Rodney Dangerduck

I am not saying that the PC must completely skip a parry. A reasonable GM would allow them to use their best parry vs. the Great Troll, and all the trollkin parries then take a -20%, -40%, etc...

The PC should have some control over the choice, not just the random SR ordering If one opponent is a trollkin, another a Great Troll, I'd save my "best parry" for the Great Troll.

Very good question! A Humakti Sword or Initiate with low Honor could be fun roleplaying. "You just shot an unarmed man!" "Well, he should have armed himself" Once you are a Sword, there is no strict requirement to maintain your Honor at 90%. Likewise, a Wind Lord need not maintain Devotion Orlanth at 90%. Obviously, if it gets very low there could be issues.

I see it the exact opposite. YGMV. Now, sorry, here I'm definitely exaggerating for effect: "Hey Humakt, even though you are the greatest fighter ever, and I have your great Gift of XXX, and your awesome combat spells, I can't beat that guy in a fair fight. Could you please break his sword so I can kill an unarmed man?"

The concept of a Humakt DI shattering an opponent's sword seems very wrong. Assuming that the opponent is behaving vaguely honorably.

Excellent points, and that's exactly why I asked. His PC just became a Sword, and mine just became a Vinga Wind Lady.

For example, a typical series of events. Opponent rolls a critical attack (or maybe a special and they are big and nasty) Humakti PC misses their parry or dodge, or perhaps achieves merely a "normal" parry. Or it is a missile attack. GM rolls damage, it's a big number An alert GM asks "just how much armor and magical protection do you have?" GM rolls location on a D20, it's somewhere vital! Humakti PC falls dead. At what steps can the PC, or, one of their companions, call for D.I. to save them from death without pissing off Humakt? If the PC were not a Humakti, the answer is simple: "anytime".

On to a slightly different topic, but when did the Sword do this? Our group is having a discussion about when it is "too late" for a Humakti to call for D.I. to not die. Some argue, and I think reasonably, that after you roll damage, then location, the Humakti is dead. They may still call for D.I., but not to live. Others argue, also reasonably, that this is pretty harsh on the Humakti. How have your groups been laying this?

My movie image of BG is River Tam at the end of Serenity.

The BG's lifestyle (and body part ornaments) do make a long term relationship difficult. Your last section is brilliant. One could make a great story about the BG who is different. In our campaign, we have a female Humakt PC, who, like a BG, is usually the stereotypically deathy / glum type. But her friend, my Vingan PC, got herself in a family way ("Bad choices make good stories"), and that started the Humakti PC thinking about her future life. And, she has feelings for a guy. On her recent Quest to prove herself as a Sword of Humakt, she, like Robert Frost, took the alternative path, "the one less travelled by Deathy". We will see if that will make "all the difference", but, IMO, it's way more interesting than the standard "Death, Death, Death to us all".

Voriof has cool flying Sky Rams. Good choice.

Never said she was dumb. Just questioned somebody else calling her brave. RQ2 Blade Venom lasts for just 15 minutes. So not something to use way ahead of time. Useful if you are about to ambush something and have 3-15 rounds to apply the Blade Venom. Also, just cocking the Arbalest takes some rounds depending on the GM. Difficult to make time for any of that in any "fair" fight. RQG seems to have eliminated Blade Venom. I say good riddance. It was primarily used by power-gaming murder-hobo munchkins, or bad guys.

Shooting Blade Venom coated Arbalest bolts, from surprise (in order to have time to apply the blade venom) and then letting others cover her while she reloaded said arbalest? Very very brave.

True, but doesn't explain the issue raised by OP, who is absolutely correct about the stats. For example, Leika is 20% to go up in her Sword and Shield (and other weapons) each time she "rolls a check". If she puts an Occupational check into sword every season, she will go up, on the average, 3.5% per year in sword. (She will make one check and average 3.5 on the D6) It is around 15 years since she became a Rune Lord and went into Snakepipe Hollow. Assuming she was 90% at that time (a minimal estimate), her sword skill in 1625 should be 90 + 15*3.5 = 142.5% Instead, it is listed at 105%. Now, one could argue that she might miss putting in an occupational check once in a while, as she is a busy Queen who needs to Orate, Manage Household, and Worship. But still... And that doesn't explain Nameless, who should be much better than listed. Personally, I think giving stats to big name NPCs is a very bad idea. I'd rather not see them at all. But, if one is going to do it, at least make them reasonably fit the rules system.

We reward good roleplaying, bravery, or good in game ideas with Reputation. Often we vote on this at the end, with the caveat that you cannot vote for yourself. (Though some ignore this) e.g. "Freyar the Ernaldan bravely healed Bronwyn in the battle with the dozen broos, she gets 2 Rep" "Andrenik out-negotiated Sora Goodsell, 1 Reputation for that" As for the standard check system, it makes "logical" sense, and I don't dislike it, but, for some players, it leads to terrible check-grubbing behavior. Our current GM awards checks for crits and fumbles, and, after an adventure, he rolls dice (typically ~2D6) and we get that many checks. This system has it's own problems, but it is more "fair". Players still occasionally try to "check grub", only to notice that it didn't gain them any checks.

I like the concept, in fact, the rules hint at this. Problem: There are darned few ways for anybody to identify spells to target. (in RQG) Soul Sight does not show spells. Shamen do not see spells. And many parties don't have shamen anyway. You see some effect "oh, the mace is glowing, and there was a whoosh of Darkness when the troll cast something on himself", but no direct "He cast Bludgeon and Shield". Most GMs sort of fudge it and let you make reasonable guesses.

Dismissing Spells on the sword is kindof boring, but, in the end, very logical, feasible, and necessary. Dismissing Spells on the character is hard cause they likely have up a lot of Shield and/or Countermagic. And somewhat boring. By "boring" I mean it becomes a battle of attrition of Rune Points or Magic Points, not necessarily a battle of skills or tactics.

From a game balance perspective, I'd keep their Rune Affinities reasonably high. Lower level characters will need more help augmenting their skills.

Don't forget Strength and an even larger Bladesharp I will take over as GM shortly, and started to think about opponents for our PCs. There's very little point giving them any armor at all. O.k., Cuirbolli and a little Shield or Protection vs. arrows. But nothing can really defend against our recent Sword of Humakt. they will use a lot of Mobility and desperate fleeing...

This is the exception that proves (or "tests") the rule. If the only way you can conceive for a Tusk Raider to be spared, is through the intercession of Chalana Arroy, then in the other cases there is no quarter or mercy.

I think this is somewhat true, but somewhat exaggerated. The intricate web of family connections between Leika and the Chan sisters suggests a high degree of nepotism in Orlanthi Society. There are other examples. Maybe you aren't "born" into a class but there is definite "privilege".

1) It's up to the GM. RQG page 415: "At the end of each season, each player can make an experience roll for each check on the adventurer sheet. If more than one adventure occurs during a season, the gamemaster may allow experience rolls after each adventure." Our group does not use the "each adventure" model. However, after a big climactic session, the GM often allows us to resolve all checks, even mid season. The four occupational checks still come only at the end of the season. 2) The chance to improve is usually much greater in RQG, because your appropriate Skills Modifier helps you improve the skill. For example, a "fighter" with STR 17 and DEX 13, pretty reasonable stats, is +15% to improve in all their weapons skills. My Vinga worshipper is STR 17, DEX 17 and, for a brief time 😞, was POW 17, so she was an impressive +25% to improve her weapons skills, even those above 100%.

Only to a Mostali. 🙂

Huh? RQG, page 145, "% success = 50% + (active × 5%) minus (passive × 5%)" 0 is a perfectly legal value for that equation, and it can be "overcome". If the caster's POW is very low, like Biturian Varosh's Allied Spirit, it may even be a challenge.

Truesword "doubles the normal damage done by the weapon". Fire Blade is not "normal". A fire bladed true sword on a broadsword does 3d6 (Fire Blade) + 1d8+1 (the normal damage) + any damage bonus.