French Desperate WindChild

your fetch is a part of your soul, not the allied spirit. If your fetch is destroyed you are dead. If your allied spirit is destroyed, you are still alive (my memory about a story from an Issaries Priest in sun dome, in the oriflam version) I see more analogy between allied spirit and adventure comrade (PC or NPC) The question could be, what happens if you sacrifice POW to someone/thing

that is not the question but sacrificing 1 POW to a spirit does'nt mean the spirit gains 1 POW automatically that's not the same mechanic than shaman rules. you can read in the wyter rules differents limitations : the max POW depends on the community size. In this way (and I m not sure wyter rules is adapted to other spirit category) an allied spirit cannot obtain more pow than the creation rules : 3d6 but the main point is Crel and Scoot note, for sure.

from my perspective the half enc (here) is more a weight notion (not size) If you "double" the enc that mean you double size and weight so the armor should not be practical

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 ...

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.

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

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.

Yes you explain my thought better than me

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

no, Rudemaster

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

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)

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.

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.

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

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

yes.. like "ghost whisperer" ? not so hard in a world where everybody knows these things exist

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 ?

Hi After much reflection, I have an other view than yours. I understand it as without discorporate, the mobile phone is the "first model", you can only receive call from your fetch or something like that. You have just the second sight power. Not the smartphone with a big choice of apps. The smartphone is only in the other side, when you discorporate. I see a shaman in the mundane world like almost any one. The shaman has some powers, few are always active, and these always active are not so weird. Of course if you see the shaman in trance, it is another story. Of course a insane shaman may be different from insane average person (speaking spirit language, hallucinating with some memories unknown from people because not in mundane world, etc...) but the good shaman seems to me to be just "normal" as human / uz / ... after that there are two things : the job : there are shamans like priests, working for their community. But can a shaman (aka with the powers) do something else than working for a community ? after all, becoming a priest is be chosen to serve a community : when a priest forget the community, he/she commits a serious sin, and will be punished by the god(dess). The power of a shaman is not given by the community or by a god, it is inside him / her. So what happens if a shaman doesn't serve the community ? the style : we imgine a weird, wild shaman, but again why a shaman could not follow the last esrolian or lunar fashion ? (cloth, behaviour,..) or why not a full armor ?

for me, a character should obtain that by heroquesting more than bargaining with a merchant but the price should be more than 45000 silvers ( you said 15-points effects, so a lot, so 3000 * 15. I used 1500 silvers for 1 POW, in my oriflam version as I don't see price for enchanters in RQ:G), the powers are rare too so why not 100 000 ? I feel it stronger than fireblade (time x3 + damage in all cases) fireblade = 3D6 = 10,5 (average) your spear : if 1 : 12.5 = 6.5 + 3.5 + 2.5 if 2 : 13.5 = 6.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 3 -> 14.5, 4 -> 15.5, 5 -> 16.5, 6 -> 20.5 it seems a little bit complex beacause to many steps to define damages why not just define 3d6 or 4d6 and then apply critical / special damages when it happens (if counter magic, then use your 1d12 as the "normal" spear) I would also add an attunementthen no need to roll dice to know if yes or not it go back to the owner and can be use as usual (sometimes twice per round, depending dex) Question : if it is an impale, what happens ? 1) go back as usual but use the double damage rule 2) go back if the owner succeed a pow roll ?(or something else) if not apply the rules ( +1d6 fire / round) 3) like any impale until the victim is slowly burned ?

bonjour I would say impale ( I have a dog) the fangs can stay inside (not detached from the mouth 😉 ) just the beast can decide to keep them "in" its opponent or try to take (pluck ? not sure of my translator) flesh, that is not "just" laceration in the bestiary there is a similar answer for saber tooth cat of course a saber tooth is bigger than a dog / wolf fangs but seems to me more appropriate

I agree, RPG is what GM and players defined. that is a common story. But remember that a GM doesn't need house rule to let the giant kill the duck. give the giant enough skill (300.. 4000 ... 50000) and with the official rules, it will be done. So for a group (GM + players) who don't want to kill any pc, give low skill to the giant and follow the rule for a group accepting that a pc death is possible for the climax, we can imagine more simulationist rules than curently (of course shared with the players) or let the GM manage the % if he/she decides that this giant is part of the climax and cannot be killed in a normal fight. After all as a player I would try to imagine a smart plan to kill or avoid the giant fury than just rushing

maybe we can define a rule : we need a table or opposition roll : SIZ / SIZ+STR/ damage bonus of attacker versus STR / SIZ + STR / damage bonus of defender every x points, the defender get a penalty. but also another table for a bigger attacker penalty : 100% in attack doesn't give you an automatic success again an ant, i believe for this one I would use the ENC of the weapon compared to the SIZ of the defender, but I don't know how, I mean, an ant has more chance than a human to not be killed by a tree.

I fully agree your hypothesis is a nice poetic and dramatic story. From an emotional perspective I would follow you, without any hesitation but from a more logical perspective (well if logic has any sense ^^) I am not sure : Let sees the reasons : Mastery : Orlanth has Mastery Rune too Spear : Orlanth gained Spear there is no issue if I replace AA by another candidate Atmospheric : AA don't manage the sky, juste the "middle" like... Orlanth And ... where AA is very very strong before Arkat ? In barbarian lands, among Orlanthi / Ernaldan (edit : after Arkat too I think) So i am not saying Orlanth is the father. Again I buy "the Yelm option" for poetry (It could be a good tragedy made by some lunar author :p) My last point is : Uz have one great "negotiator/merchant" god, AA. Orlanthi have Issaries, Yelmites have Lokarnos Uz have already lost their world, their power (and never obtain beauty, by the way). Don't tell me they are unable to manage trade without the "help" of external deity

I have the same difficulty, but my conclusion is different Glorantha is not less interesting, but the official Story after the starting date of my campaign is. So two solutions : - don't care the official Story (so don't care the scenario too), let's continue our play story, all material is just the ground. - care the official Story but change name, if our play story impacts the official Story. there is no issue when PC have ridiculous powers (or very local powers) compared to very important NPC and there is a timeline too follow there is no issue when PC have very big powers compared to very important NPC and there is no timeline too follow The difficulty (not for everybody) with Glorantha is PC have very big powers and there is a timeline