sun rises in the east.

...

Similarly an hour is the time it takes for the sun to pass over one twelfth of the arc between sunrise and sunset.

16 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Having lived north of the Arctic, that summer had 12 very long hours by that definition...

For Romans, the day started at sunrise, and there was 12 hours from sunrise to sunset, described by their number. Thus, summer hours were much longer than winter hours. And nights were either measured in 12 noctis hora (night hours) or (for the army) in 4 vigiliae (night watch), each made of 3 noctis hora.

1 hour ago, narsilion said:

I think it would be interesting to make a treasure map, give it to players. Unfortunately, it is marked in yards, but - lets say - they need the old Clearwine yard. Nowadays this measure is not used, almost everybody uses the Jonstown yard. Unfortunately, the old Clearwine town hall was destroyed 30 years ago, rebuilt without those marks, and the stones from the old town hall were sold to two different thanes, who built their houses... etc. It may take a lot of time and effort to find the treasure just becouse of old measurements 😄

Consider that idea stolen.

For me, birthdays are celebrated the last day of sacred time, when the new year begins.

5 hours ago, Soccercalle said:

If you have Hate Lunar 100 your whole existance is about killing Lunars and destroying the Lunar Empire. You may even destroy the World and your own Gods to do it. (If you could, looking at you Argie).

This is the effect of being above 100%, not the rule that allow or not to be above 100%.

For me, as nothing in the rules forbids a passion to be over 100%, the standard rule apply. Of course, as there is no skill category modifier, only an EXP roll of 100 or a situational bonus can drive you over 100%, which will be rare.

4 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

It's very hard to get a passion much over 100%.  I'd just play by normal rules.

Same for me.

4 hours ago, Ludo Bagman said:

For combat between groups of combatants I would use a Battle roll of the leaders to decide who has an advantage in the initial phase of combat.

I think this is another good use for Battle skill.

7 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

For example the Dance skill could be used as an augment to effect a deliberate feint.

Yes, of course.

7 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

With a level of success giving a surprise SR penalty to the attack.

Why not. It can be a SR bonus, but as a feint, I would give a malus to the parry (or dodge).

7 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Critical - Attack first on SR1

Special - Minus 5 SR

Standard - Minus 3 SR

failure - unchanged 

fumble - Attack last on SR12

My take would be:

Critical: Attack on SR1 (but not first, because you can have 2 critical augment by 2 different characters, potentially in opposed parties). In decreasing DEX or increasing normal SR if several characters are acting in SR1.

Special: Minus 5SR

Standard success: Unchanged

Failure +3SR

Fumble: Attack on SR12 after all normal SR12 actions. If 2 or more different characters are in this category, decreasing DEX or increasing normal SR between them.

6 hours ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

from fumble to critical, which the resistance table does not have.

You can have success levels on the resistance table.