Who is counted as unarmed in Glorantha?

[Brootse]

Characters lose honor from attacking unarmed foes. But most Gloranthans who aren't small children will carry knives or daggers as tools and eating utensils. Are they counted as unarmed? What about trolls and others who have bite attacks? Or people who know Disruption or other attacking spells?

[GAZZA]

Given the frequency of severing limbs in RQ, it might mean literally "foes who no longer have arms".

Seriously though, I'd assume it basically means "non-combatants". Which is, as you note, a trickier category in a world where every man and his dog might know Disruption to get rid of rats, but I'd suggest there is nonetheless a difference between a farmer that has a sharp hoe and knows Disruption to kill field mice, and a warrior with a blood drenched sword covered in Death runes. Basically I'd rule it on a case by case basis - if, in my estimation, the victim was not someone that could reasonably be viewed as (even a minor) threat, then they lose the honour. Of course that is not an ideal answer, because anyone could be a threat if they get a lucky critical, but it should be good enough for practical purposes.

[French Desperate WindChild]

25 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

Given the frequency of severing limbs in RQ, it might mean literally "foes who no longer have arms".

Agree !

From my perspetive, even a warrior may be considered as unarmed is some circumstances.

if someone (warrior or not) is throwing down his weapons, hands up or any activity showing you he is surrendering, if you are honorable, you must consider him as unarmed.

The same with people who are not a threat and cannot see you. If you ambush a lumberjack when he is cutting a tree with his axe, that is an ambush against an unarmed guy. If you call the guy, he see you and keep in hands his axe, then he is armed.

 

Of course if you are an elf, you can shoot him honorably even if he is cutting your cousin, the tree

Of course if you are a troll, any human could be considered as a prey, so unarmed human is just a ridiculous concept, you can kill him

 

In all case your honor may vary, depending culture, history, etc...

[Brootse]

RQG, page 234: Personal honor is not a slippery issue, subject to interpretation. The difference between honorable action and dishonorable action is clear to everyone, no matter how they behave. The Dishonor table lists things that all humans in Dragon Pass agree are dishonorable actions for an average person. Performing these deeds diminishes honor.

I've found it to be a very slippery issue and subject to much interpretation, and looks like that so have others.

[Kloster]

8 minutes ago, Brootse said:

I've found it to be a very slippery issue and subject to much interpretation, and looks like that so have others.

Yep. To stay with common cults, an Humakti (for whom killing somebody unarmed from behind would be dishonorable, whomever it is) would have (for me) a very different opinion of what is honorable or not than an Uroxi (for whom NOT killing a chaos creature would be dishonorable, whatever the conditions, even if unarmed and from behind). If I GM RQG, I would have Honor a relative thing, but honestly don't know exactly how I would manage that.

[soltakss]

Attacking an unarmed human is dishonorable.

Attaching an unarmed walktapus is not.

Giving someone  dagger to fight with, so they are not unarmed, is questionable. 

In an old RQ campaign, one of the PCs had to fight in an arena. he had geases of "Never use a spear" and "Never use a small shield",  so they gave him a spear and small shield. when the fight started, he dropped the weapons, side-stepped his opponent, grappled him, ripped his arm off and beat him to death with the bloody end. It was the first time I had actually seen that done.

 

[Lordabdul]

3 minutes ago, soltakss said:

ripped his arm off and beat him to death with the bloody end

That's totally awesome but, errr, how much STR did that character have? Or did the character use a magic spell or something?

4 minutes ago, soltakss said:

Giving someone  dagger to fight with, so they are not unarmed, is questionable. 

It's OK if you are yourself using a dagger. But yeah, don't bring a dagger to a shield and spear fight.

I think "dishonourable" fights are pretty easy to differentiate, especially when you have the whole narrative context around the fight. Players might object because they don't want to lose Honour, but frankly it's not necessarily up to them: it's up to the NPCs. At which point, my players would say "oh so the problem is witnesses, then?", and then proceed to debate for 10mins whether they should kill everybody or not, until someone goes "are we the baddies?" and then they just make up a fake name and run away awkwardly.... (I'm kinda joking but kinda not, sadly). Anyway, that's somewhat how I treat Honour -- and actually the PCs might have a couple bonuses/penalties to Honour in different regions depending on how news travel... although if the news reach a cult temple, or there's a good chance nearby spirits might have reported on the incident, I then assume the loss of Honour applies everywhere.

I'm wondering however how it works in times of turmoil and war. For example, Harvar Ironfist crushing the Righteous Wind rebellion is probably OK (at least as far as him, his cult, and his allies are concerned) because he's fighting a bunch of Wind Lords on their home turf and beating them fair and square. But then he proceeds to ride onto the city of Alone and kills half the families there... does he lose Honour? Does he lose Honour only for Sartarite NPCs, but gain it for Lunars?

[soltakss]

4 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

That's totally awesome but, errr, how much STR did that character have? Or did the character use a magic spell or something?

Grapple, rolled a critical, STR vs STR roll, STR 21, rolled a critical, 2D6 damage bonus, rolled 12, Ironhand 4, so 16, he had 4 HPs in the arm, so came right off.

6 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

It's OK if you are yourself using a dagger. But yeah, don't bring a dagger to a shield and spear fight.

A friend of mine describes the Orlanth vs Yelm fight as Yelm appearing in papier-mache, ceremonial armor and Orlanth wading in with an Iron Greatsword with Truesword and Bladesharp. Is that honorable?

I can see it happening that a greatsword-wielding warrior threatens to kill an unarmed foe and gets a cheeky retort back about killing someone who is unarmed, so he throws him a dagger to fight with.

[ItsRhetorical]

What if the opponent is unarmed (no visible weapons) but has brought two armed thugs along? I would consider that Person armed.

[French Desperate WindChild]

3 hours ago, soltakss said:

A friend of mine describes the Orlanth vs Yelm fight as Yelm appearing in papier-mache, ceremonial armor and Orlanth wading in with an Iron Greatsword with Truesword and Bladesharp. Is that honorable?

Yes it is

As both were aware it was a fight

As both agreed to fight

As both were prepared to fight with all imaginable resources available

 

 

[Ian Absentia]

8 hours ago, Brootse said:

RQG, page 234: Personal honor is not a slippery issue, subject to interpretation. The difference between honorable action and dishonorable action is clear to everyone, no matter how they behave. The Dishonor table lists things that all humans in Dragon Pass agree are dishonorable actions for an average person. Performing these deeds diminishes honor.

I've found it to be a very slippery issue and subject to much interpretation, and looks like that so have others.

Yeah, "clear to everyone" is a culture-specific assumption.  Thank heavens for that table, huh?  I'd add that, along with unarmed foes, cultural mores might extend to engaging in combat with an inferior foe, which might fall into the category of "cowardice," making the slope even more slippery.  "Inferior" might be interpreted on a scale from armed-and-aggressive-but-incompetent, to armed-but-significantly-less-competent, to armed-but-beneath-your-station.  It's a broad rubric with room for fuzzy interpretation.

!i!

[jajagappa]

7 hours ago, soltakss said:

A friend of mine describes the Orlanth vs Yelm fight as Yelm appearing in papier-mache, ceremonial armor and Orlanth wading in with an Iron Greatsword with Truesword and Bladesharp. Is that honorable?

Of course not.

And everyone learned the consequences of a dishonorable fight - the world fell apart, Humakt severed his kinship with the Air, and ultimately Orlanth had to go to Hell, beg for atonement, and submit to Yelm's Justice to restore the world.

[Dissolv]

If you want the historical perspective, even a sword was generally a side arm to a "real" military weapon, like the spear.   Pretty much anyone in antiquity would be carrying a knife of some type.  Likely they could put up a fight with it, but not many cultures would consider them "armed".   Those cultures that might and generally so poor as to not have a strong honor concept, at least in the sense of nobly waiting for your foe to arm himself.

In fact, that phrase generally meant weaponry AND armor.  Which is how it works in Pendragon.  No knight would consider it honorable to attack another who was not "armed", by which they meant armored and weaponed up.  Glorantha however, is a more savage place, and standards are a LOT different than High Chivalry. 

[Rodney Dangerduck]

Are there RQ:G rules for doing non-lethal damage?  Whacking the zealous peasant with a pitchfork with the side of your sword to do "stun" damage.  I vaguely recall that from RQ2. 

Easy enough for a GM to allow anyway.  Seems like an honorable alternative.

[AndreJarosch]

If you attack a man while he is carving some wood with a knife i would consider this unarmed. 
If you attack a man while he is chopping wood with an axe, but who is inexperienced in combat, i would consider this unarmed. 
If you attack a man while he is chopping wood with an axe, but who is experienced in combat, i would consider him armed. 

[French Desperate WindChild]

7 hours ago, jajagappa said:

Of course not.

And everyone learned the consequences of a dishonorable fight - the world fell apart, Humakt severed his kinship with the Air, and ultimately Orlanth had to go to Hell, beg for atonement, and submit to Yelm's Justice to restore the world.

Haha your honor may vary 😛

did the world fall appart because the fight was dishonorable or because the law (the emperor) was broken ?

did Humakt sever his kinship because death was used with dishonor or because his toy was used by his brother ?

did Orlanth ask for forgiveness for honor or for killing Yelm ?

 

From my perspective,

an orlanthi theologian would say that the chaos appear not because the fight was not honorable but because it was kinstrife

The Orlanth's fault is not to fight an armed, experienced, powerfull  but too proud or to naive oppononent, but to kill his uncle

 

 

 

[GAZZA]

46 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

From my perspective,

an orlanthi theologian would say that the chaos appear not because the fight was not honorable but because it was kinstrife

Isn't kinstrife, by definition, also not honourable?

[Darius West]

17 hours ago, lordabdul said:

That's totally awesome but, errr, how much STR did that character have? Or did the character use a magic spell or something?

While not particularly realistic, it is actually quite do-able, save that most people don't have much grappling skill.

[Thaz]

I think a knife or hatchet would be considered a tool rather than a weapon by most people. There are some examples in Norse saga's (who get really into their legal cases as a result and therefore quite handy as they have discussions of this sort of thing for all they are not Glornathan or representative of Sartar).

Carrying only a small axe (aka hatchet) and set upon by armed folk :- Unarmed. (and if you win you is a hero) 

 

[Darius West]

22 hours ago, Brootse said:

Characters lose honor from attacking unarmed foes. But most Gloranthans who aren't small children will carry knives or daggers as tools and eating utensils. Are they counted as unarmed? What about trolls and others who have bite attacks? Or people who know Disruption or other attacking spells?

In terms of the question of what constitutes non-combatant status, perhaps the thing that we need to take more account of is not so much about carrying weapons as about wearing armor?  If you are wearing armor, you have come prepared for a fight.

A related question could be whether dishonor could be considered a passion for the right cult; Gagarth or Krarsht for example?

[French Desperate WindChild]

4 hours ago, GAZZA said:

Isn't kinstrife, by definition, also not honourable?

That's all the problem with honor. There is not truth, only perspective

 

But is it honourable to let your kin do bad things ?

Orlanth with great responsability had no choice except doing a bad thing (fight the bad and dishonorouable emperor) to avoid the worst (accept the tyranny and disappoint his love)

=====

Or of course Orlanth cheated  our great lord who, although he saw what will happen in his great wisdom, had no choice except  doing like the rules of universe, refusing to follow the wrong path the bad nephew used. If Yelm was not the god following the rules, never the world would be saved from chaos

===

Or there is always another way, Eve-rnalda abused her stormy suitor to obtain the queenship of the world, betraying her seigneur. Just after playing with Flamal, eating an apple

Yelm and Orlanth were honourable and had to do what they did.

===

Or the dishonourable Yelm, enslaving all people in the universe, were cheated by the dishonourable Orlanth, who throwed the world into chaos. Hopefully some philospher leaders succeed to save people, and understood that the gods are just powerful entities but should not be worshipped as they act for themselves and not for us.

[French Desperate WindChild]

1 hour ago, Darius West said:

In terms of the question of what constitutes non-combatant status, perhaps the thing that we need to take more account of is not so much about carrying weapons as about wearing armor?  If you are wearing armor, you have come prepared for a fight.

 

But if you consider wearing no armor is "not prepared for a fight", it is easy to kill an humakti => don't wear anything (yes I am following a train to become munchkin).

 

I think the key words are "prepared for a fight" and "accept the fight".

 

[GAZZA]

1 hour ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

Or there is always another way, Eve-rnalda abused her stormy suitor to obtain the queenship of the world, betraying her seigneur. Just after playing with Flamal, eating an apple

I can't believe I missed that before. Well, I can, but only because I didn't realise Ernalda and Flamal had that sort of connection.

That's really been my problem in general with Glorantha - I love Hero Quests, but I don't know nearly enough to design them myself - for example, in River of Cradles it mentions that Sun County was essentially formed from what sounds a lot like a "Yelm is saved by the River" Hero Quest, and I've no idea whatsoever where to find that, how to break it into stations, and the like. And given one of my players is playing a Yelm initiate, that might come in handy at some point. The mechanics will hopefully be covered in the eventual game master's guide (here's hoping it doesn't become an extension of "the Hero Quest rules are released next year"), but I need to really dig in to the Gloranthan Sourcebook and learn more of the mythology.

[Dissolv]

On 4/30/2020 at 11:40 AM, lordabdul said:

That's totally awesome but, errr, how much STR did that character have? Or did the character use a magic spell or something?

I had a PC captured by the Lunars and sent to the Gladitorial pits to die.  He was intended to lose and was given tougher and tougher fights.  The final one was a Telmori werewolf, and all of his (Lunar supplied) weapons were useless.  But he was an extremely well rounded character, in this case with a very high grapple skill, so he went berserk, and and wound up satisfyingly killing the werewolf in hand to hand combat.   This was right out of Robert E. Howard and even the Lunars had to declare him the victor.

 

3 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

But if you consider wearing no armor is "not prepared for a fight", it is easy to kill an humakti => don't wear anything (yes I am following a train to become munchkin).

 

I think the key words are "prepared for a fight" and "accept the fight".

The Humakti isn't under any obligation to come down to your level of preparedness.  He just has to let you get prepared.   If you choose to show up naked, well maybe you have some special power that lets you fight better that way.   No matter.  Death comes for all.  And Humakt has a history of getting the better of Eurmal.  🤪   The real trickster talent is getting a Humakti to agree to fight you sans armor without realizing it. 

But for Glorantha, I would argue that an honorless killing of a Humakti is probably the correct way to go about solving that problem.

[g33k]

"He ain't unarmed, yet Lordship!  He's got a sword... In fact, he has *MY* sword.

That's it right there, stickin' outta his ribs!"