Jump to content

GAZZA

Regulars
  • Content Count

    422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

229 Excellent

About GAZZA

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Been playing RPGs about 35 years, mostly D&D, but also RuneQuest, Traveller, GURPS, Champions, and various White Wolf games.
  • Current games
    D&D5e, Runequest Glorantha
  • Location
    Western Australia
  • Blurb
    Computer programming RPG and video gamer.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If that's what you took from that, I despair.
  2. Charming dude. Seriously, did you intend to be as offensive as it came out?
  3. I would have thought from a purely practical perspective it would be in Chaosium's best interests to direct followers here rather than Facebook - and that's without even needing to consider more moral positions on the topic. (I'm amongst those who do not have and will not have Facebook accounts).
  4. I probably got it off eBay several years ago - so, maybe? If so, I can assure you it's happy with me.
  5. Some background: last night, I started a new campaign that will kick off with Six Seasons In Sartar (all we did was generate characters last night though). I loathe random ability score generation with the fury of a thousand flaming stars, so the previous RQG campaign I handed out 32 points total to purchase ability scores with according to the following table (from the 3.5D&D SRD): 8: 0 points (free; you can have less than 8 if you like but it doesn't get you more points). 9: 1 point 10: 2 points 11: 3 points 12: 4 points 13: 5 points 14: 6 points
  6. I'm just referring to the maximum amount of ENC you can carry before you get penalties - which is the lower of STR and average of STR and CON. Assuming you have a CON high enough that STR is the only limit then my point stands. As I say I don't have a better solution and I wasn't surprised to see it in RQG - none of the "problems" with it are new, nor are none of the arguments in favour of it (that's why I was able to anticipate the logarithmic one ). It is just one of those little holes - most systems have them, and those that don't are typically at the narrative end of the GNS spectrum
  7. I loathe the resistance table - it only makes sense if all characteristics are intended to be logarithmic in scale, which they clearly aren't (a STR 10 can carry twice as much as a STR 5, a STR 20 can carry twice as much as a STR 10; POW 5 gives you half as many magic points as POW 10, POW 10 gives you half as many as POW 20, need I go on?) Logically, if you have STR 2 versus STR 1 you should have the same chance of success as STR 10 versus STR 5, but you don't. Mind you I still use it, because I don't have any other better ideas for a simple comparison with a random factor, but the only
  8. If you meet Argrath on the road, kill him.
  9. Erm... yes? I mean, how would you argue otherwise? As I say, you can be evil and not chaotic (though apparently not the reverse); why would you need the distinction if it wasn't something you could detect? Wouldn't you just oppose evil regardless of whether it was a broo or an Uz? Don't most PCs do that anyway? Are you proposing some sort of trolley experiment where PCs have to choose between killing a "merely evil" bunch of marauding bison riders intent on killing one half of your tribe or an "actually chaotic" bunch of broo intent on impregating the other half? Is that something that co
  10. Honestly if you just used INT as the limit for manipulation I don't think there would be any issue. But Free INT is just silly - to riff off another example, sure, you can argue that your knowledge of the song doesn't help you to improvise, but knowing lots of songs does not impede it. If anything, the more songs you know, the easier it is to improvise. Of course that analogy was not intended to be perfect and should not be attacked as if it were, but of all the things to keep from RQ3 sorcery I honestly don't know why Free INT was considered a sacred cow. And I'm not going to wade f
  11. Chaotic does not equal Evil; it is sufficient but not required. I have absolutely no problem saying Ralazakark is not Chaotic, and no magic can ever prove me to be wrong about that. He's evil, certainly.
  12. Do they not know the tales of Arkat then? Isn't the fact of Arkat's illumination pretty obvious (joining multiple cults, no spirits of reprisal)? Or do most non-Illuminates assume Arkat was just lucky to have avoided the spirits of reprisal somehow? Arkat pretty obviously couldn't have been a Lunar illuminate since the Lunars weren't a thing back then. And given Orlanth's general aversion to dragons I'd say there's a decent reason to believe that the EWF had a fair few illuminates too (in that one would imagine a cult like Orlanth the Dragon couldn't be worshipped otherwise) - is their h
  13. Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought that illuminates were, pretty much by definition, not Chaotic. Storm Bull's Sense Chaos? Nope. A Detect Chaos matrix? Nada. If it's a "by their actions shall ye know them" sort of thing, then I suppose you could find evidence that they were a Thanatari or whatever, but I would imagine Thatatar has no more love for illuminated cultists than Orlanth does (since illuminates only join Thanatar for the sweet, sweet, powers - some of them use them against chaos, the do-gooding scoundrels). Not all bad guys are Chaotic. Even if you think illuminate
  14. It was, and it was fairly trivial for even a beginning sorcerer to have enough Presence to keep a couple of high intensity spells up which is why I never really bought the idea that it was intended to nerf sorcerers (and to be fair I don't think even Sandy created his rules with that intention). I do like Presence as the sort of unusual mechanic that gives sorcery a unique flavour. The main issue with my suggestion of RQG sorcery manipulation being limited to Skill / 10 is that it would significantly nerf sorcerers. With Free INT 18 you can have up to 18 intensities of manipulation; let's
  15. Oops, yes, I did mean RQG. Sorry about that. I'm not saying that having a high INT isn't useful in RQG for non-sorcerers - but, if you use a point based system (which I do for my campaign) it is no longer as attractive as it was in RQ3 (where it was a limit on spirit magic skills too). I've had a couple of players in my campaign go with INT 8, and while I wouldn't necessarily advocate that, it's playable. (Again, assuming you're not a sorcerer). Even INT 9 is enough to avoid any penalties in RQG I believe.
×
×
  • Create New...