Kloster

This is not clear, even in the Rune Cults section. Those information should be in the rules, along with the list of cults that allow sorcery.

I would prefer a "reimagining" of RQ3 but I'm sure I will not got it because it would be too expensive to do. That's why yes, I would participate in a kickstarter for a re-edition of RQ3. This is better than nothing, my Avalon Hill print is in a bad shape (too much use) and my french printings are in a slightly better shape. In addition, that would be a searchable PDF.

Rune Lords don't lose a POW but a Rune Point (that can be replaced by spending a POW, gaining a spell at the same time). You can even do it several times in a season if the D10 is sufficiently low. The loss is the same for the others, but you're right, the D100 loss means a low probability of trying.

I have the same read as you. And I don't think it a problem because you began your DI by sacrificing a permanent RP (RQG p272) and you can't raise a char above racial max that way.

It is gone. This one is from RQIII.

No, there is a duration of 1 season on the training.

except INT and SIZ, and duration is 1 season now, so not easy, but the max is important.

I have the same read as you.

I'm not sure. What I'm sure is that there will be arguing between players that want to go above 18 and GMs.

I completely agree here. I will just consider a 92 pointer as an average character, not slightly weak. He is sufficiently above the cut to be at least average.

My mistake for the size, but superior and elite trollkins have 2D6+6 INT in RQIII (from memory) and RQG.

According to RQG p 433, INT and SIZ should be upped a little because of 3D6 that becomes 2D6+6: SIZ 7 is now SIZ 10. For the rest, good work.

I read it the same way you do.

The extra info is the table p311 (that came from RQ2). It gives relationship cult by cult as RQIII is giving the info Pantheon by Pantheon.

Right, but RQIII had only inter-pantheon relationship, not the detailed, cult-by-cult infos. I don't remember for RQ2.

The way I have understood (or, more properly, decided, because as you wrote, there is nothing more precise) the rule p 275 is that Associated and Friendly cults are compatible, Enemy and Hostile are not, and Neutral are on a case-by-case basis. My reasoning is based on the descriptions of the 5 categories p311. In the case that concern us (Friendly), the description is: "Even without formal arrangements these groups find each other supportive and agreeable. Meetings are likely to be pleasant.". The term supportive is for me (I'm not a native english speaker and may be wrong) strong enough to allow cooperation to the point of dual initiation. The next level(Neutral) says: "Such cults act according to present circumstance. Trouble may occur, but the spark must be deliberate, not caused by minor squabbles.". The 'present circumstances' is what drove me to the 'case-by-case'. I will not elaborate on the last 3 categories (Enemy, Hostile and Associated) because they seem obvious. Another point is that I feel that if the author of the rule wanted to have only associated cults to allow dual initiation, he would have written associated, not compatible.

I confirm that macros don't work when saved as .ods

Right. My mistake on the calculation.

I've seen current Indian police wicker shields, and they are very sturdy. The only (modern) trouble I see with them is the non protection vs fluids (e.g.tear gas). But they are up to the jobs to resist fights.

The way we played it (in RQIII), it was both active and passive, but all the rolls were made by the GM. Most of the time, the player told the GM he was trying to sense and the GM rolled and answered. From time to time, the GM rolled and once, told of detected chaos without having a player's request to roll. I also like Stormbully, but we played in french and the play on word does not work.

For belonging to several cults, they have to be 'compatible', not 'associated' (RQG p275). Orlanth and Humakt are friendly (RQG p311).

This is historical. The problem was already in RQIII, and if I remember, in RQ2. AS RQG is built on RQ2, it has been ported.

Not if you have only the occupational experience rolls.

Thanks. There is a 5 cm overlap. The result is that you can have a short sword that is 5 cm longer than your broadsword, although it is supposed to be longer.

Hello, I have 2 question on RQG swords. Broadswords are 75 to 90 cm long and shortswords are 60 to 80 cm long with same shape. 1) are those length overall or blade length? 2) What are called 75 to 80 cm long blades?