Kloster

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

In reality, if I remember correctly, most of the perceived issues that triggered this whole sub-discussion was about world-building... that is: what does it mean for one's Glorantha if enchanters routinely use volunteers to pour POW into magical items? Do these volunteers get paid, and if so, how much? Does it mean anybody can get rich easily? What are societies' perceptions of such a practice? And so on... So AFAICT most people only wanted to navigate the maze of consequences, figuring out which path lead to gameable realities.

For my part, completely true.

4 minutes ago, Glorion said:

That prices in the book are in Lunars is for gameplaying convenience, and also reflects the fact that *almost all* adventurers are far richer than average inhabitants of Sartar, to say nothing of Prax.

Exactly what I meant when I spoke of economics abstraction and price of swords.

6 hours ago, dmariz18 said:

Have anyone ran a game for their family? I was listening to The Adventure Zone and that is like the goal. I feel like that would be a great way to get closer to my family and share something I love with them. Thoughts?

With my wife (Runequest, Star Wars and Champions) and my eldest son (Runequest), yes, but not together. For them, no.

18 minutes ago, soltakss said:

To be honest, it probably is not an issue.

At my gaming table the rule works one way, at your gaming table the rule might work another way. We are both happy until we game together then the GM makes the decision about how it works.

Also, bear in mind that it only affects Stackable shared spells, which is a definite minority.

Extension is different, as that is common, but I would allow Extension to be cast using Rune Points from 2 Rune Pools.

Divination is different again and I would allow it to be cast from different rune pools, but the question is asked of two deities, so casting Divination 6 using 2 Orlanthi Rune Points and 4 Storm Bull rune Points means you get 2 answers from Orlanth and 4 from Storm Bull.

 

Agreed, this point is not much of an issue. My point was that there are too many rules that are subject to interpretations. When you change of player group (I have no current regular group), everything has to be clarified each time, as many people have different readings of different rules.

By the way, I agree with your divination reading.

2 hours ago, Joerg said:

Having an idea of the meta-rules of magic affecting people or tools would be nice. Does the extra damage from Bladesharp add to the extra damage from Kargan Tor's Blessing? There is no mention of KTB being incompatible with Bladesharp, or even Fireblade. There is little info on whether the effects stack.

For me yes, as it has always been the case. As you said: "there is no mention of KTB being incompatible with Bladesharp, or even Fireblade".

I completely agree with your long post. This is why I wrote :"The listed prices are only for having interesting adventuring, and are only a simplified abstraction of Gloranthan economics, as are the various standard of living. ".

2 hours ago, Joerg said:

Being a GM obsessed with such details, my interpretation would be that for each enchantment process - whether original or subsequent - the person performing the enchantment has to pour one point of POW into the enchantment. That person may bring in additional POW from their own magic, or they may use POW provided by volunteers.

This is what I originally thought.

2 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Other interpretations may vary.

Which can be a problem when too many rules are subject to interpretations.

6 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Oh no, not at all. In fact quite the opposite.

The Red Goddess frees Malkioni from their shackles, so allows them to use Sorcery, Spirit Magic, Rune Magic and Lunar Magic. All are allowed and all come under the auspices of the Red Goddess, Third Prophet of the Invisible God.

Thanks for the explanation. While my perception is not like yours (the third prophet stuff), I like it, and may use it.

5 minutes ago, soltakss said:

At least, that is how I interpret the rules.

I agree with you, but one more time, there is an ambiguity: "When a spell is cast on a target that already has an incompatible spell, then only the spell with the greatest magic point value takes effect." can be understood both ways.

21 minutes ago, Glorion said:

True enough. Your average Sartarite farmer or herder has a wooden spear, and couldn't possibly afford a bronze broadsword. Munchkinnery with selling points of power to get rich, or getting NPCs to sac power for enchantments, can easily be prevented by any intelligent GM by bringing in a few facts of life from actual Gloranthan economics or lack thereof, and should be. I think anyone trying that kind of thing should be assumed to be a secret sorceror who really is using Tap, and likely is chaotic, and should be treated accordingly. Unless it's a Lunar campaign, in which case the assumptions might be the same but the popular and government attitudes would be different.

While I don't agree it is munchkinery, I think as you this has to be a local and societal matter. A lunar campaign should have different rules than a Heortling one.

2 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Remember that most people in a clan would have a sword/axe/shield/etc provided by the clan -- they're not paying for it, and it's not theirs to sell.

Agreed.This is why I am speaking of economics abstractions and of rules and prices made for adventuring, not to describe a working society at the global economic level.

Hello Jeff,

Why having removed the RQ3 Missile and Spells hit location table (we also used it for spears, but this is another story)?

Regards.

8 hours ago, Glorion said:

Sure. Except practically nobody in Sartar except the nobility and rich merchants has that much money. And in Prax, it's rare to find anyone with more than a few clacks. So the prices are another way of saying "not available."

In fact, I think the right answer is what PhilHibbs told:

17 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

This is not in the rules, because the core rules are not written to accurately model commerce. They are written for adventuring.

After all, a broadsword is worth 50L (close to 1 year of living for 1 free family), and almost 1 adventurer has one. The listed prices are only for having interesting adventuring, and are only a simplified abstraction of Gloranthan economics, as are the various standard of living.

3 hours ago, soltakss said:

In my Glorantha, the Red Goddess makes up the third side of the Law Rune, with Malkion as its base, Hrestol as one side supporting the Red Goddess on the other side. So, the Red Goddess is the final Prophet of the Invisible God.

Does that imply that your Lunar sorcerers can not learn spirit or divine magic?

8 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I think that going strictly by the rules, it's the same enchantment (only improved), so that the 1 mandatory POW for the enchanter has already been provided (that is, it's 1 POW per actual enchantment, not 1 POW per enchantment event). However, since presumably another enchanter can improve on the enchantment, if that happens, the new enchanter has to add one point of his own POW the first time.

I haven't thought of it that way, but I am converted. Brilliant.

8 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Ironically, the unusually weak Lhankor Mhy sorcerers might well be the more playable ones, because at least they can back it up with more immediately player-useful Rune Magic and don't have to bother the same way with caste restrictions.

As far as I understand, Aeolians and Lunars also can. And Lunars don't have caste, either.

15 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Does the target of a spell "know" that a spell has been cast at him? Even if it fails?

If your the target of a spell and you don't accept it voluntarily, there is a POW vs POW roll, so you automatically know you are 'under magical attack' because your soul is resisting. If it fails to be cast, logically, you don't know, but if it is cast successfully but don't manage to overcome your magical defenses or your POW, yes, you should know.

15 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Is there are way to mask spell casting?

Yes, being out of sight and out of hearing range.

15 hours ago, Godlearner said:

Lets say a bystander may know a spell was cast, but not who cast it?

For me, and as we play it, the target of a spell automatically knows a spell is cast and by whom. Witnesses may know a spell is cast, depending on situation (see above), but would not know who is the target, unless it is obvious, like a sword bursting in flames, somebody dropping dead or the like.

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

Thanks - yes, you can upgrade these special conditions at the very least.

You have also something in the decription of "Enchant Spell Matrix" p 265: The strength of a matrix can be built up over time. Thus a 2-point Bladesharp matrix could be built up into a 4-point matrix by later sacrifices of POW and successful Enchantment rolls. The matrix can also be created a part at a time, so that a 3-point Bladesharp matrix, needing 3 points of sacrificed POW, can be done over the course of several weeks or even seasons. Of course, it does not have the spell until the entire sacrifice is made.

Also, p335: For example, to make a spear into a Thunderbolt matrix requires 3 points of POW. The strength of a matrix can be built up over time. Thus, the Thunderbolt matrix could later have an extra point of POW stacked with it by later sacrifices of POW. Similarly, to create a Strength matrix, 2 points of POW must be sacrificed into the item. The Thunderbolt matrix, needing 3 points of sacrificed POW, can be done over the course of several weeks or even seasons. The spear does not have the Rune spell until the entire sacrifice is made.

So, even if not explicitly written, it is clearly implied that you can add POW later to an enchantment, as was already the case in RQ3  (Magic book p58): "Stackable spirit spells can be slowly enchanted into the item, a point at a time."

1 hour ago, Akhôrahil said:

Where are the rules about upgrading an existing enchantment?

RQG p251

17 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Except you also spent the night there. And "inn" is a perfectly good translation - "tabernae" were places required by law to provide hospitality.

In fact, latin "taberna" (plural tabernae) is the precursor word for french "taverne", that translates in english as "inn".

In cities, they were more shops than anything else, but outside, they were used as hotels and inns (and in that case, the plural form has to be used, but I don't remember why).

5 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I read it that only the first point of POW needs to come from the enchanter, and all the rest - even at a later time when increasing the size of it - can come from others.

Although, I'm now,a little confused about increasing standard Variable Spirit Magic spells... Or even Stackable Rune Magic... 

I've read it that the 1st point of each enchant has to be provided by the enchanter. That is, if the enchanter makes a 3 points enchantments, and then add 2 points to the enchantment, he will have to provide at least 2 points from his personal POW.  Now, after rereading your post and the rule, I think it can also be understood your way. One more clarification needed.

1 hour ago, Godlearner said:

Some spells cannot be cast on the same target. When a spell is cast on a target that already has an incompatible spell, then only the spell with the greatest magic point value takes effect. If both spells are of equal value, then the already-existing spell remains in effect.

Thanks for correcting.

On 12/23/2020 at 9:34 AM, Nick Brooke said:

Ironically, for a nation defined by their rejection of God Learnerism, the Carmanians had an apex religious caste who dedicated their lives to rules-lawyering the cosmos, finding 'exploits' their rulers could use to make the worship of pagan deities permissible.

This is part of what makes them interesting. The mix of Lunar, Orlanthi and Malkioni culture is also interesting (for me).

11 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I see the Multispell affecting the caster, not the recipient. So, Multispell 3 Disruptions, and the target needs to Counter 3MPs, not 2 RPs + 3 MPs - because it's the Disruption hitting the target, not the Multispell.

I see it the same way.

12 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

If you houserule that *every time* the enchantment is cast, the enchanter needs to use at least 1 point of their own POW, then it makes it even more frustrating.

For me, it is not houseruling. As I understand it, it is RAW. Perhaps am I wrong.

12 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

So, if you want a Spirit Armouring enchantment 4, you'll need to acquire the spell somehow, it'll cost at least 1 point of your own POW, and then another 3 nobles' yearly incomes... Not something so easy to do!

Agreed. This is why I explain I see few (very few) potential buyers for POW.

2 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

To me, this whole debate is all about whether the PCs can take advantage of a system,

Completely agree.

2 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

There's really no Glorantha world where such a situation would be greatly frowned upon, except where there's a ruling class that likes to control everything.

This I don't know and has to be decided, either officially or in each of our Glorantha.

14 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Singing requires 2 rounds unless you are awesome at it.

You're right. My mistake. It's only rune and passion inspirations that are instant, not skill augments.