I know you're charming me

[soltakss]

On 8/14/2020 at 7:22 AM, Roko Joko said:

I don't understand why you think they would have had to engage in the debate.

"We'll discuss the price of my horses after you're finished with your sorcery."

"I'll debate you all night long as soon as you're ready to address the question on its merits rather than rely on that magic to turn our heads.  So what's it going to be?"

"Get the hell out of my temple."

If a PC tried that approach then i'd happily allow it. Then I would have every single NPC use the approach whenever the PCs tried to use Glamour, Charisma or similar spells.

Players soon realise that they are more likely to buff themselves up than to be buffed against.

On 8/14/2020 at 11:00 AM, Grievous said:

Yeah, not using magic when you could be using magic, well that's just not really even trying, isn't it...

Absolutely. One of the perks of belonging to a cult is to be able to use its magic. So, Issaries merchants are good at bargaining because they have magic, Eurmali and orlanthi are charismatic because they have magic. Humakti are good killers because they have magic.

It reminds me of the scenes in True Grit, the remake rather than the original, although it is in the original as well, where the girl keeps going in to someone's office and basically rips him apart with her trading and politicking skills. at one point, she goes in and he just shies away, soghs and accepts defeat before she even opens her mouth. In Glorantha, that would be using magic.

 

 

[Nick Brooke]

My wife and I once bought some carpets in the souk of Marrakech. The carpet merchant used all his selling magic: the cups of tea, the tour of the warehouse, the chat about family history and Bedouin tribes and different styles of carpet.

If I’d told him “Shut up and just sell me a carpet” (that is, if we’d refused to engage in the process on his terms), he would have thought me excruciatingly rude, and I doubt we’d have come away with two beautiful carpets. (Clothes moths got to one of them, many years later; the other, a Berber Picasso, is still going strong, despite the cats’ best attentions)

[David Scott]

This question often comes up with new players in demo games. Glamour & Charisma are the most common as Yanioth has Charisma, and Harmast & Vostor have Glamour. 

I say that ultimately, like dressing, presenting yourself in a particular way, etc, they only improve what's there already. They give bonuses to be added onto a skill. Be it magic, skill, passion or rune augment. along with straight augments. I just assume they add like normal effects mentioned above. Otherwise it's a game slower. Glamour gives just +10% while Yanioth gets +30% from Charisma:

• CHA12 = + 15%
• CHA13-14 = + 20%
• CHA15-16 = +25%
• CHA17-18 = +30%
• CHA19-20 = +35%
• CHA21 = + 40%

I always get the players to have a conversation with the "target" and usually have an opposed roll. Depending on the situation it can be opposed with speak language, or even the same skill. The guidelines in the skills are good at explaining what to do.

New players usually just get on with it and incorporate the magic in their normal role-play. In one game, Yanioth's player got very frustrated when quizzing a Lunar priestess they had captured. All of her rolls to get info out of her were failing, until she realised that the lunar priestess had also cast Charisma and was trying to get them to let her go.

In my games Rune magic makes you more like your god, so in the above example, Yanioth starts to take on aspects of Ernalda, likewise with the Lunar Priestess. Others become drawn into the exchange in more mythic roles. Vostor had to resist casting Glamour on to the Lunar priestess to aid her, as did Harmast with Yanioth. Everyone is drawn in, not realising that is what is happening as it's an every day occurrence (for many). (It all ended with Yanioth casting dispel magic on the priestess.)

The other magic you mentioned are more powerful as you get potentially bigger bonuses. However I see little if any use as they are cult specific.

• Arouse Passion adds to a Passion that you'd need to augment with, so max +50% (Ernalda)
• Clever Tongue, the best so far doubles Fast talk & Orate for Issaries and Lhankor Mhy initiates
• Detect Truth, handy against possible liars. But is Humakt only. Never lie to a Humakti on principle.

@Nick Brooke's carpet adventure illustrates this all nicely, Nick knew what was going on, but let the seller carry on. Under MGF, I would allow the Ritual Preparation table to produce an augment to the sellers final Glamour spell bonus.

Edited August 15, 2020 by David Scott

[Rodney Dangerduck]

 

3 hours ago, David Scott said:

CHA17-18 = +30%

But please note that her bonus was +10% without the Charisma spell.  So the net gain to her Communications skills from the Charisma spell is +20%.

[Lordabdul]

15 hours ago, David Scott said:

Vostor had to resist casting Glamour on to the Lunar priestess to aid her, as did Harmast with Yanioth. Everyone is drawn in

That's an interesting twist, thanks for sharing!

11 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

But please note that her bonus was +10% without the Charisma spell.  So the net gain to her Communications skills from the Charisma spell is +20%.

Yes, exactly. Which is why I was saying previously that I find social magic underwhelming... Ernalda is the goddess of charming and manipulating people, while Humakt is the god of killing people, but Humakti magic can easily give you +100% for killing people, while Ernaldan magic gives you.... +20% for charming people? And that's only if you already had some of the best CHA for your species... you could say that the difference is that killing is Humakt's single main trait, whereas charming people isn't Ernalda's single main trait, but Eurmal The Seducer doesn't get any better either.

[soltakss]

2 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Yes, exactly. Which is why I was saying previously that I find social magic underwhelming...

I use a Silvertongue Spirit Magic spell that adds +5%to Communication skills per point and a Goldentongue Runespell that doubles Communication skills. Both are compatible with Glamour/Charisma.

[Jeff]

3 hours ago, lordabdul said:

That's an interesting twist, thanks for sharing!

Yes, exactly. Which is why I was saying previously that I find social magic underwhelming... Ernalda is the goddess of charming and manipulating people, while Humakt is the god of killing people, but Humakti magic can easily give you +100% for killing people, while Ernaldan magic gives you.... +20% for charming people? And that's only if you already had some of the best CHA for your species... you could say that the difference is that killing is Humakt's single main trait, whereas charming people isn't Ernalda's single main trait, but Eurmal The Seducer doesn't get any better either.

I've found that adding +100% in combat is not as effective as +20% in a social setting. And I've had plenty of players just say, "screw using a skill - I just want to use raw CHA to get my way," and handle it like a STR v. SIZ contest or a STR v. STR contest..

[Lordabdul]

16 hours ago, soltakss said:

I use a Silvertongue Spirit Magic spell that adds +5%to Communication skills per point and a Goldentongue Runespell that doubles Communication skills. Both are compatible with Glamour/Charisma.

That's more equivalent to how the combat spells work, yeah, and more like what I originally expected. Do you find they make much of a difference, or break things?

Also, are these home-made spells? I found some vaguely similar spell in an MGRQ book, and some HW/HQ Issaries feat, but that's all...

16 hours ago, Jeff said:

I've found that adding +100% in combat is not as effective as +20% in a social setting.

Yes I agree that social magic will get you way better results than combat magic. That's why I wondered at some point if those social bonuses were kept low because higher bonuses could break the game, making the PCs get away with a lot of stuff or something. In theory, the NPCs would get equally high social magic, but not all of them can have it in their stat blocks so that would still make the PCs quite powerful.... is that why social magic was kept at <30% bonuses?

Quote

And I've had plenty of players just say, "screw using a skill - I just want to use raw CHA to get my way," and handle it like a STR v. SIZ contest or a STR v. STR contest..

That's actually one of the sore points of BRP for me... maybe I'm missing something? It's not uncommon, indeed, that I ask for, say, a Fast-Talk roll, and the player realizes they don't have it, so instead they ask for a CHA roll... a more common one is in CoC, where I ask for a Throw roll, and the player asks for a DEX roll instead. I'm more than willing to let the player roll but then, what's the point of having the skill? Is it only worth having a skill if it's higher than Stat*3 or Stat*5, since you can replace it with a raw stat roll? Or maybe you play the scene differently with a stat roll vs a skill roll? If that's the case, what's your approach to differentiate the two rolls?

(in my dreams I rejig the BRP SRD to make all rolls StatMod+Skill, but that's a big change)

Edited August 17, 2020 by lordabdul

[Bill the barbarian]

On 8/16/2020 at 12:47 AM, lordabdul said:

Yes, exactly. Which is why I was saying previously that I find social magic underwhelming... Ernalda is the goddess of charming and manipulating people, while Humakt is the god of killing people, but Humakti magic can easily give you +100% for killing people, while Ernaldan magic gives you.... +20% for charming people? And that's only if you already had some of the best CHA for your species... you could say that the difference is that killing is Humakt's single main trait, whereas charming people isn't Ernalda's single main trait, but Eurmal The Seducer doesn't get any better either.

I think y’all are missing a crucial point. A well negotiated treaty, a well bargained alliance (or even the bargaining leading to a wedding leading to the treaty or alliance). These are worth battalions of mighty warriors. A well made treaty can prevent wars or even win them before they start! Show me the Humakt who can do this. So while the short term looks underwhelming in comparison with our death dealer with the 200 percent bonus, the 30 percent bonus can win or lose kingdoms in the final analysis! Give me a Bismarck over a Achilles any day of the week. 

Cheers

Edited August 17, 2020 by Bill the barbarian

[Lordabdul]

1 hour ago, Bill the barbarian said:

I think y’all are missing a crucial point. A well negotiated treaty, a well bargained alliance (or even the bargaining leading to a wedding leading to the treaty or alliance). These are worth battalions of mighty warriors. A well made treaty can prevent wars or even win them before they start!

I totally agree -- like we said above already. But that doesn't explain why it's this way around (more important skills get smaller bonuses) and not the other way around (more important skills get the bigger spells and thus bigger bonuses)... I can come up with some lame in-world explanations ("minds are harder to move than flesh, even for gods") but I was asking specifically in terms of game design rationale. My guess is that it would break the game[1] but I'm not sure.

[1] Although of course some people already complain that combat spells giving +200% already break the game 😅

Edited August 17, 2020 by lordabdul

[Rodney Dangerduck]

Seriously, do you guys play FRP games so that you can negotiate treaties for your superiors?  Or so you can whack monsters?

For those who prefer the later, +100% is a game changer.  In a one off special session with Todd Gardiner, I played White Eye the Dark Troll who was buffed to do like +5D6 impact bonus.  He was totally ignored by the "bad guys" because they were completely focused on our Humakt Duck.  Being totally overshadowed is not a recipe for long term fun.

[Jeff]

11 minutes ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Seriously, do you guys play FRP games so that you can negotiate treaties for your superiors?  Or so you can whack monsters?

For those who prefer the later, +100% is a game changer.  In a one off special session with Todd Gardiner, I played White Eye the Dark Troll who was buffed to do like +5D6 impact bonus.  He was totally ignored by the "bad guys" because they were completely focused on our Humakt Duck.  Being totally overshadowed is not a recipe for long term fun.

One of the best sessions I have had in years was exactly that - the players negotiating a treaty between Prince Argrath and Queen Samastina. Fantastic fun for everyone.

[Martin]

3 minutes ago, Jeff said:

One of the best sessions I have had in years was exactly that - the players negotiating a treaty between Prince Argrath and Queen Samastina. Fantastic fun for everyone.

Would you be willing to tell us more about what happened during this  session...what did the players do, what were the tensions and what was the outcomes?

[soltakss]

5 hours ago, lordabdul said:

22 hours ago, soltakss said:

I use a Silvertongue Spirit Magic spell that adds +5%to Communication skills per point and a Goldentongue Runespell that doubles Communication skills. Both are compatible with Glamour/Charisma.

That's more equivalent to how the combat spells work, yeah, and more like what I originally expected. Do you find they make much of a difference, or break things?

They work really well. When used against PCs, it just looks as though the opponent is very skilful. When used by the PCs, they can use them with other things to augment skills.

5 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Also, are these home-made spells? I found some vaguely similar spell in an MGRQ book, and some HW/HQ Issaries feat, but that's all...

Home made. I have lots of spells not in the official RuneQuest rulebook.

1 hour ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Seriously, do you guys play FRP games so that you can negotiate treaties for your superiors?  Or so you can whack monsters?

Well, both.

I have played in and GMed campaigns where the PCs have become important and have to do things like negotiating treaties and coming to agreements. sometimes they have a Face to do it for them, but at other times they have to do it themselves.

In the same campaigns, we have gone through Chaos temples and climbed on the pile of corpses to reach the next wave. 

 

[David Scott]

3 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Seriously, do you guys play FRP games so that you can negotiate treaties for your superiors?  Or so you can whack monsters?

Depends on your groups. Fortunately mine all prefer investigation, politics, intrigue and social networking. Combat is rare and often avoided unless absolutely needed. Most people I play with had a monster whacking phase in their teens (myself included) and have moved on to other genres. 

[David Scott]

On 8/15/2020 at 7:42 PM, Rodney Dangerduck said:

But please note that her bonus was +10% without the Charisma spell.  So the net gain to her Communications skills from the Charisma spell is +20%.

I keep modifiers and skills separate precisely for this reason. 

[Bill the barbarian]

8 hours ago, lordabdul said:

I totally agree -- like we said above already. But that doesn't explain why it's this way around (more important skills get smaller bonuses) and not the other way around (more important skills get the bigger spells and thus bigger bonuses)... I can come up with some lame in-world explanations ("minds are harder to move than flesh, even for gods") but I was asking specifically in terms of game design rationale. My guess is that it would break the game[1] but I'm not sure.

 

Well, if the important spells had those 200 percent skills you would have very little use for the unimportant (I suppose you mean killing) skills. Again, a 200 hundred in killing a few people vs a couple hundred in changing the lives of all in a Principality. Seems that for the level of crunchiness RQ combat achieves, it works better that the death dealer has a few hundred in attacking vs the one seducer having a few hundred in preventing the attacks from all the death dealers friends and allies ever being needed.

[Bill the barbarian]

10 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

Seriously, do you guys play FRP games so that you can negotiate treaties for your superiors?  Or so you can whack monsters?

 

Not DandD surely... but RQ,

OH, YEAH!

9 hours ago, Jeff said:

One of the best sessions I have had in years was exactly that - the players negotiating a treaty between Prince Argrath and Queen Samastina. Fantastic fun for everyone.

YEP!

[Lordabdul]

5 hours ago, David Scott said:

I keep modifiers and skills separate precisely for this reason. 

Yep, and I think that's one of the couple things for which the official character sheet isn't helping players. I also really don't like these table-based skill category modifiers because they slow down play quite a lot after a stat-enhancing spell, while the player fiddles with the "Each +4" bonuses to recompute the appropriate skill modifiers. It probably helps to have a good auto-calc character sheet here but we don't play with them when we play in person. IMHO this type of crunch/math should be confined to character creation and character improvement... I've been toying for a while with the idea to replace most of these stat-enhancing spells with spells that give straight bonuses (to skills, to damage bonus, etc).

As for the example at hand, I think we were talking about a CHA 17 character casting Charisma? She has a natural Communication modifier of +10%. Charisma boosts her to CHA 34, which is... err... +25%, so Charisma is only giving +15% here. If the character had CHA 18, she would still have +10% as her natural modifier, with a boosted CHA of 36, which gives a modifier of, hum, juuuust enough to get +30%, hence the +20% net gain from the spell. So except for characters with the highest CHA scores, the Charisma spell just gives +15%. I remember Jason Durall saying in the past that as a GM, he gives at least +/-20% to situational roll modifiers because anything less isn't meaningful enough. This means Charisma isn't very meaningful by itself for most characters.... (I'm being a bit cheeky here, since it obviously helps by... 15%... but you get my point).

Also note that CHA 18 is either extreeeeemely rare as per RAW, or just extremely (one "e") rare with some common house rules (re-roll 1s or roll 4 dice).... A player can only reasonably hope to get CHA 18 if the group is using point-buy or reallocatable-points house rules (which, I suppose, are optional rules that will show up in the GM guide, similar to CoC 7e's alternate character creation rules, but probably nobody new to BRP would know to do?). Even a CHA 17 character is quite notable in those regards.

A more reasonable CHA 15 or 16 character (which should already be considered a very charismatic character! and a very lucky stat roll!) gets +5% natural modifier, with a boosted CHA of 30/32 which gives... +20%/+25%, for a net +15%/+20% gain. So for the purposes of Charisma, CHA 15 gets you +15% (total +20%), CHA 16 gets you +20% (total +25%), CHA 17 gets you +15% (total +25%), CHA 18 gets you +20% (total +30%). Weird eh? I guess I'll recommend CHA 16 when possible (i.e. when using a point buy system... which is how it should be anyway).

Edited August 17, 2020 by lordabdul

[Shiningbrow]

On 8/15/2020 at 11:32 PM, David Scott said:

In one game, Yanioth's player got very frustrated when quizzing a Lunar priestess they had captured. All of her rolls to get info out of her were failing, until she realised that the lunar priestess had also cast Charisma and was trying to get them to let her go

This is the whole point of the thread... 

If it's realised (during or after) that magic was used to influence the situation against them, do the PCs (or even NPCs) get to basically ignore the results of the rolls? 

You've just said "yes", whereas most other posts would say "no".

[Runeblogger]

On 8/17/2020 at 4:31 AM, lordabdul said:

That's actually one of the sore points of BRP for me... maybe I'm missing something? It's not uncommon, indeed, that I ask for, say, a Fast-Talk roll, and the player realizes they don't have it, so instead they ask for a CHA roll... a more common one is in CoC, where I ask for a Throw roll, and the player asks for a DEX roll instead. I'm more than willing to let the player roll but then, what's the point of having the skill? Is it only worth having a skill if it's higher than Stat*3 or Stat*5, since you can replace it with a raw stat roll? Or maybe you play the scene differently with a stat roll vs a skill roll? If that's the case, what's your approach to differentiate the two rolls?

(in my dreams I rejig the BRP SRD to make all rolls StatMod+Skill, but that's a big change)

I fully agree with you on this. I believe an appropriate skill should always get you a better degree of success than a Characteristic x5 roll. Otherwise, why invest in your skills?

So, if two characters are negotiating and one just rolls CHAx5 and the other her skill of Fast Talk or whatever, the one using the skill should win if both get the same level of success.

[David Scott]

54 minutes ago, Shiningbrow said:

This is the whole point of the thread... 

If it's realised (during or after) that magic was used to influence the situation against them, do the PCs (or even NPCs) get to basically ignore the results of the rolls? 

You've just said "yes", whereas most other posts would say "no".

It has to be in the context of the story.

Firstly the players say they want to happen. The player in real life may be much better at expressing what they want to get out of the situation. I've played a lot of HeroQuest Glorantha, so even in RQG I get players to frame the contest and say what they want the outcome to be. However their adventurer might not be so good and has a low skill, so regardless of how much talking and roleplay they do, the adventurer roll is the final hurdle. This is also helpful with less talkative players with highly skilled adventurers. If they succeed, the player's rhetoric has laid out what they were doing. If they fail, the opponent is not convinced and their story path wins. If a draw, they talk themselves to a stand still.

In the above example, the conversation went something like this:

What do you want to get out of quizzing the Lunar priestess?

I'd like to know if the garrison had families with them when they withdrew? We don't want to cause any suffering 

How are you going to do this?

(conversation runs between them)...

That sounds like a reasonable conversation, she rebuts you by saying that they'll all be killed anyway and that you should at least let her go so she can die with dignity with her people.

Yanioth casts Charisma (as does the priestess) Opposed roll - it's a draw, neither makes any headway.

There can't be a second roll as there is no change in circumstances.

Yanioth inspires herself with the Earth (as does the priestess with the Moon rune),

I ask what that does to change the situation, Yanioth's player says "I call on Ernalda to insure the safety of the families", the Lunar priestess says by the will of the goddess, you must do the right thing (this is an asymmetric exchange, Yanioth wants to know where the garrison is, the priestess want's to be let go, to return to her people)

Second roll allowed - it's a draw. I'm forcing the other players to make passion roles as they are being affected by the magical fallout of the situation.

Yanioth's player can't roll again, as she needs a change in circumstances. She casts Dismiss Magic 2, knocking down the Lunar priestess's Charisma.

and says, you are my prisoner and depending on how you act now will affect what happens to those families. Ernalda is merciful, but Ernalda does what is needed for her own people.

Third roll allowed - Charisma gone. Yanioth's success beats the Lunar priestess's failure. she reveals the details on the group.

(this is a shortened version of events)

So in the end with the opposing Charisma gone the opposed roll allowed Yanioth to succeed, the player didn't just say I ignore that.

If everyone in the game understands that everyone uses all the advantages, then the players have to use other methods to their advantage. Using Dismiss Magic is a fair way to do it. They didn't use dispel magic as they didn't have it and it's takes time to cast in conversation.

 

[Bill the barbarian]

On 8/17/2020 at 11:57 AM, lordabdul said:

Yep, and I think that's one of the couple things for which the official character sheet isn't helping players. I also really don't like these table-based skill category modifiers because they slow down play quite a lot after a stat-enhancing spell, while the player fiddles with the "Each +4" bonuses to recompute the appropriate skill modifiers. It probably helps to have a good auto-calc character sheet here but we don't play with them when we play in person. IMHO this type of crunch/math should be confined to character creation and character improvement... I've been toying for a while with the idea to replace most of these stat-enhancing spells with spells that give straight bonuses (to skills, to damage bonus, etc).

 

RQ 3 was a nicer fit for this, as the formula was a lot easier to remember than the tables of today (in fact tables are unintuitively not good for speed, the table is meant to make it easy as there is nothing needing to be to remembered, alas if you do not have to remember the tables not only do you not remember but the table can be set up to not be intuitive and they are). In the day, my parties would figure this out (stat changes due to magic) before and include it on custom sheets. I see that the adventure Yozarian's Bandit Ducks did this, as well. Way to go boys!

 

On 8/17/2020 at 11:57 AM, lordabdul said:

Also note that CHA 18 is either extreeeeemely rare as per RAW, or just extremely (one "e") rare with some common house rules (re-roll 1s or roll 4 dice).... A player can only reasonably hope to get CHA 18 if the group is using point-buy or reallocatable-points house rules (which, I suppose, are optional rules that will show up in the GM guide, similar to CoC 7e's alternate character creation rules, but probably nobody new to BRP would know to do?). Even a CHA 17 character is quite notable in those regards.

 

Yes. I am seriously awaiting the release of the GMs book which I hope will address this.So as I was typing this I asked myself, why am I so sure the alternative method is not in the rules and why do I keep harping on the coming GM book having the answer? Are all, it as been a few moths since reading this, so I open my pdf and: 

Quote

The Gamemaster’s Guide contains optional methods of characteristic generation, and the gamemaster is free to come up with their own methods or point values as desired. It is strongly recommended that all adventurers use the same method of determination.

—from the RQ RiG page 53. 

Cheers

[Lordabdul]

4 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

If it's realised (during or after) that magic was used to influence the situation against them, do the PCs (or even NPCs) get to basically ignore the results of the rolls? 

It's not about ignoring rolls, it's just about knowing if the person in front of you is using magic, and what to do about it.

1 hour ago, David Scott said:

Yanioth casts Charisma (as does the priestess) Opposed roll - it's a draw, neither makes any headway.

You said previously that "All of her rolls to get info out of her were failing, until she realised that the lunar priestess had also cast Charisma", so it sounds like you did not make the player/PC aware that the priestess was using Charisma -- so in effect, people don't know that magic is involved until they can deduce it for themselves? Did you however make any mention that the prisoner's demeanor or even appearance was changing, as a hint that she had cast magic? Or did you just not say anything?

I think there are basically 3 ways to handle it as a GM: either say nothing and let the players figure it out, or give some "in-world" hints, or just flat out say that the NPC is casting some spell.

For example in combat:

1. Nothing
   • The enemy runs over and cuts your character's limb. Maybe with a Scan roll or something you could have seen the NPC focus briefly on some inscription on the hilt of their sword, and deduced that they had cast Bladesharp, but that's too late.
   • People might argue back and forth about whether Bladesharp has a visible magical effect, but many other spells (including Rune spells) are basically invisible. For instance, someone casting Arouse Passion might briefly take on the appearance of Ernalda, but their target wouldn't visibly change, except that they seem more passionate.
2. In-world hints
   • The GM describes that the enemy's blade is glowing (Bladesharp maybe?) or that their face is transfixed and focused on you (Axe Trance? Berserker? Just some crazy NPC with a high Hate(You) passion?)
   • Depending on how little details the GM gives, it might be unclear exactly which spell it is -- and that's probably what the GM wants.
3. Meta
   • The GM says "the enemy has cast magic on their sword", or even flat out "the enemy has cast Bladesharp".

I assume most people do option 2 in most cases. Maybe option 3a (not 3b) if the GM is running out of inspiration.

So similarly, during social encounters:

1. Nothing
   • You just fail your rolls and wonder if the NPC has high stats, or if they have cast magic. Just in case, you cast Dispel Magic.
2. In-world hints
   • The GM describes how the NPC smiles, and her eyes turning green. For a few seconds, her hair looks like snakes wrapping themselves around her neck. Time slows down and you hear Hendrix's "Foxy Lady" playing in the background.
   • You're not sure what the NPC did, but that looks like Earth priestess magic, so you cast your own magic.
3. Meta
   • The GM flat out says that NPC is casting Charisma.

Unless @David Scott left out parts of his game, it sounds like he did option 1 here. Again, I would probably do option 2 myself, but keeping it very short. Knowing my players, and based on the fact that I often add little descriptions like these in many scenes, I'd say there's a 40% chance they still don't catch up right away on the fact that the NPC used magic.

Edited August 19, 2020 by lordabdul

[Bill the barbarian]

 

 

8 hours ago, lordabdul said:

• The GM describes that the enemy's blade is glowing (Bladesharp maybe?) or that their face is transfixed and focused on you (Axe Trance? Berserker? Just some crazy NPC with a high Hate(You) passion?)
•  

What’s wrong with saying magic has been cast and saying no more....worked for me for the span of 4 decades. If you wish to  know the magic, cast the appropriate spell or as we told the dissenter’s “no whining!” We were not that mean, but if there was a solution...

 

8 hours ago, lordabdul said:

You said previously that "All of her rolls to get info out of her were failing, until she realised that the lunar priestess had also cast Charisma", so it sounds like you did not make the player/PC aware that the priestess was using Charisma -- so in effect, people don't know that magic is involved until they can deduce it for themselves? Did you however make any mention that the prisoner's demeanor or even appearance was changing, as a hint that she had cast magic? Or did you just not say anything?

And here, though I have played many other games than RQ this is where I cut my teeth. I just assume all have magic (an "orlanthi all” of course), everyone can and probably will cast magic, Ergo, If I cannot achieve a goal and there is no obvious reason, well I will have to assume there is probably magic preventing me from doing so. How do I overcome this obstacle. We’ll, if I have magic... (did you know a sword is a magical archetype of many different truths?)Again, note I assume that magic is involved if un seen well there is probably a reason for that too

 

8 hours ago, lordabdul said:

1. • The GM says "the enemy has cast magic on their sword", or even flat out "the enemy has cast Bladesharp".

 

Works for many, many many game tables. Does not work for me, if  I have a say but each to their own,

 

8 hours ago, lordabdul said:

So similarly, during social encounters:

Simply. at some point the (extremely clever) player will have to note that there is one more  button open then there should be, the individual's opposite is touching hair far more than should be common. And there is that certain pleasant fragrance of meadows after the rain (the clever person is smelling ozone from the cute quote from a poet that was in reality subtle casting of a spell not an evocative telling of a fragrant poem about a rainfall). This can happen from the enchantment of one who you are interested in via magic, whether of a mundane or a mystical origin is difficult to say. In fact, having felt this a few times I will not say that I know.

One must decide for oneself how to do this, I personally ask my players to suspend our reality, cloak themselves in Glorantha’s much more interesting hyper-rune-laced-magical-realty and ignore that it’s the dice, or a story or my bullshitting them that allows them to accept a spell has been cast they did not see, deal with it. (no whining )...

Unless...

Edited August 20, 2020 by Bill the barbarian