Rodney Dangerduck

1 hour ago, hipsterinspace said:

There’s an account of a duel between Nameless and Alain at Tourney Altar in Cults of Prax that’s pretty good. It paints a nice picture of how they both make creative use of magic in an attempt to gain an advantage over the other.

I agree that it's a great account.

However, it too is confusing: it contradicts the rules for fighting to "First Blood".  Naimless was clearly wounded first (when her shield was sheared away), since, afterwards,  "Naimless used Healing to put her fingers back in place".

We've run a lot of Humakti Duels, but always with "no magic allowed".  Pretty simple.  The disputants whack each other until somebody misses a parry, crits, or whatever.

With magic allowed, especially with Allied Spirits, it's hard to imagine all the possible tactics.  Should the quickest draw (highest DEX) just cast an attack spell for a roughly 50% chance of a win?  (Or Thunderbolt, if they have it, for a sure win?) Does it just become an accounting battle of stored magic points for your casting of Sword Trance?

If anybody has actually run some of these, between high level combatants, any tips, "action replays", etc. would be appreciated.  @soltakss?    Thanks.

16 hours ago, mfbrandi said:

Is pursuit of power — enough power to stand a chance of killing a Devil able to gobble up most of the gods in short order — usually all-that rational?

A bit OT, but, by coincidence (?), this Orwell quote came up on one of my social media feeds today 

"Power is not a means; it is an end. ... The object of power is power."

11 minutes ago, metcalph said:

Whatever Sartar may have thought about them (Was he illuminated?  Was he wilfully blind?) is IMO unknowable

For our Glorantha, I'm going with "them" (the Telmori) aren't chaotic.

3 hours ago, John Biles said:

everyone hates them.

Maybe.  It's not clear to me that more distant Tribes, such as the Colymar, Locaem, and Lismelder, have any reason to hate the Telmori.  In fact, keeping the rival Cinsina tribe "busy" might be considered a good, or at least a neutral, thing by their more Machiavellian thinkers.

7 minutes ago, mfbrandi said:

So why would Argrath indulge in genocide? Because he is gathering magical power to remake the world

I can accept this, it's actually along the line of my original question, even if I expressed it poorly.  It at least makes Argrath rational, if still a monster.

What magical power did he gather?  I don't recall any stories about "After the defeat of the Telmori, Argrath grew to 10 feet tall and could shoot lighting out of his butt".

The Wolf runner chit from WBRM, whatever it's confusing history or much debated use, doesn't have very high numbers on it.

As for making the Cinsina and the Praxians "happy", yes, true.  But  wiping out a Tribe of Sartar sets a grim precedent.  Sending the Death Star to ~~Alderan~~, er, the Telmori, might make other tribes wonder if they are next.  This was pointed out by one of my PCs.

26 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

the cult might be a lot more strict than the god actually is

I don't buy this at all.  "The Gods are Real" is a constant Gloranthan refrain  (I sometimes find it annoying).  One can easily ask them. 

Divination:

Wind Priest: "Orlanth, why are Telmori forbidden?

Orlanth: "WTF?  If they breathe, are honorable and non-chaotic, welcome them" (That's about 10 words more or less)

p.s. bonus answer: "BTW, who is your High Priest?  He's gonna start itching and scratching."

@David Scott  Thanks for the link to Jeff's article on Well of Daliath.

While I realize that real life people must sometimes be pragmatic, and are flawed, IMO Jeff takes it too far.  Or, alternatively, some of the rules text, e.g. that Storm Bull Initiates are required to investigate any hints or rumors of Chaos personally, or that Orlanthi Wind Lords must fight it to kill it if possible, should be modified / toned down.  IMO, that would actually be a good thing.

e.g. I'd like to see more positive, aspirational material on achieving the Orlanth virtues.  Less bad poetry, and less strict "Thou shall" rules that are very often ignored.  

2 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Or perhaps what they really want is the land held by the Telmori??? Argrath has to pay for his army of supporters somehow, and giving away the land of others is one option.

This has a feel of truth to it   Argrath certainly "pays" his bud Harrek with the loot of others.

I was hoping for something better than "Argrath is a monster, but you should see the other guys".  😞

There have been some reasonable ideas.  Thanks and keep them coming.

1 minute ago, M Helsdon said:

The refusal of the bodyguard to protect Temertain

I was unaware of this - thanks!  Makes me like the Telmori even more.  🙂

13 minutes ago, EricW said:

And they do have chaotic shape shifters in their ranks

Maybe it comes down to interpretations of this.  I disagree with you here.

King Sartar and his heirs, revered rulers and members of Orlanth Rex, honored and even married Telmori.  They made them a Tribe.  It seems clear that Telmori, at least "default" ones, can hardly be outright chaotic.  Did Sartar and heirs tell their bodyguards and wife to "Lie and whimper before me"?

If one disagrees with that reasoning and rules that the Telmori Tribe is indeed rife with Chaos, then yes, Argrath's actions make good sense.

As for Telmori being "tainted" by chaos, what's that really mean?  Seems like an excuse for prejudice.  (That's happened on Earth)   Which is not to say this isn't happening...

Our RQG campaign is approaching (actually, slightly past  canon) the time for this very troubling event.  (1627 ish) My question as current GM for this is simple: Why?

I understand why the neighboring tribes would want to get back for years of harm.  But why does Argrath?  I'm aware of one darker theory, to wipe out other possible heirs of Sartar.  Anything else?

I've got my own idea that may get revealed in our version of Glorantha.  There's even a prophecy.  But surely non canonical.

1 minute ago, dumuzid said:

In my group we usually play that an Ernaldan can chill a BG out of berserker, based on a line describing Ernalda doing just that from either Heortling Mythology or Esrolia: Land of 10k Goddesses.

Hopefully an errata or future reprint will add this option.  It does seem pretty obvious.

2 hours ago, Leingod said:

I mean, it always seemed pretty clear-cut to me. Babeester Gor is explicitly a goddess of vengeance, and doesn’t basically every story about vengeance show how easy it is for it to get out of hand and harm the innocent?

Vengeance is cosmologically necessary in Glorantha, that doesn’t make it good and certainly doesn’t make it infallible. Babeester would be quite unique among the deities of Glorantha if her judgment was always on point!

On another thread (possibly FB?) I suggested that a great player character concept would be a BG who had harmed the innocent, and felt guilty and a desire to make amends.  It was largely scoffed at, since "they" thought Ernaldan doesn't make mistakes in identifying the oathbreajers and defilers.

Glad to see some support here - the Gods of Glorantha are far from perfect.

8 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

I think you're reading that far too literally and pedantically. I think you're trying to apply the 'any' tag to every spell,  rather than to any temporal spell provided by the god.

If the authors had wanted Extension to apply to only spells of the same god, they could have removed the "any", and added your five words: "provided by the same god".  (or possibly pantheon, etc...)  They didn't.  To each their own.  I've found that even when the rules seem clear, which is disturbingly rare, people ignore them.  Often this is deliberate in the name of MGF.

It is intriguing that a Storm Bull can be calmed out of their Berserk rage by a Chalana Arroy, but a Babeester Gor in her berserk rage cannot be calmed by a CA, Ernaldan, or similar.

1 hour ago, jajagappa said:

I believe what Harrek has against Ethilrist is that when they go to sack Muse Roost, Ethilrist unleashes the Hound and it kills Gunda (and perhaps not easy to come back if swallowed by the Hound?). Not good to kill Harrek's Best Friend.

This reminds me of a part of the Odyssey where Odysseus is looting the Egyptians (or Libyans?), and complains that they fought back and killed some of his men.

45 minutes ago, John Biles said:

The advantage Yelmalions have is that they make great phalanxes, while Elmali are horsemen.

Each has its uses.

Given that no PC has ever stood, in game, in a pike phalanx (see note a), that "advantage" is useless.  Many PCs do ride horses.

(note a) I'm sure that some grognard here will cite one time in one strange and unusual adventure 27 years ago where his guy stood in a phalanx, and his skill roll actually mattered.  That's the exception that proves the rule.

52 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

The issue is actually stacking. It has been stated before the Rune spells from different Rune Pools do not stack.

I agree that one cannot stack a Shield spell from Orlanth with a Shield spell from Storm Bull.  Nor stack an Extension from each to get, say, 1 day duration.

However, as @radmonger notes, the casting of Extension with the other rune spell is not "stacking".

3 hours ago, Scotty said:

No. While the spells outwardly appear the same, inwardly they are different spells needing to be cast with the runes and rune points of the god the spell is from. Unless of course the spell description say’s specifically otherwise. Note that some spirit cults may be subservient cults of other cults and so use the same rune pool. 

I respectfully disagree.  The Extension spell does say specifically otherwise: "any temporal Rune spell".  Any means any.  Nor does it say "with the same rune and rune points as the spell you are extending".

Arguably, you may have to make two rolls against different runes to succeed.  We haven't bothered with that level of detail.

3 hours ago, g33k said:

Puma people

 

(tho honestly, I've never been clear why they're so triggering)

Children of Hykim (on JC) has some excellent speculations about the Puma People.

Excellent start to a list of "Trigger words"!

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

The Red Goddess is a profoundly problematic deity.

If Chalana Arroy, the most merciful and "good guy white hat" cult on Glorantha, is actively hostile to the Red Goddess, and groups her with cults like Cacademon and Mallia, then the Red Goddess is not "problematic".  By this take, she is objectively evil and must be destroyed.  Which seems a profound shift from my understanding of earlier, more "nuanced" views of Glorantha.  YGMV.

This is not necessarily a bad thing - it makes it simpler for authors, PCs, GMs, and campaigns to focus on the Prax / Sartar / Esrolia homelands, and the typical Air / Earth cults, for which there is much more material both available and upcoming.  I understand that Chaosium has limited resources and must focus their energies.

Grouping the Red Goddess in with those others is a very significant change from how our group has played Glorantha, and the Red Goddess's mission, for decades.  Our Glorantha has varied! 

Hopefully the upcoming Lunar cults book will clarify the official vision.  Looking forward to it.

3 hours ago, Agentorange said:

Vinga as a seperate Goddess in her own right - not exactly heretical as is was canon at point, but isn't now.

We believe this too.

I call it the Arian heresy.  🙂