Jump to content

French Desperate WindChild

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

50 Excellent

About French Desperate WindChild

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
    I played more than 20 years ago with the french runequest edition (RQ3 ? probably)
  • Current games
  • Location
    Paris area, France
  • Blurb
    My english is... not good... so

Recent Profile Visitors

22 profile views
  1. sometimes, what is seen or obvious for one is different what is seen or obvious for the other My interpretation was not because I don't like ( in fact I don't care) but because I tried to understand the choice of the rune points pool system. The pool means to me the power connection you have with the god, when the spell knowledge is a prayer you learned. I interpret that , If you pray your god for a "one use" prayer, you sacrifice a part of your connection with the god. And there is no reason (in my interpretation) that you forgot a prayer. That's for me the big difference with the previous rules, when there was not "one" connection with the god, just a number of uses for each spell. The new rules are better in the approach of the link between the god and the follower (even if it gives, again, more and more powers for new character, too much for me) but ok, let'say one use is one use Does that mean that you can use this spell one time... for ever ? Or can you learn again the spell , then one use = several uses ? the three options can been explained from a RP perspective. My understanding of "one use" was obvious until the question was asked. Now I doubt ...
  2. great idea you could imagine that the fetch is the brother. As twins they were one. And when the brother's body died, the sister body was frustratred. When she "meet" her fetch in her travel, that freed her body. When I say meeting her fetch, I do not say she is already a full shaman. Just she has the potential to.
  3. Arf no, you teach me something. I didn't know the word enough. I learned "taunt" as a warrior capacity in world of warcraft without trying to go deeper in the understanding, I saw the word, I saw the effect, I did the connexion. I apologize for that. As I wrote in another topic, we are here for enjoy, not suffer, not hurt. But I think it is good to clarify the spell point because both views are possible ( [vingan has the spell because they are naturaly weaker] versus [vingan has the spell because their path is stronger] ) And it is good to clarify my intention too, thanks for that
  4. Does that mean you can find an arkati sect without "darkness colour" ? following sorcery + heroquesting + storm or sorcery + heroquesting + death ? I don't remember where but I understood that arkati view themselves as something like heroquesting guards (to block any new god learners changes temptation) In fact, I don't understand what is arkatism. The only source I have are from an Uz perspective.
  5. Yes you explain my thought better than me
  6. I was taunting on that . But what is nice in glorantha is : Orlanthi seems to be the good because "freedom" blablabla but in fact have good and bad things Lunar seems to be the bad because "chaos", "slavery" blablabla but in fact have good and bad things there is no black and white except perhaps sun followers... so black 😛 just another free taunt But more seriously, I think this "grey touch" doesn't appear enough clearly when you discover glorantha. Or maybe when I discovered glorantha decades ago in my french books
  7. Imagine now a shaman happy just with his first powers (after meeting bad man) The shaman "plays" with weak spirits, avoid any danger (if she can) and do not negotiate anything with any great entity Is she so different than others ? for example if Black Fang shamans are able to "Conceal Fetch (Rare)" that means they want to conceal they are shamans ? Of course in a large part, shamans are seen as shaman, and must be seen as shaman (to show they are powerful for example, marketing-communication expertise ) But is it realy shocking (as GM / player) to imagine some "civilized shaman" they have the inner power, but no role in the community, try or not to do few things with their abilities but don't want to become powerful ? If I were shaman IRL (reword : If I obtained by accident some gloranthan shamanic powers) I would certainly do my best to not be identified as shaman, not refusing the way, just not communicating it
  8. Agree Maybe a question for official rule but one-use spell seems to me "sacrifice for one use" and you sacrifice power not knowledge (well sometimes you may sacrifice knowledge, but I don't think so for just standard spells)
  9. When I discovered Orlanthi I had the same feelings but now (of course I play the challenger..) Chiefs are mostly Chief heirs Feud is just the rule for anything, ok there is always another way but that is for cowards or women... (see next) Yes women can join a "male" cult like Orlanth but... they need a spell (Fearless) to be like men they mistrust strangers and afraid about strange things (afraid doesn't mean you fly, it could become you destroy) People have not the same value (wergild) just because they are not in the same caste (what ? caste ?) they proclaim they move like the wind,but at the end of the day, decision is based on what ancestors did, not what could be done So I respect Orlanth, Sartar, but the common orlanthi have good and bad aspects, like others, like human beings.
  10. I don't excuse rules, rules are just words. My position is more to 'excuse' people behind the rules when issues don't really impact the game. My position is that some words used in this thread (or Elmal for example) are too hard for people. I know I am supersensitive, I may overinterpret it, but I am like I am, my power is my curse. Sorry for that. And again, if there is an issue, you (not you = Akhôril but you = everybody) can fix it. After all GM change things in official scenario to enjoy their players and themselves. The main goal of RQG should be enjoy people. I see three issues in character generation : characteristic => I decided to not roll dices base weapon skill ==> too much weapons, I m thinking for next campaign to change it by pick 2 (or 3) weapons/shields in the list and add +20 scholar career skills (philosopher, scribe) ==> I feel it is unbalanced BUT because it is not enough. I m not sure today, I have some tests to do but I feel it is very (too ?) easy to create a weapon master and not so easy (impossible ?) to create a "doctor of science" (aka 2 - 3 skills at 90% in custom, knowledge, reading or sorcery) but that my view. And I will adapt it with my players feelings too (not discussing the rules, but knowing what they like). If I initiate my kids to glorantha, I know that there is no issue because Urox warrior 1 and Urox warrior 2 don't care too much the world (until they are illuminates, but it is another story) So I don't care if my house rules are the best one or not, as long as they are good for my table. I like to be nicely challenged, I like to learn more. Each play table goals vary. That is normal. There is no truth so there is no need to be hard against chaosium or anyone.
  11. and there are in the carreer / cult / homeland lists, aren't they ? my words were about balance and after all, nothing force anyone to follow the rules. I decided that players decide the distribution of a global amount for characteristics (with game limitations) you can do the same for skills
  12. there are numerous skills some are very important for play, some not some are very specific, some are very large so it is very difficult to see any balance or not between homeland, activity, cult ... what do you need as an efficient warrior ? 3 - 4 fighting skill, and rolled hundred dice against them what do you need as an efficient scribe ? (also when will you be efficient as scribe in a scenario ?) How many time you will roll the dice for scribe skill ? so don't care scribe have 100% more skills, these skills will not save the party Would I define skills like RQG if I were a game designer ? no but I m not sure i would be better. Would I define the starting bonus like RQG, definitly not (I would probably give x % to every body, and let them choose in a list - or several -) But most important, Would I be able to create and edit a good RPG ? hum, that's just 20 years I have the idea... what about the 25 and 10% of personal bonus at the end of the creation system. As a hunter / herder player I would spent a little bit here, and maybe cry because I need more bonus to charm and dance and sing skills
  13. yes.. like "ghost whisperer" ? not so hard in a world where everybody knows these things exist
  14. before building a story to explain the fact, I think it would be usefull to identify why the player wants to play a lunar, and what is a "lunar". a lunar can be a person following a lunar cult a person following the red emperor a person living in the lunar empire someone else then choosing a lodrili, a yelmite, a grain goddess, a bandit or a sorcerer is easier to explain (and play) than choosing a fan of the red emperor or a lunar cultist if the player wants to play a lunar for lunar magic it is also difficult. How would the cult support the "traitor" ? How would the character explain to orlanthi than he/she can continue to follow the lunar cult ?
  • Create New...