• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


g33k last won the day on April 17

g33k had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

649 Excellent

About g33k

  • Rank
    Junior Member


  • RPG Biography
    Games? I don' need to play no steeenkin' games!
  • Current games
    Ars Magica, Deadlands, Anima, Shadowrun, D&D3.x
  • Location
    Greater SF Bay Area, Calif
  • Blurb
    Nothing to see
    Move along
    <red flash>
    Role-playing games are GOOD for you. They are NOT the work of the devil.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,784 profile views
  1. I'm almost inclined to say "a sword is a sword is a sword" (modulo straight-vs-curved) and just treat this "oversized longsword" as a 2H-sword in all respects...
  2. I first played any BRP game (it was RQ2) in 1980. Since then I have played... dozens, at least; maybe scores? ... of other RPG's. I have yet to meet ANY system that hits so many of the "desirable" traits -- evocative and colorful; fast-playing; satisfyingly "accurate" and simulationist -- at least for what *I* desire in RPG-combat! YMMV, but no "modern" system does any better (and few do as well!) by my lights.
  3. 2 (& 3 ?) - I will vote rather in favor of these, although I'm meh over them having virtually the same mechanic: I'd rather a Passion and a Rune both grant advantages, but each grant different sorts of advantages. But here's the thing: it makes really good sense to me that when you're Passionate about something, you go the extra mile; you bring a bit more to the table; etc. You're just a bit better at it because you're just a bit more invested into the outcome... I don't see it as a crutch for bad RP'ers, or as a straightjacket for good ones, but as a mechanic bringing out the heroic reality of the world. Inigo Montoya was a great swordsman; but his going-beyond achievement wasn't the virtuoso battle against DPR/Wesley but gutstabbed and STILL out-fencing the Six Fingered Man. So too with Runes: they are metaphysical / cosmological building-blocks of Gloranthan reality. And when you act in ways that align with the runes you have affinity to... why, everything just goes better for you. You are In The Zone, you're Going With The Flow, the Force Is With You, etc etc etc... As for Rune Level spells and the new mechanic... honestly, I want to get a feel for it in play. I can envision disliking how it plays, or liking it. I'm not sure, and the QS (and my RL) just hasn't afforded me enough play-time to have a good sense of these. 4 - I have no problem with Sorcery being "That school of magic based upon the understanding of 'magical forces' as being magico-logical rules and principles, to be directly manipulated in a semi / pseudo - scientific manner," while other kinds are "magic driven by a spirit-based understanding of magical forces." It's not that "everyone else" cannot follow the same principles that Sorcery does, it's that once you're following those principles... why, you're doing Sorcery, kinda by definition... 5 - 100% agree. This is a chronic issue in the RQ community, with misunderstandings / HRs / forum-flamewars / etc ... Exactly how "Critical" vs "Special" results interplay, overlap, etc... needs to be VERY clear in the new rules!
  4. BTW -- I only became aware of this movie (and thence the source material) a 2-3 months back. I haven't seen anything but the trailers, and discussions on geek/gamer fora... But I'm kind of getting the vibe, from those trailers, that I really SHOULD get the source matter first; that the movie may be terribly heavy to inside-jokes, fanservice, and in general to stuff that's not terribly meaningful without that deeper context. Can anyone who's more familiar with Valerian&Laureline and with the movie-project, tell me if it seems likely that I'm right, or not ... ?
  5. As-presented in your inspirational bit above, the spell is taught by a spirit. I can't see why a spirit summoned by a temple would do the job all that differently than a spirit summoned by a Shaman. I only expect the temple-spirit Focus/ Taboo/ Geas/ Etc/ Whatever/ to be Cultic-flavored, as the spirit is probably an adherent of the deity in question (whereas the Shaman would be liable to take any-old-spirit that could get the job done, and THAT spirit might have any manner of odd restriction...). To be clear: I very much DO see this as "MGF," but also as a very-mixed-bag inextricably-linked to LessGF.
  6. AFAIK, the Pueblo folk used mostly "doorways" in the walls, much as modern "normal" (at least in this regard) houses . At Catal Huyuk, I believe you needed a ladder to climb out the door on the roof ...
  7. Say rather, no means to auto-detect them... If someone actively searches, specifically for them, they might well be magically track'able ...
  8. My point is twofold: if Combat-Styles are so comprehensive that all (or virtually all) weapons are included, then they become irrelevant -- either "this PC is a combatant, and knows all weapons" or "that PC is a non-combatant, and knows no weapons". As a "Combat Style" rule, this ... isn't a "Combat Style" rule, it's an all/none binary. It renders the idea of a "Combat Style" irrelevant. If only some (or only a few) Combat-Styles are so comprehensive -- and it matters to play-of-game -- then that represents such a substantive mechanical advantage that it should be mechanically different (for one example: as a relatively-rare "Trait," rather than a relatively-common "Skill" ) . Either way, I see "CS:Everything" as b0rked. Of course, Your Mythras May Vary ! If combat is a rate/incidental/unimportant event in the campaign, it may not matter much (or at all! (but to judge from the movie-trailers, combat is important in that campaign)).
  9. I really REALLY love the flavor of this! It has that "Gloranthan" feel to my sensibilities. HOWEVER ... IMHO, it adds too much complexity / bookkeeping to "Battle Magic," which should be kept simple/playable... THESE spells have their foci set into a bracer on the fore-arm, and can be lost/stolen/etc THOSE are tattoo-foci, and cannot be removed without a knife. Player should (and if they don't, GM should) keep track of which are which...? This spell has "Taboo: must not have eaten meat within the past 24 hours." Those spells have "Taboo: must have (intentionally) eaten insects within the past 24 hours." That spell has "Taboo: never wear green." T'other spell has no taboo at all. Again -- the bookkeeping to track that wonderful Gloranthan color becomes onerous. LessGF. Again -- I REALLY love the "Glorantha-ness" of this idea; and if I can find (or be shown) a non-onerous way to incorporate these ideas, I'd love to do so! But also, if this made it into RQG... 'cos I'm not likely to HR it in...
  10. I think the big/popular games are pretty PC-friendly / hard-to-kill games, you're right. Of the popular ones, WFRPG (though not new!) often gets nominated as gritty and deadly. Riddle of Steel, though 10ish(?) years old, is at least newer than RQ; "Blade of the Iron Throne" is VERY new... Barbarians of Lemuria is pretty new & pretty deadly, though AFAIK pulpy/cinematic so I expect it'd be easily tweaked to those high-survival tropes.
  11. This brings up the interesting-to-me notion that there may be some interesting Dara Happan variant on the Issaries "Market Peace" / Pavis "City Peace" spells ...
  12. Ummm... does that leave out ANY weapons? I'm not quite down with something that amounts to "Combat Style: Anything" (or even "... Almost Anything"). To be clear: I have no problem with the concept, but as a "Combat Style" mechanic that is b0rked! As you noted, that's a good thing for a "Traits" or similar mechanic ...
  13. ROFL! Artists do indeed sometimes see things that others don't... or maybe it's notice... or, as Dogboy says, understand.
  14. ... you have an inner broo? Y'know, son... ya gotta get that thing out afore it hatches...
  15. This is a fascinating notion. I think it bears some further thought, and even research... I know that the original RQ combat had substantive input from SCA / medieval-combat-reenactment folk... Is it possible that this can be run by... say... gamers who RL have combat/trauma experience, such as ER physicians/nurses/etc?