Kloster

21 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Any changes to cultural skills? If there is, and you have a list, I'd appreciate seeing those as well.

18 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

No. Well, not that anyone has made me aware of. I don't have the French edition.

I have both and have seen no other differences in skills. There are some other small points, like the 'poor' occupations may have 2 family heirloom as an optional rule.

7 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

I think they definitely should.

Taking an arrow from a 15 pound bow is vastly different to being hit in the chest with a 150 pound bow...

 

 

(well, ok, the arrow fired from one... just hitting someone with a bow doesn't do that much..)

Agreed.

2 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

The funny thing about archery, compared to other weapons, is that it's a bit harder to sometimes hit harder, sometimes hit softer. Because the draw is almost always (bar either speed archery, or over-drawing) being taken from the cheek/chin, the DB should be a flat single number - not a range of numbers.

Thoughts???

RAW, bows have no DB. We've played since 30 years that they use half DB, but this is just a houserule.

31 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

An allied spirit is exactly that - a spirit sent by your deity (or greater spirit) to help you on your ways. It's effectively a permanent Mindlink (not that this spell exists anymore).

Agreed.

31 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

Coming from a thread discussion, where it's been suggested that you can't have more than one of those (part of "Gloranthan cosmology").

I disagree with this assumption because some cults have shaman/priest, and those have a Fetch (as Shaman), and, for me, can have an allied spirit (as Priest). Waha is an example.

There is nothing as a familiar in RQG. Those were what defined a sorceror in RQ3 (You needed to create your 1st familiar to become a full fledge sorceror), and you could have several.

1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

Okay okay but apart from disease resistance, sacrifice, category modifiers, and the ability to ever cast a spell...

what has having a high POW ever done for us?

This seems for me sufficient.

On 6/17/2022 at 8:57 PM, AndreJarosch said:

You would not include a HQ in your RQ game?
Or do you only not like to be part of a HQ when you are a PLAYER?

I'm not Bill, but my answer to your question would be: Both.

First of all, welcome back. As I went through same problem almost 2 years ago, I easily understand your pain.

2 hours ago, Mugen said:

Still, it was possible to have access to second hand copies of RQ2 material in english.

In Paris, perhaps. Elsewhere, you could forget it.

2 hours ago, Mugen said:

However, we had some articles in french "Tatou" magazine from RQ3's publisher, which offered glimpses of RQ2 content.

Tatou was Oriflam's magazine. It's RQ content was only about RQ3. The last parts were translated from 'Tales of the Reaching Moon'. For french language RQ2 magazine content, there was only Runes and some very old Casus Belli.

4 hours ago, Mugen said:

In his defence, it was difficult to not be frustrated as a French Glorantha fan, as most of the available material was translations of RQ3 publications. Even if it included excellent stuff such as Sun County, most of the time it felt like authors only scratched the surface. We had to wait for Elder Sign to hear of Cristals !

The only official french language RQ products were Oriflam's translation of RQ3 products. There never was any french translation of any RQ2 product. RQ3 AH products were easy to obtain, but horrendously expensive. RQ2 english language, whether from Chaosium or Games Workshop, were very difficult to obtain.

8 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

I find this belief that contracts make matters of the heart clear, simple, and conflict-free rather, er, let's say "not compelling".  🙂

I don't think it is conflict free, clear and simple. I just said conditions are written.

18 hours ago, FlamingCatOfDeath said:

Tenet farmers and stick pickers marriages aren’t important to the Clan

Agreed for stick pickers, but I think that even tenant farmers are important: they provide food and wealth to the clan. In a society where wealth is measured in cows, all those that increase the number of cows the clan may have are counting.

21 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

This also means that the couple may find it hard to divorce, contrary to what many on this thread assume.

I assume the conditions for divorce are part of the contract. This is as easy or as difficult as the clans negotiators wants it.

9 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Another question - how many marriages are arranged, or at least done for the sake of clan/tribe benefit, rather than for "love"?

Probably the vast majority of them: the marriage is a contract between the clans, and none of them will accept something that does not bring something. That does not mean that love does not take a part, but the contract is the main point.

Of course, when I spoke of compatibility, there must be no explicit provision against it, even if the cults are friendly or better.

RQG is quite clear (RQG p 275): "It is possible for an adventurer to be an initiate of more than one cult. They must pass the appropriate tests, and this always requires that the cults be compatible. They must also tithe to each temple, and perform properly and completely all duties and responsibilities to each temple.".

The only questions are: "What are compatible cults?" and "How frequent is it?". My take is that compatible cults are cults at least marked as Neutral in table RQG p 311 (IIRC, that rules came from RQ3's Gods of Glorantha). For frequency, I already explained that I think the global proportion is quite low (David Scott spoke of 1% and I agreed with him), and that the higher you go in power and social status, the higher the proportion will be (including here the higher ranks of the various cults).

1 hour ago, David Scott said:

I would suggest that multiple cult initiation is uncommon (I use 1 in 100), but multiple subcult and lay membership is common.

I think that the higher you go in the society, the higher the number of dual cult people will be. I think your 1% is correct for the global population. The 20% we have in the screen pack are members of the Colymar ring.

1 hour ago, David Scott said:

Certain cults make it easy to become an associated cult initiate (eg. Yinkin & Orlanth).

IIRC, the cults just need not to be hostile (i.e. neutral or better).

42 minutes ago, JRE said:

At the end of the day, the rules are a framework, and you need to decide how to fit the rules to your idea of the world, or the world to the rules.

Completely agree.

53 minutes ago, JRE said:

Though that was quite typical in RQ2, I usually allow only associate cults to multi-initiate, as they have shared myths and friendly hierarchies. Humakt has no associates, so no multiple cults. However I allow temporary initiates, so you join Humakt for a couple of years, till the war is over, and if you survive Orlanth will welcome you back. I play the hierarchy as aggresively neutral, so hard to reconcile with devotion to another cult. In a way it is his gimmick, no permanent loyalty except to yourself, but extremely loyal to your current wielder / employer. Another initiation would jeopardize that.

Yanafal Tarnils, on the other hand, enjoys allowing what Humakt does not, so I allow them to share cults with their associates.

As for income, I do not sweat it. The player decides how much to tithe. If the amount seems reasonable, nothing happens. If it is a lot, there will be comments but it may improve reputation or loyalty temple. If I think it is too little, they may not be allowed at certain ceremonies (less options for RP recovery), even in faraway temples, and lose loyalty temple. There will be comments (the priest seems happy, or they clearly expected more from you) so the player may adjust the amount. Usually it is goods rather than cash, so evaluation may be a bit hard, but tithing gives you better return than selling, so they keep the coins to themselves. 

Just checking GM screen pack for RQG, Sora Goodseller is priest of Issaries and initiate of Yelmalio, and Nameless is Runelord of Humakt and initiate of Orlanth. That means 20% of the fully described NPC are member of 2 cults.

3 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

Agree. Merely striking first - if you even do - isn't a massive deal. It was weird if you can attack more often with your pike than with a dagger, though...

Correct. This was 1 of RQ3's combat weakness, but is is even worse with RQ2 and RQG.

17 hours ago, g33k said:

Look at modern fencing (foil, epee, saber).  All are 1H, all use parries.

Yes, but all are sufficiently light to allow for low inertia and thus quick recovery after the parry.

1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

RQG encourages parrying with your weapon, since, unlike RQ2, it "comes free" with your weapon skill, and, should you augment your weapon skill, or use a Trance spell, it boosts attack and parry.

Yes, this is one of the problems of the attack and parry merged in a single skill.

4 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

(Speaking of, the other thing BRP typically does poorly is weapon reach. I really liked the RQ6/Mythras solution here, where each weapon has a preferred range, and you start off at the longest one and have to make an effort if you want to get in closer. What shields and heavy armor allow is for the attacker to eat a thrust on the way in.)

BRP manages weapon reach with the Strike Ranks. With RQ's round with SR representing elements of time, this works pretty well. Much less with SR representing only an initiative order.

4 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

One possible easy fix here would be to dramatically increase the Base Chance of shields - I don't think 40-50% would be uncalled for.

I think the same, and I also think that base chance should increase with shield size.

According to RQG p278, "God-talkers may not initiate new members of the cult. Although they are provided with food and board by the temple, they typically must maintain another occupation (including being a Rune Priest of another cult)." If God-talkers can be priest of another cult, that means clearly it is possible to be initiated of at least 2 cults, provided, as Soltakss told, that cults restriction are respected.

8 hours ago, Darius West said:

but if you have to spend 90% of your income on 1 cult, and 10% on the other, you have no beer money.

Again according to RQG p278, the aforementioned priest/god-talker pays 90% of income to the cult he is a priest and 50% of the remaining to the cult he is God-talker. In your case, I understand he would pay 90% to 1 cult and 1% (10% of the remaining 10%) to the other, keeping only 9% for himself. This can pay for beer, but not much more.

7 hours ago, soltakss said:

Trolls and Aldryami will often worship multiple cults, Kyger Litor/Aldrya and another cult.

IIRC, according to Trollpack, all trolls are initiated to Kyger Lytor and according to Elder's sercrets, all Aldryamy are initiated to Aldrya, so dual membership seems common for them. But those supplements were written for RQ3, where Lay membership was not described ruleswise, so we perhaps have to understand that as 'all Trolls/Aldryami are lay member (and not initiated) of Kyger Lytor/Aldrya.

11 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Somewhat more relevant to game play, how many experienced adventurer PCs are "expected" to be multicult?  Our group is 3/8.

In our RQ3 group, 100% In RQG, 1/6, but this will increase soon.

1 hour ago, JRE said:

Humakt is by definition the one who stands alone.

Humakt/Other cult (especially Orlanth) is possible. You cut links when become initiated to Humakt, but nothing prevents you to create new links after that.

2 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Well, yeah, but the point of the thread** was about what cults are good without consideration of rune spells.

No, it was 'after you run out of RP'. If you traded spell before running out of RP, it does count.

33 minutes ago, AndreJarosch said:

I am sorry to say that, but EDGE belongs to the Asmodee Group, and they aren´t a fellew publisher of the hobby industry, but just a money making machine. 
If their calulations say, that it doesn´t make enough money they will not publish it. 

Which is an economically sound behavior for them, but bad news for us in the short term (in the long term, bad economical decisions make the company crash, so are bad for everybody).