Kloster

RQG p 249: Those in physical contact with a binding enchantment can mentally communicate with an entity bound inside (if there are no conditions to the contrary) and can command the entity to use its abilities. ... Some entities have knowledge or abilities which the wielder can use while it is bound within an item. However, many entities are not very effective when so trapped and must be released to be useful (e.g., wraiths, healing spirits, elementals, etc.). I understand that if a spirit knows a spell and is bound in an enchantment and you are in physical contact with the enchantment, you can command the entity to cast the spell. In addition, (RQG p366): Spirits may be bound into a magic crystal, or into a specially prepared object or animal as described in the Binding Enchantment section (page 249). The binder of a spirit can use any spirit magic the spirit possesses and the magic points of the spirit to fuel spells. I would very much prefer to have this situation and would be very happy if I'm wrong. On that point, I prefer the different RQIII types of spirits.

That's not the way we had understood it, but we may be wrong. I understand this point the same way you do. This, I haven't thought about, but I like it. I didn't meant it, but with the current RQG rules, if you allow to transfer the knowledge of a spell to a spirit in order to be able to cast it without having the spell counting in your CHA, the spirit WILL be able to cast it, because the rules explain you can cast the spell the spirit knows.

Yes, they extended the available INT to store spells. I was speaking of the possibility to transfer the knowledge of a spell to a spirit.

I would be very interested to know the origin of this rule (i.e. in which ruleset it originates).

Most of Runes (a french prozine from 83 to 85) issues contained RQ2 articles or scenari. Most of Runes people later went to Casus Belli, another french magazine that featured quite a number of RQ elements (most of them RQIII). Quest (a french magazine) contained something RQ (RQ3 if I remember) in ALL it's issues. It even had a duck as a mascot.

The question asked to Jason had been posted October 22, 3 month before this thread has been started.

Then, kill the Hydra!!

In order to avoid this problem, I understand 'rounding in favor of the player' as 'in favor of the character'. In that case, PC and NPC have the same rules, NPC having the GM as 'player'.

Yes, of course. Right. Right again. Yes again, even if I don't agree with your definitions of skills and abilities.

I've just checked, and this is what I understand: Skill is skill score, including category modifier. Natural Ability is any score (skill, char, rune, passion, ...). Ability is any natural ability + situational modifiers. Chance to hit/attack chance = % chance of success after all modifiers have been taken into account.

RQG p144: If the highest rated participant in an opposed roll has an ability rating above 100%, the difference between 100 and their ability rating is subtracted from the ability of everyone in the contest (including themselves).

I completely agree here. Nothing broken, not liked by everyone (but it is a matter of tastes, not of being wrong), and a big changer in the mood, the approach to the game, the way the GM prepares opponents, ... . I think Rune Points is the biggest effect rule change (and I think it is a change that goes in the right direction).

That's right. Also right. This is why Soltakss's idea to split (even under 100%) instead of a flat -20% is a changer.

Yes, you are right. This is more a problem of the way high skills are working than the effect of sword trance (this spell being only one of the ways of having a very high ability). There is no difference (except duration and not being dispellable) in effect between a 200% skill and a 100% skill plus sword trance boosted by 10 magic points.

Not really, because this is the Ability over 100% that counts, not the skill. That means that if the ability is reduced because of splitting, it is (or at least can be) below 100%. In that case, it is less a problem because the attacker's ability is either not reduced or much less reduced. I think the rule can be understood both ways.

Does not exist in Runequest (at least in the rules).😀

Right. Also right. I forgot about the cap. Thanks.

And Jump (because climb is only upwards), but yes.

My memories of RQ2 are far away (and my copy is 200km away) but IIRC, the Anti Parry effect for attack above 100% was concerning only Rune Lords. If this is the case, having (because of a spell) a Sword of Humakt that becomes a true embodiment of Death does not bother me. Whatever the case, this rule added to RQIII should not (in my opinion) break the game because you can parry more than 1 attack only by splitting a score above 100%. Even if you were boosted to 300% Parry by a spell, with 6 opponents, you have only a 50% score!

Yes, I also think this is the Parry part that causes problem. The rule was in Stormbringer, but IIRC, with -30% per Parry. It is not bad by itself. The problem comes from the fusion of Attack and Parry in a single skill + the above100% rule + the multiple parry rule. If you remove 1 of those, the unstoppable becomes stoppable again.

Correct, but even when they provide bad missile protection and have less HP, they at least provide some missile protection and passive cover, and even a Medium Shield as 12 HP (as many as a Broadsword for around half the cost).

Well summarized. I completely agree with you! I don't think everybody here has the same 'obvious' on this point.

It is not a problem in itself. I don't like it because for me it evokes Stormbringer, not Runequest, but it is not a problem. It becomes part of a problem when mixed with rules that are not coming from Stormbringer, i.e. the reduction of others skills when yours is above 100%. It is also, as you pointed, a disadvantage for people using shield and weapon vs people using a single weapon, but for me, this is counterbalanced by the advantages of the shield (more HP, protection vs missiles, passive cover).

I have the same reading as you. I haven't found anything either ... and this is why I have stolen reused your example. Yes. Yes, the horde menace is much reduced by the way abilities over 100% are managed, and this is agrgavated by Sword Trance. And yes, the feeling of the game is changed.

Completely agree here. You can add 'and Parries reducing Attacks'. In Shadowrun, this was called the 'geek the mage' effect. Yes. Exacerbates, yes. Game breaker, can be. Yes, it seems. You need now more opponents, because whatever, the parry is reduced to 100%, and after 6 opponents, both attacker and defender will be reduced to 05%. Combat can becomes very long, although the above 100% rule was supposed to shorten combat by avoiding the wait for criticals at high skill levels.