g33k

Well, this is the Inn, no longer the RQ forum, so it's pretty wide open AFAIK! Everyone is staying reasonable and polite, so... fair ball! Even if it were still the RQ forum, don't think Fate/FatePoints (or any other RPG getting a mechanic mentioned for compare/contrast) is a verboten topic or anything, but I DO note that HQG offers a Gloranthan-centric narrative-mechanic engine. As noted above: RQG is a crunchy-simulationist game, so PCs mostly live and die by the dice, by design. What does the world-machine (RAW mechanics, diced) say happens? Fate &c have a different design, where an equally-important criteria is the story, the narrative, the drama of the scene -- what makes for a better STORY? One can build a mechanic to be crunch-centric, or narrative-centric, or try to find some middle path or zone; none of those are any more "right" or "wrong" than any others, but simple expressions of personal taste, preference, or even mood. It's worth noting, if the Fate game-engine scratches your itches nicely, that it's a suite of narrative bits (Aspects, etc) sitting stop the Fudge game-engine, which is another story simulationist engine. In fact, the wholly-divorced "Aspect-Only Fate" is a Google'able thing. This means that, with a bit of tinkering, the "Fate" suite can be lifted off of Fudge and placed atop another simulation engine... such as RQG. === None of which is really on-topic for the issue of how Christianity has dealt with sexuality & celibacy and women across the centuries... Y'all just managed to tantalize one of my own geeky/OCDish preoccupations.🤡

But which Sherlock? The one starting Smaug & Bilbo is quite modern...

Dude. I am a parent. You can't scare ME with that crap! - We'll be there when we're there. - I've got an idea! Let's all play "who can be quiet the longest?" - Don't MAKE me turn this thing around!!! - <annoying woo-woo-guru voice>: "Wherever you go, THERE you are. So we are THERE now... And we are there NOW... And... " (obligatory contuation, at random intervals throughout the rest of the trip: woo-woo-guru voice "And we are there now, too!")

+1 on the very unusual vibe & creatures in Odd Soot! And of course all the other books, supplements, &c as recommended above. There's also newly re-available "All the World's Monsters" trio, likely to have useful content! I think those have over 200 monsters per book, so ... 700ish in total? And there's at least one Bestiary-type fan project available for d/l here on BRPCentral.

I think they dropped the "Glorantha" news over here, where we don't live and die by the Videogame Schedule. They're not pumping the Videogame market because their news HERE was a couple of years before the timing THERE.

This sounds a touch abstruse/arcane, and frankly just a bit too God-Learner-ish. 🤫 In other words, just about perfect for Gloranthan sorcery... ☺️ Keep us apprised of any progress you make, please! And if you decide you want playtesters for these HR's... do speak up! 😉

I have a suspicion (and I bet the videogame developers and marketers are really on top of this issue!) that in that particular world, there can be a downside of too-early an announcement getting negative buzz of the "yeah, they announced it YEARS ago, I think it's just vaporware at this point" sort of rumors/commentary. The software world is big into accusations of "vaporware," I know... The'll work on building buzz and interest when they expect they can produce a product at/near the apex of the interest-cycle they can generate... if that makes sense?

Every column is a sort of Rune. Those are "Condition Runes"

A wise man once said, "The GM's plans never survive first contact with the players." Also, remind your daughter that her character may have jiu-jitsu training; this'd be the "classical" usually-upright style, not the modern Gracie/Brazilian method emphasizing a clinching "ground game." And I don't know how "historical" they are, but sword-umbrellas always fall under the Rule of Cool.

The fine folk at Bundle of Holding inform me there's an upcoming Mythras bundle... 👍

See now... this is exactly the sort of thing that (I believe) you didn't want to do. And if I'm right... I'm sorry we've driven you to it. 😧

Ars Magica (ArM) geek here! Quick overview: 5e (ArM5) is the current edition. The line is "quiescent," with the publisher having no plans to expand it. Barring a major revamp (e.g. to the Gumshoe mystery-RPG engine (it has been discussed)), they feel the rules are as "iterated" and as polished as is practical. Supplements likewise -- the line has everything they deem appropriate to publish (n.b. they have intentionally left Blank (well... at least semi-blank) Lands un-detailed. The publisher, Atlas Games (www.atlas-games.com) has a free-to-browse forum, free registration needed to post. The complete 4e rulebook is a freebie in PDF, and the magic system is about 90% the same. So if you want a "free sample" in a 100%-legal way, there ya go! You can sometimes find 3e books still on the shelves of some shops that don't purge old stock, or DO buy used for resale; but that's getting pretty rare (if you find the 3e core rulebook for cheap, it has a nice color fold-out map of Mythic Europe; I kinda-sorta wish I had bought a few back when I found a store purging stock at $3/book). === ArM uses a verb/noun magic system, 15 Arts comprised of 5 "Techniques" (the "verbs," what you magically do) and 10 "Forms" (the "nouns," what you do it to or with). Combine at least one of each to describe the sort of magic you are doing. You add your score in your Technique&Form (plus a die roll, & maybe other stuff depending; but I won't go deep into the mechanical weeds, here). The Arts use their Latin names; e.g. Creo is "create" and Ignem is "Fire" so all sorts of fire/heat/light creation spells are "Creo Ignem," whether you are creating a small light to see a map on a cloudy night, or incinerating the razor-taloned monster coming to eviscerate you. With 5 (Te)chniques X 10 (Fo)rms, there are 50 basic TeFo combinations; but further elaboration comes with what are called "requisite" arts, where more than 2 Arts are needed. The classic exemplar here is shapeshifting -- Muto is the art of Change, and Corpus is the art governing human bodies. Muto Corpus lets you change your body... but only within human & human-like parameters. If you wish to become a wolf, or a bat, or any other (normal, non-magical) animal, you also need the art of Animal (the Latin is identical, here!), and so Animal is called a Requisite Art, written Muto Corpus (Animal) & commonly abbreviated MuCo(An). As this is not the atlas-games.com website, nor an Ars Magica forum, I'll leave it there and not delve further into "Spontaneous" and "Formulaic" magic, the setting of Mythic Europe, the Virtue/Flaw system, etc etc etc. PM me if you like, or grab the free PDF, or consult the AG forum, etc... Another good resource I haven't mentioned is the Project Redcap wiki at redcap.org.

It's also worth noting that this is Trif's site. We are his guests here. I'd hate to actually work toward making this site into something that may be less (or just other) than what he wants... nor make it more onerous for him, etc.

Sometimes, when my wife asks me to reach something down from a top shelf, I sob & accuse her "You only married me for my BODY!"

Hey now! 😠 I heroquested for that damn bottleopener, I did! Fluted-spiral point and rainbow sparkles an' all!!! ok, I wasn't expecting the sparkles an rainbows an... an bein' all delicate... an... an all that... right embarrassing at a Storm Bull Stampede, that part...

I am utterly without funds at the moment (due to a major transfer that bollux'ed on the bank side of things), but shall certainly contribute as soon as I can. Also, and even moreso: condolences to her. I can only imagine how devastated she is. Prayers, visions of golden light -- and any other spiritual support she accepts -- are fervently offered. Sarah is good people.

Ummm... Bill? 1000 posts, guy? Dunno if you're expecting congratulations, or whatever... Ummm... I think condolences may be in order. I'll take the free beer, though.

It's my understanding that RQ sorcerors have always been a bit about, "yeah, if you have time to cast your spells beforehand..." Otherwise, cast as fast as possible and hope your other party-members can screen/protect you. I haven't played with any Sorcerors in previous editions, so I may be mistaken. I understand adventuring Sorcerors often pre-cast long-duration buff spells, so when combat began they had their initial casting done... a week ahead of time. But I'm... kind of OK with this limitation. They have the potential to go REALLY powerful, but without any of the characteristic Gloranthan cult-and-culture expectations to limit them. And honestly, I don't want to see that. The God Learners lost. The Goddess Switch failed, demonstrating a fundamental flaw in their understanding. So a wizardy-guy (or -gal) whose abstruse, theoretical, "foundation-of-the-universe" style of magic leaves them extra-vulnerable to the practical "bladesharp-6" soldier with a gladius? Well... in a word: yes.

I have used other magic rules of his, in other games. I bought that book specifically to get his take on the topic for BRP...would not have bought it from any other author (well... OK, would also have bought Greg Stafford's take on the topic). I have a really profound respect for Mr. Snead's magic-rules for RPGs, in case that isn't clear! That said... I haven't had a game that implemented them, so I do not actually know how they play at the table.

The issue comes up when the topic revolves around "is HPL racist / sexist / etc-ist, and how much (or at all) that belongs at the gaming table (or in discussion on a forum)." Every table will play how they want to. I don't expect that any of this chatter here will affect anybody's play there. But when somebody raises the topic on the forum... If someone says "don't discuss the topic of how HPL's writings (or Chaosium's RPG) has (or promotes in play) sexism/racism/etc; that topic is verboten!" or makes claims that "nuChaosium products are too inclusive, and I don't want to see that stuff..." That IS sexism/racism/whatever-ism. *** PLEASE NOTE THIS IS NOT SAYING THAT THE PEOPLE WRITING THOSE POSTS ARE SEXIST/RACIST/WHATEVER-IST. *** I have absolutely ZERO belief that the OP @seneschal is racist or whatever-ist. See instead the discussion above on "Privilege," where someone who doesn't notice an issue -- because they are privileged not to have been facing it in their daily life -- denies that the problem exists, or says that it isn't a big enough problem to matter, or that those other people shouldn't talk about this problem that exists... The people writing those posts have demonstrated that they are privileged; no more, no less. They have NOT demonstrated that they, personally, subscribe to the belief; but that they don't see it when it's there. But the posts themselves, because they are blind to the issue that other people see, and deny that people should talk about a problem they see... The posts look racist/sexist/whatever-ist. And... what, Trif? If we see this, the folks who say, "shut up with your woke-ness, there is no issue here" get to say that? And the default BRPC stance is "nothing to see here (except complicit, "there is no issue" silence) move along"?

I /think/ that you are mistaken in reading any "threat" here...? Nobody on any side (that I have seen) has suggested any sort of boycott, of organizing a letter-writing campaign, of summoning a Troll Army or enacting DoS attack etc etc etc. Some people have expressed the belief that Chaosium / CoC is acting in ways (and producing content) that won't sell because the market won't like it. Those arguments have always seemed to me to be honest and straightforward statements, if sometimes misguided or mistaken in judging the market. You may have seen something I haven't, either because yours is a more nuanced reading than mine, or because someone thought better of an AngryRant and edited out the most inflammatory bits before those electrons ever reached me ... Also -- welcome to the Great Land of Posting! 😎 Hope you continue! 😁

I am entirely willing to believe you: that the uses of "Privilege" that you see and hear have at least some "insult" as used, and often are heavily insulting. It's worth noting that a given partisan community -- liberal or conservative -- isn't likely to carry everything from the "other side:" they will, in general, only do a "share" of the most objectionable bits (I observe this as "human" behavior, and neither liberal nor conservative); so you may not be seeing a "representative sample." I will at least suggest -- without real data, only the hope that I'm correct -- that you're seeing a biased subset of the usage of "Privilege" and not a normalized usage. But I am frankly bothered that you equate MSNBC with CNN; they really aren't very comparable. MSNBC is much more partisan (to the Left), CNN is much closer to center (though still noticeably Left). You can probably tell I'm something of a "leftie" myself, but personally... I can barely tolerate MSNBC coverage. I can get op-ed commentary & partisan crap easily; I want my news shows to be news, dammit! If you watch MSNBC much, you must have a stronger stomach than I do. My mom loves them, and I have to tolerate them a bit; usually, I will find lots of "chores to do" in another room. CNN... sure, take 'em with a grain of salt, but also notice whether you're looking at their "commentary" segments or their "news" segments -- the news is (usually) closer to center, and more fact-based, with less editorial-opinion / pseudo-fact sneaking in. But yes, they have leaned over leftward from their original mission. They are chasing ratings, and telling their core audience the things they want to hear; and probably, to be honest, being pushed leftward by, e.g. Trump constantly harping on "fake news" (the people there are only human, too; and will react to the constant vitriol). So it bothers me that you should equate them, when I see such a clear difference. Also please note -- if you're watching Fox and considering it a "reasonable" news source: it isn't. It is (at least) as bad in its right-leaning errors as MSNBC is in left-lean; they have never been anything other than feeding their core audience what they want to hear. Here is my question to you, based on what you said (and maybe we are drawing the analogy too far, and it falls apart?): would you decide on your preferred diagnosis or treatment recommendation (or decide you just DIDN'T want the one you got, and ANY other would do), and then shop around until you got a doctor to support that? Because I guarantee you'll find an incompetent or unethical quack who will take your money and say whatever you want said. And honestly: no, they don't necessarily get listened to. Not every voice is worth listening to. How to decide??? As a non-expert, faced by two conflicting experts, I would probably go looking for a large pool of experts (not gonna look it up, but I bet there's specialty endocrinology associations with "best-practices" recommendations; most medical specialties have them, and update them regularly) to see if there's consensus, and go with THAT. If there IS no real consensus... then sure: two doctors disagree, let's sit down and figure out how to proceed. But is there good reason to doubt "your" 2nd-opinion doctor? Ethics reviews, medical-board reviews, etc (or even just your endocrinologist's view being sharply at odds with the vast majority of other endocrinologists)? Then I would be very unhappy giving them equal credence... because that's giving the one voice (in this case, the voice paid to agree with you) equal standing with an entire profession of healers... Frankly, if I do get that large pool of experts with a consensus, I'm likely going to follow their advice... even if I don't like it. I mean: if 100 pilots tell me a plane is unsafe to fly, I'm not taking my family on board... even though we really wanted that trip to Hawaii... even though the airline found a pilot who says its safe. 100 pilots with no motivation except their own professional integrity, vs. the company selling me something, and their paid mouthpiece? Yeah, this is where things get sticky. Getting socio-political data -- solid, unimpeachable data -- is often tougher than getting medical data. I am big into making policy based on facts/data, instead of ideology and preconceptions. Sometimes it's not clear from the available facts what policy should be set; but even with facts available showing a clear direction... policy all too often is more ideological than factual. Cognitive and implicit biases (and ideology) lead to some very dubious decisions. So again, my question: how do I convince you? (or you convince me)? I mean... this stuff is hard. Endocrinology is complex and difficult! Should your one endocrinologist, paid to have an opinion, should be given equal weight with the entire profession and multiple, repeating scientific studies? Even if you find an unpaid / pro-bono expert (presumed better because money's influence can corrupt), should one person be given equal voice with 10, or 100? Even if he's maybe just a whackadoodle with a pet theory and a love of the spotlight? Should 100 random folk's opinions be given equal credence as 100 experts with evidence? Etc...

I'm sorry you feel that way. I hope you'll post sometimes anyhow... but I entirely understand your sentiment. Thank you for posting this much, in any case! I hope it's equally clear that there are other "someones" here who will speak up in support of you! Finally, I've bolded something that looks awfully significant, but I've left it in the whole post for context: I won't speak for @Cultist of Sooty as to WHY they feel this way; what have they read, and from who, etc. And that they "feel this way" doesn't mean that it's true -- that admin's here would side with sexists & racists. But I note that for every person speaking up, there's usually a bunch who don't (and upthread, I see there are private communications voicing the same sentiment). So the impression is not unique to one person. I hope this is something -- that multiple fans "feel like" (rightly or wrongly) the Mod's here will side with racists and sexists, rather than siding with people they slight -- that gets @Trifletraxor and @Jeff and @Ellie and a HUGE bunch of @Others @Chaosium (and yes, I know Triff isn't Chaosium) start talking about WTF is going on, and why fans feel this way.

Did y'all see this piece? https://www.archaeology.org/issues/352-1909/features/7900-greece-pylos-mycenaean-warrior-grave

So you're saying he killed 3 guys and wrote the ms. in the blood of his slain enemies?