Kloster

3 minutes ago, svensson said:

Which would be 'untrained' right?

I'm reminded of that line in the old John Wayne movie 'The Cowboys'....

Youngster: "Nice horse. What's his name?"

Old Cowboy: "You never name something you might have to eat, kid...."

Not really. You could mount the (RQ2) untrained but had to roll for riding every round just to stay on your mount. As far as I understand, you can't even ride the (RQG) meat category.

On 3/4/2019 at 8:51 PM, svensson said:

In RQ2, or 'Classic RQ', mounts had 4 training standards: untrained, riding, cavalry, and war-trained. An untrained animal was unbroken and would not accept a rider. A riding animal would take a rider, but you'd need to make Ride checks every round in combat or you'd lose control and the mount would hare off on its own whim. A cavalry mount was used to rough feeding, hard trail use, and desensitized to battle. It wouldn't attack, but it's a stable platform to fight from. A war trained mount would attack at the rider's command.

RQG has only riding, cavalry and war-trained, with same description than RQ2. The fourth category is labeled 'meat'.

5 hours ago, Tindalos said:

No, that's burned wine again.

How do you spell 'Cognac' in Heortling?

4 hours ago, RHW said:

So the same latitude as France? 😉

While the natural climate for Peloria might have cold winters, magic moderates that and snow is rare, right? Thanks to Kalikos, you’re not getting a Minnesota winter in Silver Shadow or even First Blessed. I bet you wouldn’t have had them when Dara Happa was at its height either, except when things went horribly wrong

Same latitude as France, yes, but not the same climate: New York is (roughly) 40 degree North, Chicago is 42 degree North, Madrid (Spain) is 40.5 North and Bordeaux (South of France, and 1 of the largest wine producing region) roughly 45 degree North, but there is almost never snow, nor freezing in Bordeaux (average low 3 Celsius in January, 1 day snow every 3 years), and Madrid rarely (elevation is 667 meters). And you have white wines in Alsace (where winter is very cold) and in the Moselle valley (close to Belgium) with snow and freezing every years. In Switzerland, Wallis and Vaud counties produce lot of (white) wines and in Germany, the Neckar valley is a continuous vineyard.

3 hours ago, womble said:

As I remember RQ3's Multispell, it specifically treated Disruption as separate spells with separate rolls for location affected, which makes the difference explicitly stated in RQG that multispelled Disruptions stack their damage into one location a significant one.

RQIII multispell was for Sorcery only, so couldn't affect Disruption, but otherwise, you're right on the way it works: each of the multispelled spell count as a separate one. This is why we used it with enchant and link spell condition. The rule on that point is exactly the same in RQG.

1 hour ago, womble said:

Given that d3 average 2 per die, and 6 points is most human locations taken out, you need to worry about Multispell-2, which is within the reach of all starting characters, and any Initiate NPC with 2 Rune Points or more.

Of course, Countermagic-3 or Shield-1 will stop an un-boosted volley and be there to interfere with the next one.

Completely true. This is a perfectly legit and effective tactic, even with starting characters.

1 hour ago, womble said:

That's how I read RQG's multispell, too. I wouldn't consider the spells so simultaneous that a Countermagic-1 would stop them all, though. The first one would be stopped by it and blow it down for succeeding Disruptions. Also, I'd say each Disruption would be a separate wound for First Aid purposes.

The link spell condition on enchantment specifically creates 1 big complex spell (RQG p251, RQIII magic book p56), this is why I understand that 4 linked would count as a 4 MP spell. I agree with you for the wound count (and thus for healing and first aid).

On 2/28/2019 at 10:53 PM, g33k said:

Has anyone made an R-map of the Sartar Clans?

Sorry, but what is an R-map?

1 minute ago, Crel said:

And this inadvertently highlights another great point--how and why particular things are dangerous changes a lot. I never played a game high "level" enough to worry about Multispell 4, so that much Disrupt wasn't something in my mind!

It is possible (with RQIII as with RQG) to perform the disruption shotgun effect with an enchant and a link, but each of the attacks have their locations rolled separately. It is nonetheless very efficient because 4 simultaneous disruptions are more interesting than 1 disruption boosted by 3 MP, use the same number of MP and take the same time to cast. The way I read RQG multispell (but I may be wrong), 4 disruptions linked by multispell count as 1 MP for overcoming countermagic (but I may be wrong), but all the damages are rolled on the same location, rapidly removing said location.

20 hours ago, Crel said:

Even two fellas in the back with POW 13/14 shooting Disrupt at the same target a couple rounds will be a huge problem for a party averaging POW 11. Disparity in the POW stat, IMO, is really important.

Yes, this is especially true because the resistance is POW vs POW now, not anymore MP vs MP.

As it is now possible to perform multiple parries (and the parries scores are globally much higher because of the single skill), the ranged attacks are even more important than in RQIII. So, slings and composite bows become weapons of choice, especially when your horde of trollkin (or other low grade NPC) is facing a character with over 100% combat skill.

It depends if the whiteboard is a vertical one or put on the table. If on the table, unpainted 25 mm miniatures.

48 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

Do you find the subtractions to be a problem?

The only substraction we had is a 95% Humakti with sword skill enhancing spells (not counting rune or passion inspiration). I don't like the effect, but we had no real problems. It is more a 'not feeling right' thing than anything else. My impression is that the really important (and possibly problematic) things occurs with skills far higher or bigger skill spread than what we currently have.

4 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

1. A has 100%, B has 200%, A goes first. My first parry is not reduced, but my second is by the standard 20% and further by 100%. Fine.

I think 1st parry is reduced by 100% (to 100%), while the attack is reduced to 0% (so 5%)

According to Jason (in the Runequest core rules question thread, P4), if you have 150% and your opponent 99%, you go down to 100% and he go down to 49%. There was a question on the same subject by Skovari, and a clarification asked by myself. But I agree with you, the wording RAW is strange.

Ough, I had not seen this one.

13 minutes ago, Alexandre said:

Exactly, this is my problem:

• If I have 150 and my opponent 99, I stay at 150 and he goes down to 49;
• If I have 150 and my opponent 100, I go down to 100 and he to 50.

Basically for a difference of 1% in his skill I also get the penalty of 50%. This is what seem to me a bit harsh but of course YMMV. 

No, if you have 150% and your opponent 99%, you go down to 100% and he go down to 49%.

29 minutes ago, Alexandre said:

Why is this? I mean, if your skill is at 150% and you fight against an opponent whose skill is at 100%, you keep your 150% but he drops to 50%, whereas if his skill is just 101% you take the 50% penalty too! It just seems to me a huge difference for such a small change (even though it's above the "magic threshold" of 100%, which is actually 99% for split attacks, but this is another topic). 

No, if you have 150% and your opponent 100%, you go down to 100% (with 20% special and 5% crit) and your opponent go down to 50% (and 10% special and 3% crit).

Macedonian and Thessalian heavy cavalry had no stirrups, but used xyston (around 4 meters lance) 1 or 2 handed for shock attacks. I don't know how they did it, nor what saddle they used, but the troops pinned by the phalanx were most of the time destroyed by the shock. The effect on greek, persian, egyptian armies was devastating, so the rule seems correct.

Small question that concerns most European customers on Chaosium website: What will occur with orders passed BEFORE March 29 (Brexit date) but items sent AFTER (which now seems more than possible) said date? Do you know if there will be delays or taxes?

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yes, whereas RQ2 SRs were mostly for determining who attacked first, in RQ3 there was a stronger correlation for overall sequencing of actions. You know where every character was at any SR, and movement was integrated with spellcasting and melee. Characters could even change actions in response to what happened during the round, which you couldn't do in RQ2. 

Yes, this why I called RQIII a quasi impulse system. This is something we liked (probably because a lot of us are also wargame players).

RQG p302:

Storm Voice (Rune Priest) Orlanth Thunderous Subcult. Requirements: Standard. Storm Voices are the spiritual leaders of the Orlanthi. A candidate must belong to the
Thunderous subcult.
Wind Lord (Rune Lord) Orlanth Adventurous Subcult. Requirements: Wind Lords are the temporal leaders of the Orlanthi.

So, to be a Rune Lord/Priest, you need to be a member of both subcults. You then have access to both sets of spells, you need to spend an extra POW to join the 2nd subcult and you have only 1 Rune point pool (see P 282).

On 2/16/2019 at 8:36 PM, Darius West said:

3) Is there any reason why men can't venerate Vinga and get the "Fearless" spell?

On 2/17/2019 at 1:04 AM, womble said:

3) Yes, there is a reason. They are men. They don't qualify, any more than an Ernaldan who hasn't given birth to a healthy bairn can become a full priestess. 

I think that the answer would be the same for the 'none' sex characters: They are no men, but are no women either, but I wonder what would be the answer for the 'both' sex (hermaphrodites).

4 hours ago, Joerg said:

What gave you this strange idea of ships going under like lead zeppelins?

I like lead zeppelins. Whole lotta love!!

9 hours ago, womble said:

By the same token, if it's as obvious as the Salamander-spear trick would be if elementals didn't need some quantity of their element present to manifest, it'd be standard practice. There's a reason why it isn't.

If I remember correctly, the element is needed to Summon the elemental, but once binded into an enchantment, the necessary element is brought within. When called outside, the elemental does not need extra because it has already been summoned. This is at least how we played it.