RQG One-use Rune magic

[Akhôrahil]

6 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Basically, this is a munchkin's / heroquester's backdoor to carrying way more rune points onto a quest than normally possible. These spells won't be your usual arsenal (but can be), and they use the rune scores of the person who traded the spell to activate it.

Yep, it's not well balanced. And it even cheapens some cults, as it's bloody obvious that you should try your utmost to get a Spell Traded Resurrect from CA in order to bypass permanent Rune Point costs (and you don't even need the right runes!). Surely you can find someone who is a bit lax about it and wants to use your Lunars for charity or the cult coffers or something?

I'm not even clear with how Spell Trading is motivated within Glorantha. Rune Magic is all about access to the Runes and emulation of your god, and this isn't obviously something that can be traded away...

Edited February 11, 2020 by Akhôrahil

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Regarding accusations of cut & paste from previous additions, it seems this is not the case.  This is the relevant entry from cults of Prax: 

Quote

If the spell traded away can be reused, both priests must throw D100 again to see if each will recall his spell after a week’s meditation at a temple. If one throws 96-00, he does not normally recall. He then must make a “remembering roll” before he gets use of the spell. This may be attempted once a week, and the priest must make a successful roll which is computed exactly the way his Power Gain roll is figured for that week. Once the spell is remembered, then there is no further trouble. 

Cults of Prax. Chasoium PDF. p64

And in River of cradles RQ3, it doesn't even cover the One-use eventuallity in the spell trading description. 

So the text we have for Spell Trading in RQG is specific to that edition. 

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

2 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

I'm not even clear with how Spell Trading is motivated within Glorantha. Rune Magic is all about access to the Runes and emulation of your god, and this isn't obviously something that can be traded away...

Its an Issaries trading thing. Every thing is a commodity  

[Akhôrahil]

1 minute ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Its an Issaries trading thing. Every thing is a commodity  

I agree that they will trade what is tradeable. But that still doesn't explain why magic is tradable in the first place. You might as well want to trade skills, hit points or characteristics, but that isn't supported (although it can happen within heroquests). 

Edited February 11, 2020 by Akhôrahil

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

10 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

I agree that they will trade what is tradeable. But that still doesn't explain why magic is tradable in the first place. You might as well want to trade skills, hit points or characteristics, but that isn't supported (although it can happen within heroquests). 

I suppose it represents the power of Issaries, nothing is beyond trading. Its a bit like trading a bit of your soul or your gods soul. You could trade skills as a tutor - I guess its a material thing so would have to be learned through practice. Trading hit points would be a bit like necromancy  

Edited February 11, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

Interestingly spell Trading in RQG is all one-use only ( for the traded spells). This wasn't the case in RQ2 where as I've quoted, there was a % chance that you could remember the spell permanently (if it was reusable). 

I think this RQG ruling with regards Spell trading does point strongly to the intention of One-use being intended as cast and forget. The terminology is (minus the hyphen) the same. 

Edited February 11, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[PhilHibbs]

2 hours ago, AndreJarosch said:

A Chalana Arroy for instance might have traded Resurrection in RQ2 to another person, because that person needed it for a specific situation. Would she has done that if she knew that he could used it over and over again (which seems to be in RQG, in your interpretation of the rules)?

This is just baffling to me, how can anybody read the rules to mean that a traded one-use spell becomes reusable to the person it is traded to? Even reusable spells are traded on a one-use bases, so suggesting that one-use become reusable is rather unexpected.

Oh, I see the thing about a % chance to get it reusably now. Well, since I didn't know about that, and it isn't in RQG, no I didn't have it in my interpretation.

  

2 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I was curious about when the term "One-Use" came about in RQ. It was in RQ3. RQ2 has the term "non-reusable". 

Ooooh, interesting, thanks! Seems odd that they didn't go back to the RQ2 term, really, given the emphasis on RQ2, and how that seems to fit the intended (IMO) mechanic a little better ("non-reusable" can more easily be interpreted as applying to the RP spent, whereas "one-use" has a strong implication that it implies to the spell).

Edited February 11, 2020 by PhilHibbs

[PhilHibbs]

1 hour ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I think this RQG ruling with regards Spell trading does point strongly to the intention of One-use being intended as cast and forget. The terminology is (minus the hyphen) the same. 

That may have been the intention at one stage of development, like the idea that you should get access to common rune spells gradually.

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

52 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

That may have been the intention at one stage of development, like the idea that you should get access to common rune spells gradually.

Yep can’t rule that out either. But on balance I still feel that it’s more likely an oversight/omission in the RQG text. Particularly as RQ2 and RQ3 both played it the same way. Why water down one-use limitation for RQG? 

Edited February 11, 2020 by Paid a bod yn dwp

[Kloster]

3 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I was curious about when the term "One-Use" came about in RQ. It was in RQ3. RQ2 has the term "non-reusable". 

The RQ3 text on the subject makes it clear that One-Use spells are cast and forget. You need to re-sacrifice power in order to acquire the spell again:

 

RQ3 Softbound Deluxe edition 1993. p112 - Spell limits.

I'm not sure there is a strong enough thematic reason why the designers would have changed this assumption in RQG?

RQIII had no Rune Points, so could not tell us anything on this subject.

[Kloster]

1 hour ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Yep can’t rule that out either. But on balance I still feel that it’s more likely an oversight/omission in the RQG text. Particularly as RQ2 and RQ3 both played it the same way. Why water down one-use limitation for RQG? 

It's not watering down. It is just a completely different set of rules for casting rune spells. I think we should forget getting back to previous editions on this subject (and try to understand what is the precise meaning of the new rule).

[Lordabdul]

3 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

I was curious about when the term "One-Use" came about in RQ. It was in RQ3. RQ2 has the term "non-reusable". 

Not completely true: RQ2 uses a mix of "one-use" (with or without hyphen) and "non-reusable". If you look into RQ2 scenarios like Pavis, Big Rubble, Griffin Mountain, etc., you'll see that the number of "one-use" increases while "non-reusable" becomes mostly extinct, as (it seems) Chaosium settled on a standard terminology.

3 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Yep, it's not well balanced. And it even cheapens some cults, as it's bloody obvious that you should try your utmost to get a Spell Traded Resurrect from CA in order to bypass permanent Rune Point costs (and you don't even need the right runes!).

It's only as well balanced as the GM wants it to be    Getting a traded Resurrect spell not only requires the party to have an Issaries initiate who can get a CA priest at a market, it would also most probably (in my game) require doing something for the local CA temple -- so a whole adventure's worth in payment, in addition to money and all that stuff.

2 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

That may have been the intention at one stage of development, like the idea that you should get access to common rune spells gradually.

What is your source for this point about common rune spells? It's interesting to me because I've got a house rule for exactly this, although my house rule is for playing "unexperienced" characters, and is designed/tuned so that by the time your character has ~3 years of experience, like "normal" RQG starting characters, you do get pretty much all common rune spells, so that it's backwards compatible with RAW.

[Lordabdul]

Also, even though I think Jason might have misunderstood the question, if we were to consider the Q&A as "correct" (I don't), remember what it says:

  Q: In the case of trading one-use spell, when will the original owner be able to cast the one-use spell?
  A: As soon as desired, as per the rules.

...which only means that the owner can cast the spell at least once after the trade -- it doesn't say anything about how many times the owner can cast it. So even if you believe that "one-use spells" are, indeed, "one-use" (and not "RP-sacrificing spells"), it doesn't grant the original owner the ability to cast that spell repeatedly after having traded it. It just means that trading it away somehow doesn't "consume" your one-use.... which doesn't make a lot of thematic sense to me because the receivers are using your RPs and Rune affinities, so it's really like the original owner has indeed cast it, and therefore should have "consumed" the one-use during the trade...

Similarly, if you believe that "one-use spells" are "RP-sacrificing spells", then you should lose those RPs spent on it while trading it away. But RAW doesn't mention that.

Edited February 11, 2020 by lordabdul

[PhilHibbs]

14 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

What is your source for this point about common rune spells?

Early drafts of the rules that were shared among a limited group for feedback. Also, isn't it the rule in the Quickstart?

The one that I have to hand - a fairly late one I think - has an interesting but annoying mechanic, I'm going to take a risk and share a snippet here:

Quote

An initiate can use Rune Points to cast any cult, subcult, or associate god rune spell known by any temple where the character participated in seasonal or High Holy Day worship during the previous year.

Bookkeeping nightmare! Everyone has to keep a calendar of where they have worshipped, and what spells were available there. If you have worshipped at a Major Temple, then you have access to all the Common Rune spells. If not, you don't.

Edited February 11, 2020 by PhilHibbs

[Lordabdul]

1 minute ago, PhilHibbs said:

Bookkeeping nightmare!

LOL yes, wow. It's like taxes in North America where you have to do all the useless bookkeeping and calculation, when really the government already knows most of it already  

[Joerg]

4 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Interestingly spell Trading in RQG is all one-use only ( for the traded spells). This wasn't the case in RQ2 where as I've quoted, there was a % chance that you could remember the spell permanently (if it was reusable). 

I think you mis-interpret this. The priest rolls whether his memory of the spell he traded away comes back intact. The spell he received leaves no trace of memory (unless it was one he knew himself).

 

[Akhôrahil]

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

LOL yes, wow. It's like taxes in North America where you have to do all the useless bookkeeping and calculation, when really the government already knows most of it already  

Here in a civilised country, I do mine literally in five minutes via secure login to the tax authority with the standard national online identification, and digital signing. 🙂

Edited February 11, 2020 by Akhôrahil

[metcalph]

5 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Interestingly spell Trading in RQG is all one-use only ( for the traded spells). This wasn't the case in RQ2 where as I've quoted, there was a % chance that you could remember the spell permanently (if it was reusable). 

I think that's a rule for the magician to regain the spell after it has been cast by the person that he has traded it to.  If a Chalanan trades a Heal Wound spell which is then used, she must spend a week at the temple and roll the dice to remember the spell.

[Paid a bod yn dwp]

2 hours ago, Joerg said:

I think you mis-interpret this.

 

54 minutes ago, metcalph said:

I think that's a rule for the magician to regain the spell after it has been cast by the person that he has traded it to.  If a Chalanan trades a Heal Wound spell which is then used, she must spend a week at the temple and roll the dice to remember the spell.

Yep - you’re right. Thanks for the clarification 

[Shiningbrow]

15 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I agree that they will trade what is tradeable. But that still doesn't explain why magic is tradable in the first place. You might as well want to trade skills, hit points or characteristics, but that isn't supported (although it can happen within heroquests). 

Because Chalana Arroy likes to keep the Rune Lords going to fight Chaos alive, and giving them access to a Resurrection is safer than sending a priest along...

[Alex]

Pardon the thread-Zorak-Zoraning, but having just wrrrrecked ma heid trying to follow the ins and out of this I thought I'd try to tie up some loose ends, in case anyone else happens along with the same confusion...

 

On 4/21/2020 at 6:55 PM, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

Just to tie up this thread I started with Chaosiums official answers in the Q&A regarding One Use Rune spells and rune points:

Several links/images no longer working here:  deleted, or changed URLs, perhaps?

 

On 2/11/2020 at 10:20 AM, Crel said:

More possibly-relevant text to the discussion, from the Well of Daliath errata:

I read Jason's answer as supporting Akhorahil's claim that the Spell Trading knowledge-loss text is a cut-and-paste error.

This one was entirely clear from the quote given, but the URL it's from has changed:  https://wellofdaliath.chaosium.com/home/catalogue/publishers/chaosium/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-players-book-print/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-qa-by-chapter/cha4028-runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-chapter-14-rune-magic-spells/#Shield (and scroll down a bit, there doesn't seem to be an anchor for "Spell Trading".

But while I'm here, a couple of further thoughts...

On 2/11/2020 at 9:58 AM, PhilHibbs said:

You can also drop to 0 RP via Divine intervention. (Need to check the mechanics, but I think that's how it works, CMIIW)

Only for Runies, and they're losing temporary RP, so no rules edge-cases or changes of initiatory status (from that part!) involved.

 

On 2/10/2020 at 11:20 PM, lordabdul said:

Sure, if you were to abide by the "one-use spells can be used repeatedly" rule. Which I don't because, indeed, it can leave you a destitute lay-member even though you were previously a God Talker with a whooping 9 points Rune Points pool. Makes no sense to me.

 

My intuition is that the deity would allow the God-Talker or Priest to voluntarily self-demote to Initiate by repeated use of 'One Use' rune magic.  After all, it's in theory possible this could happen with just one such use!  But this is a 'deity-facing' attribute, so if it fails your SimGlorantha smell test, it also seems legit to to say "no repeated 'one-uses' if it causes a change of initiatory status".

 

On 2/10/2020 at 9:41 PM, Akhôrahil said:

You're still  not reading me correctly - by using one use spells, you can drop your permanent Rune Point pool to 0. There are no Rune Points to even regain! There are few obvious differences between this and Lay Membership.

Casting rune magic that (in effect) loses your status as an Initiate seems much iffier.  It's counterintuitive to think of of someone doing something notionally devout, and losing all connection with their deity in the process, even if that proves to be a temporary glitch in the subsequent narrative.  I'd be inclined to say these normally simply don't happen.  Unless the deity/GM think this is a rare case of a sucker needing an even break, in which case I think I'd say you retain that last point of PRPP, but have to lose a point of POW to make good the shortfall.

Most one-use magics aren't one-pointers, so that rules out many opportunities for immediate do-overs anyway, over and above the "rare" concept.

[Akhôrahil]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Casting rune magic that (in effect) loses your status as an Initiate seems much iffier.  It's counterintuitive to think of of someone doing something notionally devout, and losing all connection with their deity in the process, even if that proves to be a temporary glitch in the subsequent narrative.  I'd be inclined to say these normally simply don't happen.  Unless the deity/GM think this is a rare case of a sucker needing an even break, in which case I think I'd say you retain that last point of PRPP, but have to lose a point of POW to make good the shortfall.

I don't think you would need to re-initiate or anything, it's merely that if you have 0 Rune Points, there is very little practical rules-based difference to being a Lay Member. But there are some - for instance, I don't think it would work to burn your way down to 0 Rune Points and then abandon the cult in order to avoid Spirits of Retribution, and you shouldn't get stuff like Gifts & Geases revoked (at least permanently - temporarily might still be an idea?).

I feel there may be some conceptual problem here, though - the POW you spend for a Rune Point when you initiate is supposed to forge your connection to your god - what has happened to it once you no longer have any Rune Points?

Interestingly, the situation is likely to occur next time we play - a PC is dead, and the Daka Fal initiate feels he won't need his Rune Points too badly once he has initiated to shaman, so a one-use Resurrect will drop him to 0 RP.

Another interesting feature - on a crit, you don't lose any Rune Points, and hence don't lose them permanently, so it's a rare situation where it's a good deal to try to push your casting chance up as far as it will possibly go in order to slightly increase the crit chance. Enhanced Augment, Meditate, Ritual Preparation...

Edited November 9, 2021 by Akhôrahil

[Scotty]

2 hours ago, Alex said:

Several links/images no longer working here:  deleted, or changed URLs, perhaps?

Questions on BRP Q&A are moved over the Well of Daliath Q&A, then deleted from BRP.

2 hours ago, Alex said:

scroll down a bit, there doesn't seem to be an anchor for "Spell Trading".

Fixed - Spell Trading, note the the Q&As for spirit & rune magic are being moved over to their relevant Red Book of Magic page.

Please note that a Rune priest only needs to have 5 rune points to become a Rune priest (page 275). There is no requirement to maintain this level.

As usual GMs may rule otherwise in their games. Should you wish to inflict this on your players, treat the drop below 5 rune points as POW loss below 18 is treated on page 278, as an involuntary leave of absence.

At 0 rune points you do not loose your connection with your deity. You can still worship and give magic points to your deity. To break the connection, a 3 point Ban is needed (RQG page 319).