What are clothes?

[Brootse]

My last similar thread was a great success:

So now it's time for another; what are clothes? The Bless Woad spell's description (RuneQuest Roleplaying in Glorantha p. 322) states that: "If the wearer ever puts on armor or clothing, the woad immediately loses all its magic power." Are belts clothes? And can you carry a shield or a backpack on your back without losing the blessed woad's powers?

[David Scott]

Given the people who wrote original RQ, i've always assumed that the woad rune magic is a skyclad (digambara) ritual magic. So naked is naked - just your weapon and shield. No belts, backpacks, hats, etc. Skyclad symbolising the unclothed truth. There are a few similar practices in Glorantha - Waha Khan making - naked ritual fight against chaos in the Marsh and the Great hunt.

[jajagappa]

4 hours ago, David Scott said:

i've always assumed that the woad rune magic is a skyclad (digambara) ritual magic. So naked is naked - just your weapon and shield.

I agree.

[Qizilbashwoman]

5 hours ago, David Scott said:

Given the people who wrote original RQ, i've always assumed that the woad rune magic is a skyclad (digambara) ritual magic. So naked is naked - just your weapon and shield. No belts, backpacks, hats, etc. Skyclad symbolising the unclothed truth. There are a few similar practices in Glorantha - Waha Khan making - naked ritual fight against chaos in the Marsh and the Great hunt.

no HATS? No shoes surely but no HATS?

[Minion1stClass]

1 hour ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

no HATS? No shoes surely but no HATS?

Hats are all one needs to BE clothed. A fine hat makes a person. So, def no hats for skyclad.

[D]

does that mean if you're fighting a woad covered warrior, the first round you should try and put a hat on them?

[soltakss]

1 hour ago, D said:

does that mean if you're fighting a woad covered warrior, the first round you should try and put a hat on them?

Like giving clothing to a house elf.

If you can put a sock on a woad-clad warrior then it should stop the woad.

10 hours ago, David Scott said:

So naked is naked - just your weapon and shield. No belts, backpacks, hats, etc.

We tended to play that belts containing Crystals, matrices and so on were allowed, but they couldn't be belts that covered anything vital, so no belts 3 feet wide, for example.

[Thaz]

For me no hat, no shoes, no shades. 

I'd allow personal jewelry in moderation. 

No belts. No wearing a shield across your back. Or front. 

Weapons and shields and other items carried in your hands

[Ian Absentia]

This is bound to get very legalistic, but I'd rule that "no clothing" certainly refers to:

• Any worn item or device intended to protect one from physical harm;
• Any worn item or device intended to protect one's modesty or dignity.

I might further rule that it refers to:

• Any worn item or device intended to promote one's personal comfort;
• Any worn item or device intended to promote one's dignity or status.

In essence, any kind of advantage achieved by adding accoutrement to the body.  So, of course, armor of any kind is right out.  Incidental and unprotective clothing intended just for peacocking is iffier, but covering up your gender-bits out of any sense of protection, real or imagined, is also out.  "Personal comfort" should be out, too, but does that include utility?  Like belts and harnesses?  Jewelry also seems to fall under the rubric of peacocking, but a lot of jewelry in Glorantha is imbued with magic -- what if that magic includes protective spells that take the place of armor?

Hmm.  What about tattoos that act as armor matrices?  Seems like gaming the restriction to me.

Personally, I'd request an explicit list of terms and agreements from any god before accepting such a restrictive geas.

!i!

[Bill the barbarian]

13 hours ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

no HATS? No shoes surely but no HATS?

You can leave your hat on, the song says so!

[PhilHibbs]

11 hours ago, Thaz said:

For me no hat, no shoes, no shades. 

I'd allow personal jewelry in moderation. 

Jewelry is definitely allowed

The Picts used to wear iron chains around their necks and waists.

Edited June 17, 2020 by PhilHibbs

[Brootse]

14 hours ago, D said:

does that mean if you're fighting a woad covered warrior, the first round you should try and put a hat on them?

Rules would say so. Though there are no rules saying how difficult it would be, but I'd require some wrestling checks.

[PhilHibbs]

13 hours ago, soltakss said:

If you can put a sock on a woad-clad warrior then it should stop the woad.

That's gamesmanship. Which is fine, if that's the sort of game you want to play, but it's not for me, and it's not the sort of thing that the rules should encourage.

You're wearing woad, someone throws a hat at you and it lands on your head, you knock it off and carry on fighting. It did not dispel your woad. Unless it was a magical hat that dispels magic.

[Ian Absentia]

34 minutes ago, PhilHibbs said:

That's gamesmanship. Which is fine, if that's the sort of game you want to play, but it's not for me, and it's not the sort of thing that the rules should encourage.

And if one can succeed in putting a pair of socks on a hostile, armed, woad-clad opponent, then one's priorities seem a little askew.

!i!

[jajagappa]

5 hours ago, Ian Absentia said:

but does that include utility?  Like belts and harnesses?  Jewelry also seems to fall under the rubric of peacocking, but a lot of jewelry in Glorantha is imbued with magic -- what if that magic includes protective spells that take the place of armor?

Do like Orlanth does - grow an extra arm and carry it in hand.  Problem solved!

[Thaz]

It should be noted woad is pretty good sunblock. So if its sunny your going to be wearing the reverse image for weeks.... 

[David Scott]

As it's only available to Vinga or Adventurous subcult Rune Lords, it's not going to be widespread amongst adventurers. As an example if we imagine Vasana becomes a Rune Lord and used the spell, she'd be using her sword and Shield. It's likely that the gem in her necklace is the POW storage crystal, Demoralize and Mobility would likely have their foci on the back of her shield,  her heal focus on one of her earrings. As a GM, that's all reasonable to me. I don't think this is complicated.

21 hours ago, Ian Absentia said:

but a lot of jewelry in Glorantha is imbued with magic -- what if that magic includes protective spells that take the place of armor?

As it seems to work like shield, I'd allow sprit magic protection to stack. As it costs rune points to use, it will be a rare person with 15pt woad.

[Thaz]

1 minute ago, David Scott said:

Demoralize and Mobility would likely have their foci on the back of her shield,  her heal focus on one of her earrings. 

Or just inked on her body as tats. Frankly most of my players go for that so they cant be stolen. And on their bodies not their limbs after that one time....

[David Scott]

1 minute ago, Thaz said:

Or just inked on her body as tats. Frankly most of my players go for that so they cant be stolen.

The ones we can see are all truth or death runes.

[Thaz]

20 minutes ago, David Scott said:

The ones we can see are all truth or death runes.

She's only naked that one time. Ink them somewhere under your armour if your wise. Never ever ever get your Heal Foci inked on a hand....

 

[David Scott]

2 hours ago, Thaz said:

Never ever ever get your Heal Foci inked on a hand

I think this is an artefact of RQ rules, paranoid players and not Glorantha in general. Those who know healing magic would be respected and want to show others that they knew it. Like having a first aid badge. Having it on your hands or in a ring or even bangles seems the most obvious place to me and fits in with the idea of healing being a comforting action, the laying on of hands etc. I've never imagined healing being an hands-off process.

[Atgxtg]

On 6/16/2020 at 3:05 PM, Brootse said:

So now it's time for another; what are clothes?

"Our  way of hiding in plain sight?"

Arghh, you and your Nysalor riddles!

 

 

[Thaz]

17 hours ago, David Scott said:

I think this is an artefact of RQ rules

Oh totally and somewhat tongue in cheek. My wannabe Shaman has one of his MP matrix enchanted on his left hand and the other on his forehead. Part of his rather obvious oddity is that he has a ton of non rune and non clan ink which confuses people a bit but make sense to him. And the Ancestors. 

[jajagappa]

22 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

"Our  way of hiding in plain sight?"

Arghh, you and your Nysalor riddles!

While one might initially assume that the OP is either the Conceal or Hide riddle, it is actually the Act riddle (though some in the Jelenkev temple have incorrectly labeled it as the Disguise riddle) - this is clearly identified in the Jonstown Compendium, see item 10,042.  The correct response is "The makings of a mortal."  (Or so claims the famed scholar Harrik of Oranesstead.) 

[Ian Absentia]

[Oops.  Mis-read another post.  Move along.]

Edited June 19, 2020 by Ian Absentia
Why don't we have the option to delete our own posts again?