Jump to content

RQ3 Sorcery House Rules


Austin

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Crel said:

I can't comment re:Glorantha. Or maybe I just don't really have a comment. But it feels really weird to me that the more sorcery you know, the worse you are at sorcery. If you know a ton of cool spells you can't use any meaningfully. I don't understand how some notion of "empty brainspace" translates for the designers to "I can use that to be really good at sorcery".

For me, it feels really natural that as your skill in a spell improves, the stuff you can do with that spell improves too. It feels intuitive—number goes up, do more cool stuff. I don't understand why in RQG's sorcery, if you get really good at a spell, it doesn't mean you understand that spell more (as measured by how much cool stuff you can do with it).

Ah I understand now -- the problem isn't that there's a limit to the number of spells you can remember, or that there's a limit to the amount of manipulation you can do in your head... the problem is that those 2 limits are combined. So you have to choose between knowing a lot of spells that you have to cast at low power, or knowing a couple spells that you can buff up. Gotcha.

Yes, I agree that it's pretty lame. A simple house rule would be to just separate the 2: you have Memory INT and Manipulation INT, both based on INT (probably INT minus spirit magic), and those are your two limits.

Quote

To me a skill-based sorcery system feels "obvious" in ways Free INT-based systems don't.

The RQG sorcery system is already a skill-based system. The "problem" (if any) is more that it's a skill-based system with a few peculiar (to me) properties:

  • As previously mentioned, a balancing act between how many skills you know and how complicated your usage of that skill can get. Usually, trying to use a skill in more elaborate ways is represented with penalties and other situational modifiers.
  • It's a flat system. That is, regardless of how awesome you are in sorcery, any new spell starts at an abysmal score. A hierarchical system where, for example, Runes/Techniques are percentage scores themselves would let you have a mechanic where newly learned spells can start higher if they are "in your wheelhouse". The precedent for that is the Language Tree equivalency for language skills, or the Weapon Types equivalency for related weapons.
  • It can eventually get your character in a corner that you don't like. That is: once you've mastered a Rune or Technique, you can't unlearn it, so after bad choices you might end up with a setup you don't like. If, again, Runes/Techniques were instead percentage scores that, say, balanced each other or summed to a maximum (a bit like Form/Power Rune affinities), then you could, if needed, re-adjust your character by investing in some other Runes/Techniques and letting other ones decrease to represent that you're letting yourself forget them... (the balancing/total could actually be based on INT too).

I think the RQG Sorcery rules look "good enough", but I'm pretty sure I'll use a bunch of house rules if I ever have sorcerers in my group.... or... you know... go back to this ridiculous project of GURPS: Glorantha (GURPS has a couple of very good skill-based magic systems IMHO). I also need to look back more at Ars Magica, even maybe GM it a few times. It will probably give some good insights.

Edited by lordabdul

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

The RQG sorcery system is already a skill-based system.

I don't see Free INT systems as skill-based systems because while each spell is a skill, your ability to perform magic doesn't improve as your skill increases. Might just be a difference in the way we each define things.

15 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

A hierarchical system where, for example, Runes/Techniques are percentage scores themselves would let you have a mechanic where newly learned spells can start higher if they are "in your wheelhouse".

That's one of the routes my brain's been exploring for a second run at sorcery rules. I don't know if I would organize spells as a skill or not, or just have the casting percentages be entirely based on the Rune/Technique percentages.

Another option could be always casting on spell%, but manipulation is governed by R/Ts using a concept like Ability values in Glorion's house ruled sorcery. Hrm. The rabbit hole beckons...

25 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

It can eventually get your character in a corner that you don't like. That is: once you've mastered a Rune or Technique, you can't unlearn it

The limit on R/T's known is interesting. It's the sort of thing I would assume I dislike, and my initial reaction was negative, but it's sort of grown on me. I agree that pigeonholing yourself is a real danger, but at the same time I've come to like how it works as a soft limit on spells known. For me, it adds the flavor of "I follow X school of sorcery." Plus, the "gain insight into other R/Ts" mechanic helps keep what you have total access to really broad. The main tricky part are the Form Runes since they don't have insight into any other Runes.

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my publications here. Disclaimer: affiliate link.

Social Media: Facebook Patreon Twitter Website

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Crel said:

That's one of the routes my brain's been exploring for a second run at sorcery rules. I don't know if I would organize spells as a skill or not, or just have the casting percentages be entirely based on the Rune/Technique percentages.

That last one is basically how Ars Magica works. A combination of both is how the main GURPS Magic works... which I like because while it's a bit crunchier, it looks more like "magic as music", where you can work on, say, your different guitar techniques to get better at playing in general, but you can also learn a specific song (spell) really well.

2 minutes ago, Crel said:

Another option could be always casting on spell%, but manipulation is governed by R/Ts using a concept like Ability values in Glorion's house ruled sorcery. Hrm. The rabbit hole beckons...

Yes :)  Hit me up in private if you want to bounce ideas off someone, or even need help. I love geeking out on magic systems (and gaming mechanics in general, in fact).

2 minutes ago, Crel said:

The limit on R/T's known is interesting. It's the sort of thing I would assume I dislike, and my initial reaction was negative, but it's sort of grown on me. I agree that pigeonholing yourself is a real danger, but at the same time I've come to like how it works as a soft limit on spells known. For me, it adds the flavor of "I follow X school of sorcery." Plus, the "gain insight into other R/Ts" mechanic helps keep what you have total access to really broad. The main tricky part are the Form Runes since they don't have insight into any other Runes.

Yes, I would definitely want a strong incentive, if not flat-out limitations (as per RAW), that result in sorcerers getting specialized in one or other flavour of magic.

  • Like 1

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/12/2020 at 8:40 AM, MJ Sadique said:

No man, you are very far from the count, NOW we are at RuneQuest 7 ... SEVEN, officially named RQ-G because it's a fork from RQ2 as much as RQ3.

Yeah,

Having spirits limiting your spells numbers and Sorcery max intensity is a big bother enough, no need to cumulate it with your sorcery spell list. And moreover the to spell augment INT act as a patch to just counter this whole limitations -contradictions, contradictions...-

If my memory is not failing me the mechanic, based on The concept of Palace of Memory technique, was one of Sandy's ideas where sorcerers could know more spells than what their INT permits. It also permit to store spells and knowledge (like skills, runes and sorcery techniques) without the need to permanently lose the ability to cast the spell (which was also one of RQ3 limitations); the concept in itself is good because you could know more spell than your INT as ritual and long duration spell don't need to be actively memorized !!!

We are in no way at any RQ7, as the other 4, 5 and 6 were more or less authorized pirate productions that do not deserve numbers and are of no interest. The RQ4 which at one point Chaosium was actually planning to produce, deserve the number because, even though it was cancelled when the main author got his jail sentence, was for real. RQG doesn't have a number, it's a free man!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prisoner

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, lordabdul said:

 

Yeah I think either way you need some kind of limit -- whether it's INT, or INT-minus-spirit-magic, or INT-minus-spirit-magic-and-sorcery depends on how out-of-the-box powerful you want sorcerers to be. Me, I like my sorcerers to be like alchemists and scientists, travelling with scrolls and trinkets in their pockets, rings on their fingers, etc... all with inscribed spells that took years to grow and grow in their labs and fancy towers, until now they can blast you away by touching one of their necklaces. A smaller Free INT gives an incentive to do that, although what sucks is that it costs POW and so far there aren't a lot of ways to get a POW gain roll when you're a pure sorcerer (it's OK for Lankhor Mhy sorcerers though since they get normal worship... but we don't have rules yet for the Invisible God and other stuff like that).

 

I like INT minus spirit magic because spirit magic and sorcery do interfere with each other, and should. Good sorcerors despise spirit magic, and this gives a rules reason to do so. Sorcery should not interfere with sorcery mentally. But limiting your knowledge of sorcery spells by your INT just makes too much intuitive sense not to be used. OTOH, I can visualise the learning & forgetting thing as a legit way for sorcerors to deal with spells beyond their INT, but the process ought to be a whole lot harder than it is now, not something you can do through a little casual meditation. 

As for sorcerors getting by with all sort of weird inscribed spells and whatnot, what that means is either the GM hands it all to the players on a silver platter, or there is essentially no way for a sorceror to be of any use until around about two years of time, not game time but real time unless you game twice a week. Hard enough to develop a sorceror from scratch even without the one sorcery spell at a time silliness.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Glorion said:

We are in no way at any RQ7, as the other 4, 5 and 6 were more or less authorized pirate productions that do not deserve numbers and are of no interest.

That's very rude, and misinformed.

You may be confusing the fact that, according to Jeff Richard, Mongoose had no right to make and OGL license using the RuneQuest name.

But both Mongoose RuneQuest games, and Mongoose Design RuneQuest 6 were perfectly legal products, licensed by Greg Stafford.

Edited by Mugen
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mugen said:

That's very rude, and misinformed.

You may be confusing the fact that, according to Jeff Richard, Mongoose had no right to make and OGL license using the RuneQuest name.

But both Mongoose RuneQuest games, and Mongoose Design RuneQuest 6 were perfectly legal products, licensed by Greg Stafford.

Correct. These editions were legit. RuneQuest 6, now Mythras, is a beautiful game and the company, the Design Mechanism (not Mongoose Design), is under the helm of stellar game designers Lawrence "Loz" Whittaker and Pete Nash. These guys are professionals and no piracy was involved.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Glorion said:

I like INT minus spirit magic because spirit magic and sorcery do interfere with each other, and should. Good sorcerors despise spirit magic, and this gives a rules reason to do so. Sorcery should not interfere with sorcery mentally. But limiting your knowledge of sorcery spells by your INT just makes too much intuitive sense not to be used. OTOH, I can visualise the learning & forgetting thing as a legit way for sorcerors to deal with spells beyond their INT, but the process ought to be a whole lot harder than it is now, not something you can do through a little casual meditation. 

Yep I agree with the first half. As for the second half (learning & forgetting), I think the "memory palace" technique is well suited for explaining it. I'm not sure why you think it's not hard enough to swap your spell slots though: 3 hours and a Meditate roll that you could fail? That's pretty harsh IMHO, and it requires the whole party of PCs to effectively come to a stop. In practice, it's not very far for the usual trope of having to pick your spells for the day every morning.

Quote

As for sorcerors getting by with all sort of weird inscribed spells and whatnot, what that means is either the GM hands it all to the players on a silver platter, or there is essentially no way for a sorceror to be of any use until around about two years of time, not game time but real time unless you game twice a week. Hard enough to develop a sorceror from scratch even without the one sorcery spell at a time silliness.

....which is why (1) sorcerers should be older characters (and not "zeroes" or beginners) and (2) a true sorcerer-centric campaign should, IMHO, explore things like the "troupe play" approach of Ars Magica, or other uncommon things (one game a year instead of one game a season?). You really can't have it both: either sorcerers are recluses who spend 80% of their time researching and improving their magic... or.... they don't. But I'm not interested in a 3rd magic system that would be kinda like the other 2 but with fancy customization... a truly different system means different gameplay too.

Edited by lordabdul

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, GAZZA said:

To me, that comparison undermines your position. We have languages in RQ, and you can learn as many as you like even if you have an INT of 8. Similarly, to the extent that sciences exist in Glorantha there are Lore skills, and again - there is no limit to those based on INT. (You will be better at learning them if you're smart, sure, but you're not penalised for Speak Heortling if you also know Mineral Lore and Speak Seaspeech).

INT is not used as a limit for skills anywhere except for sorcery. So it's a fair question as to why that's the case, if indeed sorcery spells are "just" another type of skill you can learn. The analogous limit is CHA for spirit magic, where the more charismatic you are, the more spirits you can convince to hang around you and let you channel their magic; perhaps the Free INT really represents some sort of Lovecraftian insanity, whereby the more spells you memorise the harder it is to think at all - but then, one would have to wonder why it only affected your ability to cast sorcery spells.

I mean, the obvious "real" reason it's there is as a mechanical limit similar to the Rune Points and Spirit Magic caps. But it feels a lot more artificial than those, because while there is a hard limit to the number of spirit magic points you can "memorise" they do not otherwise reduce your ability to cast those spells (and similarly for Rune Points), whereas in effect Free INT does.

I'm not saying I have any ideas on how to change this , but where a powerful shaman is likely to have a full CHA worth of spells, a powerful priest is likely to have their full CHA of Rune Points, a powerful sorcerer will ideally have zero memorised sorcery spells and have all of his magic available via inscriptions. I can't be the only one who thinks that feels weird.

I think the idea that it's *only* a skill is the problem. I'd say it's representative of the mind's ability to store magical formulae correctly and persistently. Similar to a skill, but with significant differences. 

Language was used as a useful analogy because of the ease with which someone can mix them up and get them wrong. Perhaps better might be fully groking the grammar, which even native speakers don't always get right.

Anyway, I can understand the designers needing to place some limitations, and sorcery has always been the INT based magic...

 

As for inscriptions... It makes a bit of sense to me for a sorcerer to have a few spells in memory, and the rest they need to "meditate" on, or to have stored in the ubiquitous "wizard's staff/book" (or wand... Or hat... Or robe... Or gaudy ring...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, GAZZA said:

To me, that comparison undermines your position. We have languages in RQ, and you can learn as many as you like even if you have an INT of 8. Similarly, to the extent that sciences exist in Glorantha there are Lore skills, and again - there is no limit to those based on INT. (You will be better at learning them if you're smart, sure, but you're not penalised for Speak Heortling if you also know Mineral Lore and Speak Seaspeech).

INT is not used as a limit for skills anywhere except for sorcery. So it's a fair question as to why that's the case, if indeed sorcery spells are "just" another type of skill you can learn. The analogous limit is CHA for spirit magic, where the more charismatic you are, the more spirits you can convince to hang around you and let you channel their magic; perhaps the Free INT really represents some sort of Lovecraftian insanity, whereby the more spells you memorise the harder it is to think at all - but then, one would have to wonder why it only affected your ability to cast sorcery spells.

I mean, the obvious "real" reason it's there is as a mechanical limit similar to the Rune Points and Spirit Magic caps. But it feels a lot more artificial than those, because while there is a hard limit to the number of spirit magic points you can "memorise" they do not otherwise reduce your ability to cast those spells (and similarly for Rune Points), whereas in effect Free INT does.

I'm not saying I have any ideas on how to change this , but where a powerful shaman is likely to have a full CHA worth of spells, a powerful priest is likely to have their full CHA of Rune Points, a powerful sorcerer will ideally have zero memorised sorcery spells and have all of his magic available via inscriptions. I can't be the only one who thinks that feels weird.

I think the idea that it's *only* a skill is the problem. I'd say it's representative of the mind's ability to store magical formulae correctly and persistently. Similar to a skill, but with significant differences. 

Language was used as a useful analogy because of the ease with which someone can mix them up and get them wrong. Perhaps better might be fully groking the grammar, which even native speakers don't always get right.

Anyway, I can understand the designers needing to place some limitations, and sorcery has always been the INT based magic...

 

As for inscriptions... It makes a bit of sense to me for a sorcerer to have a few spells in memory, and the rest they need to "meditate" on, or to have stored in the ubiquitous "wizard's staff/book" (or wand... Or hat... Or robe... Or gaudy ring...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shiningbrow said:

I think the idea that it's *only* a skill is the problem. I'd say it's representative of the mind's ability to store magical formulae correctly and persistently. Similar to a skill, but with significant differences. 

Language was used as a useful analogy because of the ease with which someone can mix them up and get them wrong. Perhaps better might be fully groking the grammar, which even native speakers don't always get right.

Anyway, I can understand the designers needing to place some limitations, and sorcery has always been the INT based magic...

As for inscriptions... It makes a bit of sense to me for a sorcerer to have a few spells in memory, and the rest they need to "meditate" on, or to have stored in the ubiquitous "wizard's staff/book" (or wand... Or hat... Or robe... Or gaudy ring...)

Well, prior to RQG, spirit magic was INT based as well (which seems fair to point out in a thread about RQ3). Published sorcerers for RQ3 almost never had any spells memorised - for example, the dude in Strangers in Prax, the one in Griffin Island (not strictly speaking Gloranthan but easily convertable)... and you can see why. You are literally making your spells less powerful if you keep them in memory (which is still the case in RQG).

I'm not suggesting I have the answers. But it is a pretty weird and unique mechanic that I'm honestly not sure reflects anything "in world" very well. YGMV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Correct. These editions were legit. RuneQuest 6, now Mythras, is a beautiful game and the company, the Design Mechanism (not Mongoose Design), is under the helm of stellar game designers Lawrence "Loz" Whittaker and Pete Nash. These guys are professionals and no piracy was involved.

It was 4:30 AM when I wrote this. :D

In addition to what I said, I would add that, in France, Mongoose editions are often named "RQ4" and "RQ5", while english speaking fans (the vast majority) call them MRQ1 and MRQ2, essentially to avoid confusion with the unpublished RQ IV:AiG.

Edited by Mugen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GAZZA said:

for example, the dude in Strangers in Prax

I love that this dude has a bunch of active spells on him with season-long extensions (or more). In comparison, Urvantan from The Smoking Ruin looks less well prepared.

By the way, inscribed spells can still be further manipulated upon casting, right?

  • Like 1

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, DreadDomain said:

Correct. These editions were legit. RuneQuest 6, now Mythras, is a beautiful game and the company, the Design Mechanism (not Mongoose Design), is under the helm of stellar game designers Lawrence "Loz" Whittaker and Pete Nash. These guys are professionals and no piracy was involved.

I said they were authorized, didn't I? Legally, no piracy involved. Still, as far as I'm concerned, piracy. Some things are more important than legality.

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Yep I agree with the first half. As for the second half (learning & forgetting), I think the "memory palace" technique is well suited for explaining it. I'm not sure why you think it's not hard enough to swap your spell slots though: 3 hours and a Meditate roll that you could fail? That's pretty harsh IMHO, and it requires the whole party of PCs to effectively come to a stop. In practice, it's not very far for the usual trope of having to pick your spells for the day every morning.

....which is why (1) sorcerers should be older characters (and not "zeroes" or beginners) and (2) a true sorcerer-centric campaign should, IMHO, explore things like the "troupe play" approach of Ars Magica, or other uncommon things (one game a year instead of one game a season?). You really can't have it both: either sorcerers are recluses who spend 80% of their time researching and improving their magic... or.... they don't. But I'm not interested in a 3rd magic system that would be kinda like the other 2 but with fancy customization... a truly different system means different gameplay too.

I think being able to unproblematically pick your spells every morning is too damn easy. The idea that you can change spells right in the middle of actual game sessions I don't care for at all, even with the Meditate role and having to be out of it for three hours (why would the other players have to come to a dead stop?). Basically, I think changing sorcery spells should take a week, and be as difficult a process as learning a spirit spell, though not requiring rolls. BTW, the gains from aging are so paltry in the RQG system that starting your sorceror at age 60 and making stat loss rolls every year is probably the way to go. As for one game a year, then you have to change characters too often. Something should be done about that, and hopefully it will be when the Western pak comes out. LM sorcerors are another matter, as to do their stuff, they really don't have to be very powerful, as they essentially are scholars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, GAZZA said:

Well, prior to RQG, spirit magic was INT based as well (which seems fair to point out in a thread about RQ3). Published sorcerers for RQ3 almost never had any spells memorised - for example, the dude in Strangers in Prax, the one in Griffin Island (not strictly speaking Gloranthan but easily convertable)... and you can see why. You are literally making your spells less powerful if you keep them in memory (which is still the case in RQG).

I'm not suggesting I have the answers. But it is a pretty weird and unique mechanic that I'm honestly not sure reflects anything "in world" very well. YGMV.

Having spirit magic based on INT was a dumb idea, CHA makes far more sense. RQ3 sorcery was the downfall of the system, it's single worst feature. I gather Sandy got rid of Free INT in his system, smart man. RQG sorcery would be a fine system if they just got rid of the idea that knowing sorcery spells makes you a worse sorceror. Except that as it stands a beginning sorceror is pretty worthless unless he/she is LM, but hey, this is all based in Sartar at the moment, so that sorta works. Sorcerors are evil, don't you know? The God Forgot sorcerors, the only *low level* ones other than maybe Lunars you are liable to encounter or want to run, can be powerful even at low levels provided they have Tap and use it freely and eagerly. 

Edited by Glorion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Glorion said:

Having spirit magic based on INT was a dumb idea, CHA makes far more sense. RQ3 sorcery was the downfall of the system, it's single worst feature. I gather Sandy got rid of Free INT in his system, smart man. RQG sorcery would be a fine system if they just got rid of the idea that knowing sorcery spells makes you a worse sorceror. Except that as it stands a beginning sorceror is pretty worthless unless he/she is LM, but hey, this is all based in Sartar at the moment, so that sorta works. Sorcerors are evil, don't you know? The God Forgot sorcerors, the only *low level* ones other than maybe Lunars you are liable to encounter or want to run, can be powerful even at low levels provided they have Tap and use it freely and eagerly. 

Free INT was still in Sandy's system, it was perhaps a little less important, but it was still there. However, it wasn't used as a limit on manipulation, which is the point in question; those limits were based on your skill level with the particular spell. You could likely have used INT instead of Free INT for Sandy's system without any real loss of precision. (Personally I have never really been convinced that Sandy's system was better than the core system - but it certainly was no worse; for the record, though, I really never got the hate for RQ3's sorcery system, it certainly wasn't anything to do with Free INT).

RQG sorcery pretty much is RQ3's sorcery's system - the alterations with Runes and so on are not significant to what everyone complained about (which seemed to be mostly about the Duration manipulation, and that's absolutely still there). I have no particular problem with RQG's sorcery system but it's funny to see it get a pass when it is so very similar to the RQ3 version - it certainly has more in common with RQ3 than Sandy's system.

As far as CHA making more sense than INT for spirit magic - eh, fair enough. I mean, you couldn't have based it on CHA in RQ3, since CHA wasn't a thing (and APP -> CHA is not a mere name change, though unfortunately that seems to have been overlooked for Tusk Riders... but that is an argument that I seem to be alone in). INT has turned out to be basically a "dump stat" in RQ3 unless you're a sorcerer (and as you point out, right now very few PCs will be) as other than a couple of skill modifiers it doesn't really affect much, whereas the CHA 18 requirement for Rune Lord status along with it being the limit for both spirit magic and Rune Points makes CHA something that all PCs should aspire to have a high value in. (Although of course CHA can be increased and INT cannot).

If I were in the mood to make a suggestion, I might suggest that having INT as the maximum number of sorcery spells you could know (excluding matrices and similar) and the manipulation limit based on your skill level / 10 (or / 5 for specialists - the same as it was for Sandy's system) might work, though Sandy's system could ignore Duration while RQG sorcery cannot, so perhaps some other adjustment is better. That would have the result that beginning sorcerers with 18 INT and one spell at 5% couldn't cast it at intensity 17 1 in 20 times, but there are plenty of people that would argue that denying that possibility would make the system worse (and I'm not even sure I would disagree with them). That's why I say I don't have the answers - I just note that Free INT seems like a very strange mechanic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, lordabdul said:

I love that this dude has a bunch of active spells on him with season-long extensions (or more). In comparison, Urvantan from The Smoking Ruin looks less well prepared.

By the way, inscribed spells can still be further manipulated upon casting, right?

I would assume so; I can't see any way a sorcerer can get access to all the manipulation skills otherwise. And yes, I always thought that Arlaten was a great example of an NPC (mind you that can be said for pretty much everyone in Strangers in Prax - that was one of the best supplements during the RQ Renaissance).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

RQG sorcery pretty much is RQ3's sorcery's system - the alterations with Runes and so on are not significant to what everyone complained about (which seemed to be mostly about the Duration manipulation, and that's absolutely still there). I have no particular problem with RQG's sorcery system but it's funny to see it get a pass when it is so very similar to the RQ3 version - it certainly has more in common with RQ3 than Sandy's system...

Yes. That was something that really surprised me when I read descriptions of RQG's Sorcery, after all the talks about fixing inherent problems with RQ3 Sorcery. It seemed like the only problem was the possibility for Sorcerers to have unlimited access to all the spells, and not the reliance on huge amounts of MP, which could either make you pitifully weak or extremely powerful.There was also the introduction of Enhance (INT), which IMHO is just too good to ignore.

Presence was the real limitation in SP's rules, and it did a good job in limiting the number of spells a sorcerer could have on himself.

33 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

(...) that seems to have been overlooked for Tusk Riders... but that is an argument that I seem to be alone in). INT

Well, perhaps it's just the two of us, but you're not alone. ;)

33 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

If I were in the mood to make a suggestion, I might suggest that having INT as the maximum number of sorcery spells you could know (excluding matrices and similar) and the manipulation limit based on your skill level / 10 (or / 5 for specialists - the same as it was for Sandy's system) 

I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

RQG sorcery pretty much is RQ3's sorcery's system - the alterations with Runes and so on are not significant to what everyone complained about (which seemed to be mostly about the Duration manipulation, and that's absolutely still there). I have no particular problem with RQG's sorcery system but it's funny to see it get a pass when it is so very similar to the RQ3 version - it certainly has more in common with RQ3 than Sandy's system.

I think the changes are more in the spells than in the system mechanics. Spells learned in RQG are very different from spells learned in RQ3 because of how the Runes & Techniques interact with spell choice. Also, RQG starts at a 5 min base duration rather than 10 min, so it's very slightly more difficult to hit those long Duration thresholds—though this is quite trivial once you start investing POW into inscriptions. The duration, range, etc. tables are also slightly changed, although I think this is more the result of rounding than an actual change to mechanics.

I also have a few friends (used to a high-powered sorcery game basically using the rules in the OP) who complain that RQG's sorcery nerfs sorcerers because of how it handles damage or damage-like effects, where a spell's damage increases in "tiers", basically. Every 4 strength, it improves about a D6. In the section on designing new sorcery spells, the rules recommend that an intensity of sorcery is about worth half a point of spirit magic. In RQ3 (even without our ruleset bastardization, I think), magic point per magic point sorcery and spirit magic had about the same effect.

34 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

I mean, you couldn't have based it on CHA in RQ3, since CHA wasn't a thing (and APP -> CHA is not a mere name change, though unfortunately that seems to have been overlooked for Tusk Riders... but that is an argument that I seem to be alone in).

I agree with you that it's screwy. It's just not a debate I've cared to delve into. You're not alone. :)

Does anyone know what Tusk Rider CHA was in RQ2? I'm wondering if there's some "edition-itis" at play, if RQ2 CHA equals RQ3 APP equals RQG CHA.

38 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

INT has turned out to be basically a "dump stat" in RQ3 unless you're a sorcerer (and as you point out, right now very few PCs will be) as other than a couple of skill modifiers it doesn't really affect much

Do you mean RQG? Personally, I think those skill mods matter quite a bit. They impact how easily an adventurer can get a skill up above 100%. If you have INT 17 that makes you much more capable of improving the majority of your skills (whether over 100%, or just in general).

48 minutes ago, GAZZA said:

If I were in the mood to make a suggestion, I might suggest that having INT as the maximum number of sorcery spells you could know (excluding matrices and similar) and the manipulation limit based on your skill level / 10 (or / 5 for specialists - the same as it was for Sandy's system) might work ... That's why I say I don't have the answers - I just note that Free INT seems like a very strange mechanic.

That seems like a reasonable hotfix to me, to get rid of Free INT. The big follow-up question for balancing is if using ritual practices to increase your spell percentage increases your manipulation as well.

INT as the cap on how many spells you can know makes perfect sense to me. It's the Free INT=Manipulation part which has always been my hang-up.

Jonstown Compendium author. Find my publications here. Disclaimer: affiliate link.

Social Media: Facebook Patreon Twitter Website

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Crel said:

Do you mean RQG? Personally, I think those skill mods matter quite a bit. They impact how easily an adventurer can get a skill up above 100%. If you have INT 17 that makes you much more capable of improving the majority of your skills (whether over 100%, or just in general).

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.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mugen said:

Yes. That was something that really surprised me when I read descriptions of RQG's Sorcery, after all the talks about fixing inherent problems with RQ3 Sorcery. It seemed like the only problem was the possibility for Sorcerers to have unlimited access to all the spells, and not the reliance on huge amounts of MP, which could either make you pitifully weak or extremely powerful.There was also the introduction of Enhance (INT), which IMHO is just too good to ignore.

Presence was the real limitation in SP's rules, and it did a good job in limiting the number of spells a sorcerer could have on himself.

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 say, Strength 7 and Duration 12 for a weekly duration spell. An equivalent Sandy sorcery spell would need to be at 61% (as you always rounded up for manipulation limits in that system), which is fine for a starting character, but under the RQG rules sans Presence you'd need 171% which is a bit beyond the pale. So you might decide to make it skill / 5, which brings that down to a more reasonable 86% (easily achievable for a starting character in RQG); however, then you face the opposite problem of combat spells now being able to get chucked around at Strength 19... although I guess a starting RQG character can do that anyway, so maybe that's OK?

I dunno, I'm not a game designer, and it's a lot easier to tear down than build up. No Free INT for sorcery isn't a hill I'd care to die on, it's not really that big a deal anymore than the RQ3 core sorcery rules were (any rules that can result in Arlaten are obviously workable IMO; I did convert him over to Sandy's system once, and it was surprisingly similar in overall effect).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GAZZA said:

Free INT was still in Sandy's system, it was perhaps a little less important, but it was still there. However, it wasn't used as a limit on manipulation, which is the point in question; those limits were based on your skill level with the particular spell. You could likely have used INT instead of Free INT for Sandy's system without any real loss of precision. (Personally I have never really been convinced that Sandy's system was better than the core system - but it certainly was no worse; for the record, though, I really never got the hate for RQ3's sorcery system, it certainly wasn't anything to do with Free INT).

RQG sorcery pretty much is RQ3's sorcery's system - the alterations with Runes and so on are not significant to what everyone complained about (which seemed to be mostly about the Duration manipulation, and that's absolutely still there). I have no particular problem with RQG's sorcery system but it's funny to see it get a pass when it is so very similar to the RQ3 version - it certainly has more in common with RQ3 than Sandy's system.

As far as CHA making more sense than INT for spirit magic - eh, fair enough. I mean, you couldn't have based it on CHA in RQ3, since CHA wasn't a thing (and APP -> CHA is not a mere name change, though unfortunately that seems to have been overlooked for Tusk Riders... but that is an argument that I seem to be alone in). INT has turned out to be basically a "dump stat" in RQ3 unless you're a sorcerer (and as you point out, right now very few PCs will be) as other than a couple of skill modifiers it doesn't really affect much, whereas the CHA 18 requirement for Rune Lord status along with it being the limit for both spirit magic and Rune Points makes CHA something that all PCs should aspire to have a high value in. (Although of course CHA can be increased and INT cannot).

If I were in the mood to make a suggestion, I might suggest that having INT as the maximum number of sorcery spells you could know (excluding matrices and similar) and the manipulation limit based on your skill level / 10 (or / 5 for specialists - the same as it was for Sandy's system) might work, though Sandy's system could ignore Duration while RQG sorcery cannot, so perhaps some other adjustment is better. That would have the result that beginning sorcerers with 18 INT and one spell at 5% couldn't cast it at intensity 17 1 in 20 times, but there are plenty of people that would argue that denying that possibility would make the system worse (and I'm not even sure I would disagree with them). That's why I say I don't have the answers - I just note that Free INT seems like a very strange mechanic.

Free INT as a limit on manipulation was the whole problem with the RQ3 system, so as far as I'm concerned if Free INT is used for something else, might be OK. The problem hasn't gone away in RQG, but the very simple fix I use that I gather you are interested in also, namely that you can know sorcery spells, unlike spirit magic, up to your INT, pretty much solves the problem as far as I'm concerned, making INT not Free INT the limitation. Unless your sorceror is foolish enough to learn spirit magic, a crime that bears its own punishment and properly so. Except for the Lunars, with their fondness for combining everything. I suggested in my system that Free INT might actually play a role in Lunar sorcery, though not as written in RQ3, as otherwise Lunar sorcerors would be crippled, which they definitely are not. The *other* big problem is the whole unmagical feel of the system. Bringing in the Runes as the building blocks solves that problem, in way that is actually even better than in my system, where lore knowledge is the controller. I think my system could be better for "Runequest Earth" or some such. BTW, I for one never had a problem with Duration manipulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...