French Desperate WindChild

bison (adopted), revenge (lunar) shaman (well at least brumia addict but maybe shaman, who knows) but it was just a joke 😉

Argrath ?

as said, for me that the same than a war leader giving order. so I would extend this : if you see your spirit in your sword as a "stormbringer", you may decide some trigger : "when I drow my sword/you out of the sheath, cast fireblade", I see it as prepared spell (but of course it means the spirit will cast the spell everytime even when you don't want, and no, i will not accept too complex condition, except if your spirit has INT 15+) if you want your spirit to cast the spell on demand, or your phallanx to move on the left, or your healer to flee ... , I see it as a new "action/preparation/reload" so +5 note that is an explorating discussion for me , I m not full convinced, but it seems to me acceptable at first sight

Before everything 1) I disliked to see too many resurrection spell 2) same with major wounds, you miss a left arm ? you need more than one hour to get it back. Note that there is no issue to have fun with one arm (see the white bull campaign) So, do you actually kill your PCs? then yes. but death should not be the conclusion of a ridiculous event (except when the player dislikes the character or the gm ) That should be the output of a great action, or a ridiculous decision (yeh yeh jump into the volcano, let's try your tactic, I m tired...) In your drowning example, I would probably consider they succeed to save their life (you know, when the movie hero wakes up after a big fall) however the notion of loss must be here : pc lose their gear (a part at least), and would gain some passion (fear water, fear heights, maybe fear danger) How often do your players manage to die? depends too much of the situation, the campaign (not the same if you are in Argrath army or being a waha initiate dealing with duke Raus, or some heroes exploring the hell to bring back life Do you cheat? if cheating means to breach the rules for the purpose of winning against the players, I never cheat because my role, as a gm, is not to win. So your reaction with the traskar seems to me appropriate (but as said, I would give them penalties, passion, etc...) I would never say you were cheating then. Do you do traps ? trap is exactly the same than ennemy : a dangerous opposition, so that is exactly the same, could be mortal or not How about really tough monsters? well you should anticipate what I m going to write, right ? tough monsters are like volcano, "yeh yeh jump into, I m hungry I will command a pizza" of course it means gm must warn there is a too big danger, and let the pc choose if / when they flee. But if they decide to face the bat, or to challenge Harreck, well I hope they are well prepared. the big issue would be the mass of effort I would have to describe how heroically they will be transform into ... nothing (bat) porridge (Harreck).

two answers : 1) because discussing about poor yelmalio is boring me 😛 2) it seems to me to fit with the main god role : the last hope but as I m following desperatly the "canon", I call it a heroic spell (or the key word the more appropriate for heroquest benefit)

no : fetch is part of the shaman, and the shaman is mundane native

an idea, if not a runespell (or why not a personal one), it could be nice to have an heroic spell after the hill of gold : "last survivor" Personal, Once incapacited, or even dead during a battle, if there is at least one ally still fighting, you stand and continue to fight as usual. People or even yourself are able to heal you If the only allies still fighting are all under the "last survivor" effect, the spell ends. maybe too powerful, however

I m not sure of your conclusion From my perspective (but that is just mine, no proof, need other answers), spirit as any non mundane world native, is somewhere "frozen" by the great compromise. it cannot change by itself, experience, etc.. Only mundane decision (aka sacrifice, etc...) may add POW to spirit. same when you are leading your warriors and commanding them to go there or there : are your focus on your opponent and can use your sword to attack, or are you just able to defend yourself ?

the one who casts determines the POW score if you order a spirit to cast a spell, you have to use the spirits POW in any resistance table or other roll If you cast the spell yourself, that is your own POW to use well it is what I understand

but when you create a Yelmalio adventurer, you know what are the spells available. You know what are the benefits and the weakness compared to other cults. And your GM is here to to warn you. That is not "Yelmalio is the god of sun/light without fire warriors", that is "Yelmalio is the god of sun/light without fire warriors and this is the magic provided" that's what I don't understand with experienced roleplayers (I understand a new player did not understand it, but in all case a new player will do some mistakes, that's part of the learning process. Where in any rulebook, there is something hidden about the weakness of Yelmalio. That is not like few years ago (rqg core rules book) Yelmalio was awesome, and now (hihi) with the cults of glorantha book, Yelmalio is just ridiculous. And, after all, if you want more powers for Yelmalio, if you don't want to play your character "as is", add more powers, and that's fine for you. a little quest, and now you have flamesword, for any reason you are an exception in the cult. Holy man for some, traitor for others, some hook for scenario. Or another option, see with your gm if you cannot gain a magical spear, dealing more dammages on people with darkness rune > 30% for example. Then you are still canon with the cult, and you have about the same power than the other players (if it is so different on your table).

in any game you as a customer, as a gm + players community, you can reach the level you want you are a buyer, nobody can tell you to do anything. yes in D&d, you may decide to replace Elminister (don't know, don't like d&d) yes in vampire the masquarade, you can drink god yes in Glorantha, you may decide to be able to kill Argrath, eat the crimson bat, even destroy the invisible god or the cosmic dragon. That's your choice, that is not a question of rules but once this is done, what is the next door ? Ok you just killed the cosmic dragon, you replaced god etc ? what will you do now ? I think this is the point : when people say never you will blabla, that means, there will not be scenario proposed to "end" the game. just because so few people (or customers) want to reach this level. So yes do what you want but for me seeing a limit you cannot reach is more interesting, you are always progressing, but the curve of progress is asymptotic, and at the end, the play should be more, in my opinion, how to manipulate the world than how to destroy a always bigger opponent

thank you @Ludovic aka Lordabdul. Maybe a free pdf addendum , maybe even a community project.

seems to me that GM are able to change things if the fighters in the published scenario have skills at 90% and rune pool at 5 and the GM knows (or just thinks, players may propose alternative) the pc are not enough powerful... she can 1) reduce the skills and magics to give a reasonable chance of success 2) add some npc to help during the fight, propose the less "warrior pc" to play this npc 3) not play the scenario, choose another one if she thinks the opposition should be at the right level (if the big boss is a runelord, of course there are lot of RP and skill>100% so it may be not the right time to play this) and same if pc are too powerfull, add % or even number of ennemies. Players must find solutions during the play, so does GM during the preparation. And same, a GM may try to create her own scenario (if no published scenario gives it) to offer opportunity to any pc to shine at least one time in the campaign. There are so many ways to propose a good campaign for an initiate (and no shaman) of Waha. Same for Yelmalio. Or anyone. Discussing with players helps too. They may have some idea about their characters, after all, why the player choose a cult? was it random, or because he had some idea ? This idea is a source of scenario (from scrach or adapting a published one).

will we find these differences in the book ? Nysalor as riddle when draconism has… etc ?

yes the point here is you have not to welcome your ennemy (if you are at war) except when Issaries (if we are on sartarite side) for sure you can be "honorable" and @!%%% 😛 I think the point is not who they are but what you do. So if they are dishonourable but respect the proper words... you have to choose between honor and responsability. Too much honor doesn't mean too good leader

same for me and I would add when a gm consider an action dishonourable (but not listed in the rules) a discussion with the player (or all the players) to define if it is or not and why (from a character perspective) could be nice. for me there are only 3 reasons : 1) they didn't ask with the proper words 2) they are not "people" (is it dishonourable to kill a mouse in your bedroom ?). 3) you are at war and they don't show you some negociation signs / white flag So, for example, no you can't (honor speaking) refuse courtesy to your ennemy (from another clan, other country, even other race ;if previously your clan accepted they were "people")

bienvenue dans ce monde merveilleux ! @soltakss gave you a lot of nice "positive" reasons to leave the land however the player may choose "negative" reasons : bad omens, the spirits told your shaman that you are cursed. The clan decides to ban you (for ever or not). You don't understand what was wrong but you are now alone. crime, someone was murdered in your clan. The leaders consider you are the murderer. Hunter, you are now the prey (you may be the true criminal or not) you killed someone in another clan (accident ? skirmish ? ...), for good or bad reason. In all cases your leaders want peace, they accept the other clan will hunt you, but they give you some advices / gears however remember that hunshen are not human, they are beasts. Human are weird or cursed or what you want but not good animals, they don't understand what are the true way of life. Loving (physically) a human is probably not acceptable for a beast, but you could gain human friends. After all the most powerful beast is Harreck and he has a lot of friends A hunshen character may decide if (s)he is now human or still beast (some roleplay perspective). It may change some points (if you are not a beast anymore, you cannot call your ancestor magic, you cannot transform yourself, etc...) note that when I say beast or human, I'm not considering the shape/body, but the mindset and the character's perspective. Same for "decide" : you don't change your nature, you decide to turn your backs on it. for the names, as I don't speak the beast language, I manage to use descriptive names (broken tusks, big belly, burrower, red fang, spring horn, yellow submarine...)

see how I'm changing side .... (but with honesty) Seems to me that what you are describing, in glorantha, is not about honor, but about passion (however I would say both attitudes would respect different "honor styles" in our world) your humakti has honor + "every body dies", so those who he starts honorably the fight must die (even if killing a downed ennemies is dishonourable, the opponents did know the issue when they accepted the fight against him) when your vinga has honor + "protector of the weak", so you can ambush everyone if strong, (even if it is not honourable it is challenging), but will not kill the weak (no honor and no challenge) that could explain there is only one "honor system" as there is only one root culture defining "honor" If we consider Orlanth and Humakt as son of Umath and Umath as a rebellious sky god, honor is only One light/fire "law". Yanafal Tarnils is both heir of Humakt (personal Cult) and Yelm (local culture) that makes sense too. In fact the only issue is the word [honor] exists irl. If it were is the only one honor system in glorantha, defined in the Emperor court before the gods war, It consists blablablabla, there would be no discussion. So does that mean that Nelat judgement was the purge of all the dishonorable acts of Orlanth ? or was something deeper ?

You are right but you are wrong (at least for me of course) it is not meaningless : it is the common language between different people from different tables if anyone answers a question with his own house rules (or background) , using this forum about rules/background would be meaningless raw is , that s true, and sometimes frustrating however no raw is note it is always interesting to see house rules but it should be identified, understood there is a context Imagine a question about a yelmalian wishing to see the options to kill a zorackzorani and the answer « easy use thunder bolt, 1rp 6d12 dammage » because in my glorantha * all sky gods have thunder bolt and thunder bolt gives (pow/2)d(pow) dammage * that is not my glorantha 😛

An other option than @svensson smart option if, after you get our so expected precious, you see a frustration among your players, during an adventure, they may enter some other world, past remains or I don’t know and, if they survive the ridiculous challebge, so ridiculous that they see it is ridiculous, and they see that you give them an automatic pow gain with exactly the amount to pay a new spell… if they don’t understand … let they meet Cwim

the situation you are describing is not about "what is honor" but "is honor more important than other loyalties/oaths/passions when you are facing this situation/context" what I mean about "honor depends on" for some people, irl, "honor killing" is perceived as honorable, for others killing his daugther because she loved someone is a shame. this kind of difference is not possible in RAW glorantha (well I think)

By the way, we have the underworld and surface/middle air cults specialised against chaos, what about see and sky ? is water, by nature, not impacted ? is the red moon / nysalor the sky answer ? (Kind of aikido opposition = your strength is my strength = illumination) Or both sky and see have some gods to fight chaos ?

I fully agree. However I have a little concern about the rules: there is only one honor definition (at least in the setting) for all the people (from prax to esrolia to tarsh) So considering the answer « it depends on the situation » is, if I understand well the rules, a house background A rule I follow but seems to me important to note 🙂 our glorantha may vary, for our best

for the curse, I consider that if the hunter doesnt't follow the rites, the beast spirits will be angry, it could start with some penalty to the next hunt (tracks, fire arrow, etc..) it could continue with some "revenge" depending on the beast (for sure rabbit will not attack you when bears, yes with a "s", will destroy your camp. but one hundred rabbits rushing you should be impressive) see it like princess mononoke story

because you are looking for mechanic 🙂 that's the point : the mechanic (aka roll skills/knowledge) must be followed when there is a stress situation for the character (that's raw I think) aka you don't need to roll peaceful cut when you are a skilled hunter in a quiet place so in our case the (background + storytelling) says as you are initiate of Waha's secret, you don't stress because you know how to be and to do in the wastes of course if, as a GM you consider a specific place as dangerous even for Waha, you need to roll. let's say you just kill some prey in the desert You follow Odayla ? you are stressed because you know that the sand may ruin the flesh and you don't know exactly what the local beast spirits expect you. So you must roll You follow Waha ? you are not stressed because you know how to do, you know what spirits wants, etc... so you don't have to roll exactly the same that a sartarite knows how to be welcome by her tribe, without rolling, when an esrolian needs to make a cusom roll to be sure to do things right