Only one POW-gain roll per season?

[Godlearner]

12 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

Toss a Slow at a runaway cow? Befuddle a pig that struggles at slaughter? Disrupt pests? 🙂

Befuddle does not work on animals as they no longer have INT. Slow and Disrupt may work, although in the games we play to actually get a check or a POW gain roll the action has to "matter". I may give it to you for the cow, but a pest's POW is likely too low for it actually matter. Prevents check hunting.

[Kloster]

25 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

If I increase the Worship score to, say, 75% (spending of 5 MPs), they get an average of 14~15 POW after 10 years (depending on their sacrificing). They get to 17 after 19 years.

 

17 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

You get pretty big temple, holy day and sacrifice bonuses. Minor Temple and HHD/Sacred Time gives you a +50% even without any sacrifices (and MP sacrifices are essentially free) or augments. Assume 75-95% chance of success. Plus, since they keep succeeding, they get experience checks, and it snowballs from there.

I'm counting 95% success because of the modifiers Akorahil describes and because I don't see a reason not to push to 100% or over because more MP augment your score and more importantly makes your god happy. This is purely religious fervor (my personal way is to go to around 120% with my characters). And I am not even counting Scotty's rules that told us that tithes count.

 

15 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

Toss a Slow at a runaway cow? Befuddle a pig that struggles at slaughter? Disrupt pests?

I was not even counting those not so egregious munchkins tricks. I barely counted 1 raid done or 1 raid received or 1 spirit encountered per year. With those (and disruption against rodents is for me a logical use), you have your 6 rolls per year.

 

31 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

This however taps into how different GMs interpret MP spending, how "religious" vs "traditionalist" their Heortlings are, and so on. I'll leave this up to individual GMs to figure out, and therefore whether they need to alter their Glorantha, their NPC rules, or both.

Agreed.

[Kloster]

2 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Befuddle does not work on animals as they no longer have INT. Slow and Disrupt may work, although in the games we play to actually get a check or a POW gain roll the action has to "matter". I may give it to you for the cow, but a pest's POW is likely too low for it actually matter. Prevents check hunting.

As far as I remember, disrupting rodents was described in an official RQ product, and was one of the reason most farmers had disruption.

For the POW of pests, in the bestiary, almost all living creatures and animals have 3D6 POW. Some have 2D6, the rubble runners have 1D6+6, and some have more than 3D6. We can assume a basic rodent has 2D6.

[Kloster]

11 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Slow and Disrupt may work, although in the games we play to actually get a check or a POW gain roll the action has to "matter".

For a farmer or a tenant, a running cow does matter, and a cow has 3D6 POW, same as the farmer, so it should count.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Kloster
typing mistake

[Lordabdul]

36 minutes ago, Akhôrahil said:

You get pretty big temple, holy day and sacrifice bonuses. Minor Temple and HHD/Sacred Time gives you a +50% even without any sacrifices (and MP sacrifices are essentially free) or augments. Assume 75-95% chance of success. Plus, since they keep succeeding, they get experience checks, and it snowballs from there.

Oh I missed those, thanks!

[Godlearner]

13 minutes ago, Kloster said:

For a farmer or a tenant, a running cow does matter, and a cow has 3D6 POW, same as the farmer, so it should count.

Right, but if you want to pet it and its tries to move away and you cast Slow ... that does not matter.

Quote

As far as I remember, disrupting rodents was described in an official RQ product, and was one of the reason most farmers had disruption.

Yes, but it does not mean you get a POW gain roll for it.

Quote

For the POW of pests, in the bestiary, almost all living creatures and animals have 3D6 POW. Some have 2D6, the rubble runners have 1D6+6, and some have more than 3D6. We can assume a basic rodent has 2D6.

Our rule of thumb is that if its 10 or more points below you than it does not matter.

[Kloster]

3 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Our rule of thumb is that if its 10 or more points below you than it does not matter.

On average, a farmer has 11 and a rodent would have 7. That makes a gap of 4, not 10.

5 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Yes, but it does not mean you get a POW gain roll for it.

Right.

5 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Right, but if you want to pet it and its tries to move away and you cast Slow ... that does not matter.

If it is running away and you don't want to loose a cow, for me, it does matter.

Whatever, my counts were not including that kind of rolls, only High Holy days, sacred time, raids and the occasional spirits.

[French Desperate WindChild]

for me the "average joe" stats explanation doesn't count a lot, I like @Nick Brooke answer

 

My issue is more about known heroes

After 10 years (glorantha time), should every PC be largely stronger than Ballista (we have the stat) ?   Able to challenge Ralzakark, the Red Emperor, Argrath ? crimson bat, ... Orlanth ?

 

[Bill the barbarian]

2 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

After 10 years (glorantha time), should every PC be largely stronger than Ballista (we have the stat) ?   Able to challenge Ralzakark, the Red Emperor, Argrath ? crimson bat, ... Orlanth ?

 

An alynx in a really foul mood?

[Dissolv]

7 minutes ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

After 10 years (glorantha time), should every PC be largely stronger than Ballista (we have the stat) ?   Able to challenge Ralzakark, the Red Emperor, Argrath ? crimson bat, ... Orlanth ?

Entirely depends on the campaign that you are running.  My current one started very, very low powered.  The character's relative power to the more storied members of their clans is a constant theme that drives the players as their relationships to the cast of NPCs (Red Cow region!) has been changing over the course of the adventures.   The campaign has heavily followed the seasons to pace the lifestyle and culture of the hill people, and the players have consciously chose to burn multiple seasons in "training montages" rather than risk the options for more serious adventures.  All are new to Glorantha and Runequest both, so they played it very cautiously at first.

We meet once a week and I allow experience checks, and POW gain rolls if they meet the conditions at the end of every meeting, unless they are obviously in the middle of a gnarly adventure like their three week epic in Snakepipe Hollow.  The very first character made Sage Lord just three weeks ago, and one character has become a thane in great stead for the Two Pine clan.  This has taken nearly 30 sessions.  (holy cow, has it been that long already?)

The first set of adventures were designed around showcasing the world, the game mechanics, and setting up the characters and role playing possibilities.  They players generally only took action when a leader-esqe NPC took them, and formed sort of an "out of luck" club, as their families were mostly all dead, and Chief Broddi was against raids and trouble-making of all sorts that allow the Orlanthi youth to make their mark.  Gradually the lack of opportunities grated on the players, so they started taking matters into their own hands.  One player famously stole Red cows from his own clan every adventure, and used them to bribe various powers around the region to distract the Lunars away from the Hill of Orlanth Victorious, so that he and other clansmen could worship. 

By the time their characters were significant threats, having gained full body armor, good magic, and significant skills (not just fighting -- they are great at communications in general each character has his own set of useful skills), they turned into significant regional power players as well.  They boasted in the halls, took on dangerous quests, including bold forays into the Woods of the Dead and Snakepipe Hollow.   They gained a great deal of reputation, and started fitting into leadership slots in their society.  Recently this has culminated with a restoration of the Two Pine Battle magics, and a loose alliance with Red Cow.  They have come out against Lunar occupation, but have held the rebel factions in check as "the time is not yet right". 

There was a game session where the players were invited to a significant planning session with the various factions of the rebellion.  They could have gone to the East with Tosti Runefriend to learn eastern draconic magic, or gone south to aid King Broyan, or pledge service to Kallyr Starbrow herself.  After weighing the options they decided that the East was too far with so many pressing demands at home (plus they lacked the Guided Teleport to return quickly), going to war in Hendrikiland would cause them to be just so much meat in the meatgrinder, and aiding Kallyr would reduce them right back to nameless torchbearers, but in a much higher level setting.  Ultimately they chose to become regional power players and are working actively in clan and tribal politics, learning as they go that it isn't as easy as it seemed when they were mere youths...

The power levels of the characters are held in check not by holding back POW and exp rolls, but powerful artifacts and opportunities to Heroquest for "gamebreaking" rewards.   This is still in the prelude of the Hero Wars, after all.  They are getting hints of power, but havn't had their shot yet.   The plot is mainly story driven, and the characters' rise to power in their home region has been very rewarding for the players, even as they are forced to take more consequential decisions.  About once ever five or six sessions I bust out a big epic adventure, and the players have opportunity to make serious gains then.  However so far this has been things like: A PoW crystal.  A necklace with a spell matrix on it.  A chance to learn secrets of some lunar sorcerous practice.    Soon, it being nearly 1620, all sorts of things are going to bust loose and I expect that one character will make Wind Lord status.   If they can "master" the local political situation, then they can access the support and magics of two Clans -- the Red Cow and the Two Pine.  From there they may stay with a political campaign, or choose to branch off on a more significant small party outing.  (Perhaps Eleven lights!)  At that point it may be possible that one or more items of significance, or heroic powers be earned. 

Judging by this, I think that my players might be ready to walk into the very start of one of @soltakss 's campaigns in around the 50 week mark!

[Scorus]

1 hour ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

After 10 years (glorantha time), should every PC be largely stronger than Ballista (we have the stat) ?   Able to challenge Ralzakark, the Red Emperor, Argrath ? crimson bat, ... Orlanth ?

Yes, this is an issue. In my game the players tended to start with low POW, so some of them still only have 3 rune points. But I have one, after only 7 seasons and 2 sacred times, who has 10! That means he has gotten to the point that he doesn't get them all back every season (I don't allow replenishing on associated cult holy days) and that is the only thing keeping him from tossing them around in a rather unbalancing fashion.

The NPCs tend to reflect a significant under-appreciation of how quickly POW will accumulate for an adventuring character! Perhaps there needs to be more things that one has to sacrifice POW for?

[French Desperate WindChild]

9 hours ago, Bill the barbarian said:

An alynx in a really foul mood?

You will say that I m a bad GM, but I will never let a pc win again this kind of opponent... Yelm maybe, but a little cat ? nah.... it s a fantasy world, but it is a (about) simulationist game too. I have some limits !

[French Desperate WindChild]

9 hours ago, Scorus said:

The NPCs tend to reflect a significant under-appreciation of how quickly POW will accumulate for an adventuring character! Perhaps there needs to be more things that one has to sacrifice POW for?

I think that's the point. It will solve a lot of things (from a simulation) if there was described some "for the community, without any gain for the character" POW sacrifice. It's explain joe and named pc point. I don't say that pc must sacrifice. They are adventurers, they can be "fringes" but if they want to have more regular activity (as worker or as leader) they may have to "donate" sometimes (when bad omen ?)

Heroquest canon rules could bring some reason too : the clan support heroquesters (pc or npc) sacrificing permanent pow or something like that

 

9 hours ago, Dissolv said:

Entirely depends on the campaign that you are running. 

For sure yes: GM can decide to "accelerate" progression or not. Players can decide to play hero or not.

But I m talking about the consistency of the world

If a gm manages the divergence it is not an issue, but if the divergence is not managed, that may ruin the play

To explain my perspective, let's talk about "Bambi" GM, who carrefully observes the rules and the published scenario.

GM starts his campaign with the rainbow mount scenario (I m so old ... ) as RQG pc creation give enough power to manage it (Bambi can be both smart and respectfull of the rules ) , one of his pc becomes king of the newtlings. He decides to pay an enchanter to make a good weapon and order all the newt community to sacrifice 2 POW to the weapon and... that is done the campaign is broken, a new pc (2-3 sessions) owns a 100POW enchant.

Note as a player I would probably become merchant explaining that I will sell the magical mushroom and gain so much lunars * than I can hire 100 guards with me for next adventures

Few published scenarii will be possible. Few published NPC will be serious opponent.

that is not an issue with @soltakss -like GM. the GM knows where he/she goes and adapts/creates rules.

 

I think that after the game mechanics and the "make the game fun", whe may have somewere a kind of "regular GM way of life", giving some info about where the table is and how to manage it. A good example was the dwarf campaign in elder races (well the french version I think that is the same advenutre) when the scenario explain that there are a lot diamonds but few merchant will identify them so a great wealth but at the end of the day an only virtual wealth

 

Edited January 13, 2021 by French Desperate WindChild

[Lordabdul]

20 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

You get pretty big temple, holy day and sacrifice bonuses. Minor Temple and HHD/Sacred Time gives you a +50% even without any sacrifices (and MP sacrifices are essentially free) or augments. Assume 75-95% chance of success. Plus, since they keep succeeding, they get experience checks, and it snowballs from there.

So for anybody who still cares, with 95% Worship, the average person would get to POW 16 at 10 years (with only 3 RPs... POW 15 with 5 RPs), but struggle to ever get to POW 18 (which is fine, not everybody wants to be a Rune Lord/Priest).

The typical Colymar militia (3 RPs, POW 12) would have 3 to 5 years of experience under this model (I used a more opportunities for POW gain than the average person).

19 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

for me the "average joe" stats explanation doesn't count a lot, I like @Nick Brooke answer

My issue is more about known heroes

Both are interesting to me. I'm still going to stat NPCs with my gut, as always, but knowing whether that's below/on par/above what the rules "dictate" provides some interesting insights... when I look at this kind of thread and ignore the "rules-as-written must be obeyed no matter what!" posts, I can still often find a few little nuggets of world-building that make NPCs feel more alive, because reconciling the world with the system often leads to some creative thinking.

As for heroes, Leika Black Spear might be in her 15th to 20th year as an adult according to my spreadsheet, assuming the maximum amount of Worship and POW gain rolls per year (since she's adventuring like crazy) and depending on how she sacrificed to get her big pile of RPs and what was her original POW at birth (I gave her 16). That seems consistent with her timeline (she was exiled in 1613 after Starbrow's rebellion, which means back then she was already "big enough" to be causing trouble). You could make her a couple years older if she sacrificed POW for other things in her lifetime (which she probably did, such as establishing a link with the wyter).

One thing occurs to me looking at my spreadsheet's progression for adventuring PCs and NPCs like Leika: with the diminishing chances of increasing POW when POW gets higher, you have to spend about a year without doing any sacrifices at all in order to get to 18 and reach Rune Level. Then you need to wait another year to get to 19 so you can start sacrificing again without going under the threshold. Something to keep in mind for players who get to Rune Levels... although I'm curious to hear about some practical experiences instead of my theoretical spreadsheet.

18 hours ago, Scorus said:

The NPCs tend to reflect a significant under-appreciation of how quickly POW will accumulate for an adventuring character! Perhaps there needs to be more things that one has to sacrifice POW for?

Volunteering POW for enchanted items for the clan comes to mind. We had a big thread about this not too long ago, but I was reminded of it by reading the example in RQG p251 where Yanioth has to limit her enchantment because she can't find any volunteers to help her at the time. But I don't think it happens enough to make a significant dent in the general population's POW. I imagine it's like being called for jury duty: it may happen to you once in a lifetime.

A more common one may be sacrificing POW for the clan's wyter (RQG p287). If I make the average person sacrifice for RPs once every 3 years, and for the wyter also once every 3 years (on different years), they only get to POW 14 after 10 years.

I'd love to hear about other things average people do on a regular basis for the clan!

Edited January 13, 2021 by lordabdul

[Akhôrahil]

56 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

One thing occurs to me looking at my spreadsheet's progression for adventuring PCs and NPCs like Leika: with the diminishing chances of increasing POW when POW gets higher, you have to spend about a year without doing any sacrifices at all in order to get to 18 and reach Rune Level. Then you need to wait another year to get to 19 so you can start sacrificing again without going under the threshold. Something to keep in mind for players who get to Rune Levels... although I'm curious to hear about some practical experiences instead of my theoretical spreadsheet.

Apprentice Shamans have a truly massive advantage when it comes to getting to POW 18.

[Scorus]

2 hours ago, lordabdul said:

So for anybody who still cares, with 95% Worship, the average person would get to POW 16 at 10 years (with only 3 RPs... POW 15 with 5 RPs), but struggle to ever get to POW 18 (which is fine, not everybody wants to be a Rune Lord/Priest).

This reminds me that house rules make a big difference in the discussion. My comments are based on my game, where you only get a skill check in something if your roll would have succeeded without bonuses. So if you are at 35% worship but bonuses take you to 95%, then you are only going to get the skill check and POW roll if you roll under 35% (though you will get the greater rune point recovery, etc. based on the 95%). This reduces the number of POW gain rolls and the number of Worship skill checks (though several of my players use one of their four extra skills each season on it).

[PhilHibbs]

1 hour ago, Scorus said:

This reminds me that house rules make a big difference in the discussion. My comments are based on my game, where you only get a skill check in something if your roll would have succeeded without bonuses. So if you are at 35% worship but bonuses take you to 95%, then you are only going to get the skill check and POW roll if you roll under 35%...

That makes sense for the skill check, but not giving the POW tick for a successful worship is quite different. You worshipped, it was successful, you made contact with divinity, you should get all the benefits. A skill tick is not one of those benefits, so that's fine to houserule, but a POW tick is.

Edited January 13, 2021 by PhilHibbs

[Kloster]

3 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Both are interesting to me. I'm still going to stat NPCs with my gut, as always, but knowing whether that's below/on par/above what the rules "dictate" provides some interesting insights... when I look at this kind of thread and ignore the "rules-as-written must be obeyed no matter what!" posts, I can still often find a few little nuggets of world-building that make NPCs feel more alive, because reconciling the world with the system often leads to some creative thinking.

Completely agree.

3 hours ago, lordabdul said:

One thing occurs to me looking at my spreadsheet's progression for adventuring PCs and NPCs like Leika: with the diminishing chances of increasing POW when POW gets higher, you have to spend about a year without doing any sacrifices at all in order to get to 18 and reach Rune Level. Then you need to wait another year to get to 19 so you can start sacrificing again without going under the threshold. Something to keep in mind for players who get to Rune Levels... although I'm curious to hear about some practical experiences instead of my theoretical spreadsheet.

Figures seems correct. Don't forget the POW gain bonus for priests (Leika is High Priest of Orlanth Rex).

3 hours ago, lordabdul said:

A more common one may be sacrificing POW for the clan's wyter (RQG p287). If I make the average person sacrifice for RPs once every 3 years, and for the wyter also once every 3 years (on different years), they only get to POW 14 after 10 years.

It seems a correct usage for 6 POW spent and a few POW gain.

[Dissolv]

16 hours ago, French Desperate WindChild said:

He decides to pay an enchanter to make a good weapon and order all the newt community to sacrifice 2 POW to the weapon

I think this is where we diverge.  The way I run it, the players have to sacrifice to the community.  Mainly with their blood, sweat, and time, but the community needs them to solve big problems.  It doesn't exist to empower the players. 

A successful adventure does tend to leave the players in a better position than before.  Maybe they had to quest for the Mcguffin of Might to deal with some threat or other.  When the threat is dealt with, sometimes they wind up with Mcguffin for a good deal of time.  Sometimes not.  But the clans people my players are interacting with cannot be "magic taxed" by the PC's, nor do they give out clan treasures willy nilly.  They may loan the players one for a specific purpose, but the items, power, and wealth are the clan's, not the players'.

Pre-existing items, like the Black Spear, are things normally wielded by NPC's, or retired PC's willing to leave the adventuring life and act full time as the defender of the clan.  This is a fine and fitting last chapter to a story.  Which bring me to my other point.

PC's should die. 

Yeah, I said it.  Clearly not too often, as that ruins the story.  But think about it from a story point of view.   For all his might and his labors, Hercules dies in the end.  Perseus has the one great adventure and then essentially retires to be king.  Every Viking hero dies essentially, even the gods.  Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser get old -- the Grey Mouser loses a hand, and they settle down on Rime Island.  Conan gets old and goes on "one last adventure" in Conan of the Isles. 

In a long running campaign, there should not be an endless acquisition of un-losable power like in a video game.  Equipment should come and go -- even Arkat's unbreakable sword is destroyed.  Heroquests may demand sacrifice, real sacrifice from our heroes, such as some of their strength, or their most favored weapon.  True heroes rise to the occasion, usually in defense of their homes and communities.   If you can get a good "feeling" of the community and the players really care about it, you may find them giving pow crystals and minor items away to up and coming NPC's that catch their eye.  It isn't about building a more and more powerful character.  The character becomes more powerful through acting in harmony with his role as a champion/philosopher/king/hero during the story.  The less linear this is, the more real it feels, and the more you move away from D&D style leveling.  Some adventures should wind up with your players making a net gain out of the deal.  Others they should lose something.  There should be risk of both, gradually tightening in around the players as the hero wars progresses.  It may feel like fate, or a doom, but it really should be "you pay your money and you take your chances."  No one made the players try that dangerous Heroquest.  But if they choose to do so, there must be equivalent risk along with the potential for reward.  How you manage that is very much up to your style of GMing.  To help the players understand and manage the risk, I use a LOT of foreshadowing, storytelling within a story, and try to give them a chance to converse with many different NPCs.  Clues to this adventure, and other snippets to be used later are liberally sprinkled around.   Given 4-6 sessions, I can usually build to a pretty epic adventure where it all comes to a head and the players pull the trigger on their plan, and we see if it all comes together with the players standing tall at the end......or not.   Quite a few times my players have "noped" their way from the main fray, and very often they try to resolve things without resorting to violence.  But sometimes that werewolf pack just isn't taking no for an answer, and so they pick themselves up, stand in front of the farm steads, grit their teeth, and we see what we shall see.

[French Desperate WindChild]

6 hours ago, Dissolv said:

I think this is where we diverge.  The way I run it, the players have to sacrifice to the community.  Mainly with their blood, sweat, and time, but the community needs them to solve big problems.  It doesn't exist to empower the players

 

facing this situation :

a pc is the hero-king of  a poor newtling community (and the newtlings, in this scenario, are not introduced as smart or rebellious),

he just killed their like-god ennemy as the prophecy annouced it centuries ago.
I was not talking about me, I just said that  new gm (this scenario is for new characters, so why not new gm) may not find a way to refuse this munchkinery.

 

I think we don't diverge,

If, as GM, I was in the situation, I would use the god cards, some elder of the community would have some dream: ok the pc is an hero, ok he is elected as king but he is making a too big mistake so the newtlings must refuse to serve him (a kind of "impeachment") so no pow sacrifice.

 

And I fully agree with your quoted sentence, that exactly what I think and I think this view is the balanced view of RQG, but it is not clearly explain. And I don't say it must.

I m for the GM choice, but an  inexperimented GM has less choices than other, and it is particulary true in a so rich world than glorantha, where rules are more focus on players than on balance of the world.

So it could be good to have somewhere some gm helps to explain what is behind the rules (ok you can have great enchantment, but the "standard" is not a lot of great enchantments, and how you have some example to manage it)  a GM can for sure diverge but this way may impact the difficulty of other published scenario. GM must be conscious of their decision. That is my point

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Shiningbrow]

On 1/13/2021 at 4:45 AM, Kloster said:

If players are able to spend MP to max their worship rolls, so are NPC

Maybe they haven't read the rulebook that says you can do that???

[Kloster]

5 hours ago, Shiningbrow said:

Maybe they haven't read the rulebook that says you can do that???

Agreed, but the gods nonetheless like to receive more MP, and the priests should at least teach that to childrens, so I expect NPC (at least the religious ones, but in Glorantha, that means a lot of people) to spend more than the 1 or 2 mandatory MP. My characters have always spent more MP than what was necessary to go to 100% (I usually go to about half available MP, keeping the remaining ones in case of problem), and I assume that NPC have also the same kind of behavior. The bonus to Worship roll is just a side effect of the gift to the god, not a goal in itself. The 5 to 6 MP added to the temple and High Holy day (or even Holy day) modifiers are sufficient to push the score of a standard Joe Farmer above 100% naturally, meaning a 95% roll.

[Shiningbrow]

54 minutes ago, Kloster said:

Agreed, but the gods nonetheless like to receive more MP, and the priests should at least teach that to childrens, so I expect NPC (at least the religious ones, but in Glorantha, that means a lot of people) to spend more than the 1 or 2 mandatory MP

I suspect those NPC priests would consider reading the RQG rulebook to be a form of God Learnerism... and so, perhaps they don't teach that to the kids?? (and probably don't know themselves!)

[Akhôrahil]

1 hour ago, Kloster said:

Agreed, but the gods nonetheless like to receive more MP

Another thing that I wonder about is whether the gods and spirits benefit from larger MP sacrifices. Because if they do, then a culture that said "screw it, we won't just sacrifice 2 MPs at holy days, we're going to do 10 MPs instead, and as often as we can!" would actually feed their god/spirit into higher strength at a very marginal personal cost.

Edited January 15, 2021 by Akhôrahil

[Kloster]

3 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

Another thing that I wonder about is whether the gods and spirits benefit from larger MP sacrifices. Because if they do, then a culture that said "screw it, we won't just sacrifice 2 MPs at holy days, we're going to do 10 MPs instead, and as often as we can!" would actually feed their god/spirit into higher strength at a very marginal personal cost.

Frankly, I don't know if the gods benefits of it. I just said they like it. If they do, that may explain how Sartar, that is much smaller in size and population than the Lunar empire, can have such results. A better 'Got mit uns' in effect, so to speak.