Kloster

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

You can't take a sword onto the spirit plane.

But you can bring fists enhanced by a Boon of Kargan Tor that someone cast on you. Of course, only Son Goku has Fist Trance (TM), but still.

Horned Man surely can dispel said Truesword and Sword Trance almost at will. But is is still worth to try.

15 minutes ago, Trotsky said:

I imagine the Horned Man would just not turn up in the first place, it is a very sacred ceremony, and they would not get a chance to become a shaman at all

Why not? His role is to test the would be shaman, but I also expect him to have a bag of tricks of his own.

On 11/23/2020 at 8:24 PM, lordabdul said:

Did you have a reference for spirit MP regen in RQ2 by the way?

In both RQ3 (Magic book p57) and RQG (p250), a bound creature can not regain Hit Points, but nothing is said about MP, So, for me, the normal rule (i.e. 1/24th of total MP per hour) should apply.

One more question: If you are attacked by a spirit and you choose to use a fight with a (magically enhanced) weapon, does the character weapon skill vs spirit sspirit combat skill roll replace the normal spirit combat vs spirit combat roll, or is it in addition (at a normal SR for this attack)?

In RQ3, you were creating specific enchants (Fire elemental, frex). I have not checked, but I presumed this has not been changed.

3 hours ago, Mossmac said:

What is the opinion of other GM’s about the relatively easy Worship role buff of the stackable ‘1 MP gives +10%’ bonus?

I like all the other buffs described and makes the players really think about how to maximise their Worship role. But if all you have to do is sacrifice 2 + 9 MPs which you get back in less than a day I don’t see the point of all of the other more interesting buffs.

how do GMs who actually role play the worship ceremony deal with this? Do you ignore the MP buff?

I would think a higher level character easily makes the role nearly every time. Do you apply extra rewards for critical worship results? making it still significant for rune level characters to buff their worship role with sacrifices etc?

Frankly, I always maximize the worship rolls with max MPs. But I don't think things becomes too easy:

- The gods need the MP.

- If you spend too much MP, this is spot on time for the GM to launch something. If you are left to 1MP and a band of broo attacks the village, or someone needs an immediate help for healing, you are in deep sh..., not to say that using sword trance with 1 or 2 MP (the ones you have recovered) is a bit futile.

- I think you forget the other modifiers the GM may add (weather, omens, whatever he wants), that may force you to use the other options to get a decent (i.e. 95%) roll.

4 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Before you make your shamanistic initiation, make sure to Spell Trade for Sword Trance and get yourself something that allows your sword to work in Spirit Combat (this could be enchantment or a spell-traded Truesword), and borrow all the MP crystals and other MP storage you can get your hand on. Then, when you face the Bad Man, throw up a 30+ point Sword Trance and win every round of Spirit Combat against him (the sucker only has 175% Spirit Combat, not nearly enough), earning six Shaman Gifts in the process.

You don't actually need to have any skill in swords for this to work.

Ouch! But the adventures for finding the Issaries guy and the Humakt guy to provide the spells, plus give them what they require would be interesting. But it is worth it!

15 hours ago, ffilz said:

As a grumpy old grognard who still prefers RQ1, I've got to say that I love ALL of what is being done on the RQ/Glorantha front.

6 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

As someone who his favorite classic RQ is RQ3, I will echo this. .

Same for me.

6 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

My perspective is totally different. I believe RQ3 was a vast improvement over RQ2 and I would have preferred RQG to be based off RQ3. But in the end, even if RQG does not make all the choices I would have made, in the aggregate, I believe RQG is better than RQ3. Actually, for all the expressed design intent, beyond what the stat block looks like, I do not find RQG that close to RQ2. And I am also glad the timeline was advanced.

Ditto.

6 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

It is interesting that I probably am a grognard whose opinion Jeff thinks should be dismissed but I am generally very positive about RQG (even if I still want to see a revised and corrected edition)  

Still agree.

15 hours ago, ffilz said:

Cheers to all! Keep up the good work! And don't take it too personally if I grumble a bit here and there...

Don't be afraid. Please continue. All opinions are good to hear.

6 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

All that to say to irrespective of our perspectives of what is best (RQ1, RQ2, RQ3, RQ6, RQG), a lot of us are united by our love of Glorantha and RuneQuest.

Yes (although for me it is more RQ than Glorantha).

4 hours ago, Trotsky said:

Spirit Magic damage boost spells do not usually harm spirits, but may affect weak ones

Divine damage gifts such as from Humakt only doubles any magical damage

What about Sorcery or Sorcery enhanced weapons?

52 minutes ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I used to read Casus Belli when I was at Uni!

But I cant remember any article on BRP or RuneQuest.....

Mind you, it was back around 1995-1998! 😮

You were right spot on BaSIC is Casus Belli HS19 (June 97), and if I don't remember of any specific topic on BRP, there was at least 1 in each for several years about BaSIC. RQ had at least a few dozen scenarios and topics., but mostly before your time.

By the way, where were you located in '95-'98?

18 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Sounds about right, escpet that you forgot The Fantasy Trip, which was the basis for GURPS. 

Yes, I forgot it.

18 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I was thinking more along the lines of something two or three times that- similar to, but with a bit more to it than original magic world. Basically a core, standalone gamebook without all the bells and whistles that could serve as an introductory/basic RPG. All the bells & Whistiles could then be put into an expansion book. But, that would assume a desire to go that route, which doesn't seem to be the case. 

That means what Casus Belli (an old french RPG magazine) did with BaSIC: a 48 pages BRP booklet with roughly 25 pages of rules, the rest being an intro to RPG, a minimalist bestiary and a few examples. I used it and it was very good.

2 hours ago, CaptinDan said:

I think back in the day (2nd Ed D&D) there was a whole thing where players could buy levels by using gold, at which point how much treasure is worth matters a lot more. I much prefer RQG where cows matter!

Yes, you can eat cows, not Gold Coins (TM).

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

You missed HERO system, which was possible the first generic system. Both HERO and BRP pioneered the idea of a generic system, and both did so by taking a successful parent game system (Champions and RuneQuest, repsectively) and then using those rules for other settings. Rolemaster would probably be another. HERO, ICE and Steve Jackson Games were the companies that produced the bulk of the setting books that covered various historical/semi-historical places.

Published as a generic system, BRP is first ((78), then GURPS ((86), then Hero ((90). But as a standalone game, Champions is the foundation of Hero system in 81, as RQ2 is the basis of BRP.

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

IMO what we probably need is a simplier version of BRP, without the options, and then an Advanced Role Playing supplmenent with the optional and variant rule systems. 

You mean going back to the '78 booklet? Why not. Seems to me a good idea.

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

We also got rid of fatigue, certain types of armor, got rid of numerous cult restrictions, and changed shamanism and spirit combat substantially.

Exact. Those same points are mainly those that makes me think RQG is better.

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

If you want to keep playing your old RQ3 characters using the RQ3 rules, nobody is stopping you.

I am not. I was just explaining my thinking of the OP post.

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

But we will be exploring sorcery and Malkionism, and they work using the RQG rules.

Please do. Yes, please.

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

I am finally happy with how sorcery works.

So am I. I loved RQ3 sorcery, but on that point, RQG is (for me) far better.

10 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

Glorantha most definitely does not have RQ3 sorcery. It doesn't have RQG sorcery. It doesn't perfectly match any mechanic from any game system. You will not find a Gloranthan story that does, that is not based directly on the rules, that pre-dates RQ3. The various game systems are approximations, some better than others, some just more appropriate for telling different kinds of stories.

RQG sorcery more closely matches Chaosium's Glorantha than RQ3 sorcery. Maybe RQ3 matches your Glorantha better, or fits better the kind of stories you have played, that's fine. House rule it, combine, ignore, that's what many Gloranthan GMs have done with every rule system ever produced. The published rules provide one way of doing it, and they decided that the RQ3 way was flawed. I don't blame them at all, although I enjoyed it and also am a little saddened to see some of it go.

What I understand is that RQ3 sorcery does not match more their Glorantha, but is simply the rules they used during many many years, and they are disappointed that some of the things they were doing are not working anymore.

9 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Wait I'm confused... you said you consider the rule being the same (i.e. you can't change the spell once it's been inscribed) but then you say that it doesn't have to be done in one shot (i.e. you can change the spell afterwards?). How do you do it at your table?

You don't change the spell, you add points to it, like in RQ3's enchant. Similarly, you could, and still can, add conditions, or transform a bladesharp 2 matrix to a bladesharp 3 by spending 1 POW and casting the enchanting spell.

14 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

I wonder if that's still valid in RQG? I'm really tempted to allow upgrades, maybe at some extra cost.

For me, yes, the rule is the same. RQG p390: "For each point of POW added to the inscription, the base strength, range, or duration of the spell is increased by 1, without requiring any manipulation by the sorcerer."

Nothing says that is must be in one shot. In fact, the only difference I have noticed is that by default, the RQ3 sorcery spell matrix could be used by anybody, as the RQG inscribed spell can only be used by it's creator.

18 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Maybe RQ3 made improvised sorcery so powerful that nobody ever needed inscribing spells?

I was doing it, just because it was the only way to obtain the long duration needed to have all your spells up when you need them.

19 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Because it sure sounds like improvised casting is how most RQ3 grognards are doing it all the time

Whatever the case, RQ3 sorcery were longer to cast than other spells just because of the sheer number of MP needed. It is just longer now. Note that it does not bother me, because I was already using my sorcerous characters that way, and when you cast a 1 season duration protection spell, you don't care if casting it takes 4 or 5 rounds.

The casting duration is only important for direct, personal attack spells. For those, I use spirit magic spells (in matrixes), a bow and a broadsword, wether RQ3 or RQG.

54 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

AFAICT RQ3 doesn't have spell inscriptions.

It had. Magic book p58 (it was not called Inscribing, but part of the spell matrix enchantments, but the rules and effects are essentially the same).

1 hour ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

Some of those oriental bows are also "unbalanced" in that that hand grip is not equi-distant from the tips. Makes for even more confusing design considerations. 🙄

IIRC, this was to be able to go from one side to the other on horse.

2 hours ago, lordabdul said:

As is often the case, a spot ruling later became a house rule (half MOV, no action that would obviously uncover body parts, like attacking, but you get double the protected hit locations).

Consider that stolen.

2 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Small rules comments here. First, it’s only half DB for thrown. Second - and very easy to miss - you don’t get even that for Atlatl, as it counts as a projectile weapon rather than thrown.

Atlatl is described (RQG p 211) as projectile, but the chart p 212 puts it with the javelin (as thrown). One more ambiguous point to correct.

This one is nice, not dumb.

Yep, same art. I haven't noticed any difference., except for the scenario.

11 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

 

That would also work. Just for the record, I do not necessarily only want super simulationist systems. What I described above was only a way for us, back in the days, to make RQ3 combat more fun and more believable within the context of a 12 seconds Melee Round. For RQG, which doesn't really try to model movement in combat, I rather think of the Melee Rounds as "an undefined, elastic period of time where everything happens almost simultaneously".

I also like the Pendragon-style everything happens at once.

What we did is use RQ3 RAW, forcing players and GM to be creative in the use of maneuvers to beat others. This was intellectually very interesting.

10 hours ago, Runeblogger said:

I'd love to see pictures of the new art included. 😀

I've just browsed quickly, and haven't seen any. I am now at work and can't answer more properly.