Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Quote

What's "Sorcerous Arts"?

Basically things like Intensity, Multispell, Duration, Range (in RQ3 as well as others that where added in different rules such as Ease, Combine, Speed, etc.) All of these manipulation techniques had a % associated with them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I agree.  The natural limit for remembering Sorcery spells should be INT, not Free INT.  But, I like the idea that knowing spirit magic reduces your effective INT as that "connection" to the spirit wo

Indeed we spent several minutes of our session Zero trying to interpret that the text on the spell cost.  The Tables clearly show un-mastered manipulation costing double, and the example shows what ha

I think experienced sorcerers will have created inscriptions for all the spells they know so they can use their full INT to cast them.

Thanks.

2 hours ago, Godlearner said:

That finally worked was getting rid of Free Int

I forgot to also ask: with no more Free INT, what limit or diminishing returns prevent sorcerers from learning all the Rune and Techniques? Basically: what is the justification for schools of magic to exist? (Water magic, Fire magic, etc.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Thanks.

I forgot to also ask: with no more Free INT, what limit or diminishing returns prevent sorcerers from learning all the Rune and Techniques? Basically: what is the justification for schools of magic to exist? (Water magic, Fire magic, etc.)

Each rune and technique still take 1 POW to master.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

couldn't the limitations of free int be overcome by engaging in coven casting, each caster remembers enough of the spell to assist in the casting by focusing on their portion this would allow the casting of huge spells, much like how the Sartar Magical unions and lunar colleges function, an extension of Temple Magic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Godlearner said:

Each rune and technique still take 1 POW to master.

Do you mean you replace "free INT" with "your POW score"? How does that work since POW can go up and down quite a lot during play, as you sacrifice for RPs and such?

Also, note that there are 25 Runes and Techniques in the rulebook (there are more in reality, like Dragonewt Rune and so on but let's ignore those). If you exclude Tap, Chaos, and one side of all the Power Runes, that's 18 points. Sounds to me like there's no reason to have "the super bad-ass Fire Wizard of Mountaintop", because any bad-ass wizard can effectively control all the elements and all the techniques?

(maybe you only use the original POW score? determined old-school with a straight 3D6 roll?)

Edited by lordabdul
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

Do you mean you replace "free INT" with "your POW score"? How does that work since POW can go up and down quite a lot during play, as you sacrifice for RPs and such?

There were two methods proposed, one was to get rid of it completely, one used Spell % /5 as to the amount manipulation which could be done, while another suggested using species maximum (21 for humans) as FREE INT. The next discussion was the limitation of the number of Runes/ Techniques which can be mastered  as these are limited by ones INT.

My personal opinion is that I would not limit those since mastering each requires 1 POW (or you can limit them in the same way as Divine magic that is based on ones CHA), or once again by using the racial maximum INT as the limit, which works out to 9 in total for a human.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

or once again by using the racial maximum INT as the limit, which works out to 9 in total for a human.

Oh I see you would still do the "above 12" threshold thing. Gotcha, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PhilHibbs said:

No, it just costs 1 POW to learn. So it isn't a limit, but it is a cost.

Yes that was my point -- if there's no limit, it's easy to spend 1 POW (as per RAW), regain it, and learn another rune or technique a couple seasons later. And therefore after a while sorcerers would know the vast majority of them. But @Godlearner corrected my misunderstanding, saying that they have other limits in place, both for number of runes/techniques mastered, and for amount of manipulation. Basically, the same rules as RAW but with different limits.

Edited by lordabdul
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, davecake said:

Neither of those have any meta effect, so they just don’t matter as much. Enhance INT makes you better at casting, say, Boon of Kargan Tor, which means a sorcerer with Enhance INT and Boon of Kargan Tor will be able to cast a more powerful damage enhancing spell. Or Dispel it. Or also cast better defences, summon bigger spirits, and just generally be able to cast better spells.  Hell, if Enhance STR or Enhance DEX was really good, the sorcerer with Enhance INT can probably cast more powerful versions of them. 

You're still assuming that other areas don't have an Enhance INT spell... Sure, "Fire" tribes should virtually been guaranteed, but it doesn't exclude others. Take LM as the prime example. Has the spell, doesn't list the Rune.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, davecake said:

Neither of those have any meta effect, so they just don’t matter as much. Enhance INT makes you better at casting, say, Boon of Kargan Tor, which means a sorcerer with Enhance INT and Boon of Kargan Tor will be able to cast a more powerful damage enhancing spell. Or Dispel it. Or also cast better defences, summon bigger spirits, and just generally be able to cast better spells.  Hell, if Enhance STR or Enhance DEX was really good, the sorcerer with Enhance INT can probably cast more powerful versions of them. 

You're still assuming that other areas don't have an Enhance INT spell... Sure, "Fire" tribes should virtually been guaranteed, but it doesn't exclude others. Take LM as the prime example. Has the spell, doesn't list the Rune.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, icebrand said:

I use RQ3 raw for sorcery, with whatever handwaving i need to make the encounters deadlier (since sorcerers in that ruleset are not very deadly compared to other magic users), unless you like your sorcerers to be guys with high stats that hits for high damage, then all you need is MP crystals and high base INT, % casting is irrelevant.

And, with a few careful tweaks, can be used as both a Wizardly system, and as a Shamanistic system.

SDLeary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that if you want to cast big sorcery and not be as limited by free int, you can inscribe the spell in a tome or other.object and infuse it with POW so that each point increases intensity with out impacting required Free Int, so if you inscribe a object with 5 POW you have 5 free points of Intensity to play with that your not constrained by free int. So you can cast a 20 intensity spell but only counts as 15 as far as free int is concerned.  And you can cast the spell through.the object with out having to memorize it.

Edited by Videopete
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Videopete said:

Remember that if you want to cast big sorcery and not be as limited by free int, you can inscribe the spell in a tome or other.object and infuse it with POW so that each point increases intensity with out impacting required Free Int, so if you inscribe a object with 5 POW you have 5 free points of Intensity to play with that your not constrained by free int. So you can cast a 20 intensity spell but only counts as 15 as far as free int is concerned.  And you can cast the spell through.the object with out having to memorize it.

Yes, but consider that before you even start doing it, you would have had to spend somewhere in the order of 5+ POW to master runes and techniques (likely more as you will most likely need Magic point point matrices or spirit bindings) and you begin to realize that is an expensive proposition. Possible, sure, but very expensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Videopete said:

Remember that if you want to cast big sorcery and not be as limited by free int, you can inscribe the spell in a tome or other.

Yep, and I'd argue that sorcerers cast at least as many pre-inscribed (or otherwise prepared) spells as improvised spells when out in the field. Or at least, that's how I'd play it.

2 minutes ago, Videopete said:

so if you inscribe a object with 5 POW you have 5 free points of Intensity to play with

My understanding was that each additional point of POW does pre-manipulate the spell in a certain "set" way. So if you spent 4 additional POW in it to increase the strength, that's how the spell would come out every time. That is, you cannot "redirect" these 4 points of manipulation into range or duration or a mix of everything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Possible, sure, but very expensive.

Or, rather, time consuming. Wizards always play the long game. Which is why full-time wizards are not very playable IMHO (in addition to being somewhat of a premise rejection of Glorantha) unless you do troupe play or shared characters or some other gameplay trick. Part time wizards like sages are more viable.

But it's not that expensive compared to a "normal" character who spends their POW in enchanted items and Rune points. A Bladesharp 4 item or a bound elemental spirit is also going to cost around 4 POW.

Thankfully, POW points in Enchantments don't have to all come from the enchanter. It's probable that inscribed sorcery spells are the same. It helps to have a community to support you.... or some servitors or slaves or prisoners if you're an evil sorcerer in a dank tower.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Or, rather, time consuming. Wizards always play the long game. Which is why full-time wizards are not very playable IMHO (in addition to being somewhat of a premise rejection of Glorantha) unless you do troupe play or shared characters or some other gameplay trick. Part time wizards like sages are more viable.

Only if you stick to the Dragon Pass area. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Godlearner said:

Only if you stick to the Dragon Pass area. 

No, sorcerers all over Glorantha are long game players. Sorcery as Greg Stafford envisioned it is extremely flexible with the potential to be more powerful than anything a Rune or Spirit magician could pull off, but is also extremely time consuming and preferably is done with the support of a school and/or congregation. Sorcery is preemptive, not reactive.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Richard S. said:

No, sorcerers all over Glorantha are long game players. Sorcery as Greg Stafford envisioned it is extremely flexible with the potential to be more powerful than anything a Rune or Spirit magician could pull off, but is also extremely time consuming and preferably is done with the support of a school and/or congregation. Sorcery is preemptive, not reactive.

And we are back to the YGWV. Seems I have been there from the first time I was Greged thirty years ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Godlearner said:

And we are back to the YGWV. Seems I have been there from the first time I was Greged thirty years ago. 

If you want to YGMV how sorcerers work in your Glorantha that's fine, but don't expect RQG's sorcery rules to align with it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Yep, and I'd argue that sorcerers cast at least as many pre-inscribed (or otherwise prepared) spells as improvised spells when out in the field. Or at least, that's how I'd play it.

My understanding was that each additional point of POW does pre-manipulate the spell in a certain "set" way. So if you spent 4 additional POW in it to increase the strength, that's how the spell would come out every time. That is, you cannot "redirect" these 4 points of manipulation into range or duration or a mix of everything.

Even if that's true, it's largely irrelevant. It's for one spell only, and so you'd know exactly what you want to do with it. So it won't be like "OMG(s)*, I wish I hadn't dumped all that POW into Intensity!!!"

Besides which, it'd be highly unusual that you'd want a much longer duration or range without wanting a higher Intensity

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lordabdul said:

Or, rather, time consuming. Wizards always play the long game. Which is why full-time wizards are not very playable IMHO (in addition to being somewhat of a premise rejection of Glorantha) unless you do troupe play or shared characters or some other gameplay trick. Part time wizards like sages are more viable.

I disagree.

While the trope, and probably the mechanics, seem to suggest this (non-adventurers), so too does being a Sage in LM, or an Issaries Priest. However, they obviously still work.

The difference is merely the need to break the stereotype.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Sorcery Q&A page in the Well of Daliath site

"Please be aware that, Sorcery is presented to allow Lhankor Mhy adventurers to be created. Future supplements will detail sorcerers from other cultures and provide more details of the sorcery system. Some elements of the system will likely change to portray other cultures.".

I imagine the current system is just a brief outline to be filled in more comprehensively later on. A lot will change or be clarified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that if free INT goes away, there remains very few incentive to puts points in INT at character creation. Is there any reason to put points in INT at characters creation, but free INT sorcery? I would argue that without free INT, INT would just be like RQ3 Appearance, a useless characteristic that all players ended up minimizing.

With RQG, INT provides skill bonuses, but it is always shadowed by POW in the tables, so that it is almost always better to put the points in POW instead. Int 17 Pow 13 provides the same Knowledge modifier as Int 13 Pow 17. What is the best here? Int 13 Pow 17 of course unless you want to be a potent sorcerer, since Int is so hard to raise during play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, resurrected duck said:

With RQG, INT provides skill bonuses, but it is always shadowed by POW in the tables, so that it is almost always better to put the points in POW instead. Int 17 Pow 13 provides the same Knowledge modifier as Int 13 Pow 17. What is the best here? Int 13 Pow 17 of course unless you want to be a potent sorcerer, since Int is so hard to raise during play.

It's kind of funny that RQG INT is becoming equivalent to D&D INT, a dump stat unless you're a wizard.

Link to post
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...