Can Warding be abused this way?

[MJ Sadique]

Muaaahahahah, the hamster wheel of doom .... I love this one.

I truly love all your Eurmal ideas and even if it's not possible in rules, this will definitely become a godly item in my Glorantha. I think I will prefer create the Hula Hoop with Issaries warding (aka create a market in GoG) because you are target by the magic If you have hostile intent (friend or foes); So if you can play with Eurmal Hula Hoop of Death it mean you are friendly, if not you are hostile and the unlimited power will crush you (since there no limit to stack create market unlike warding).

 

I just remember The best/worst abuse I ever try (in RQ3) as player :
I was playing an aldryami at that time and I create a "wall" of 81m length x 1m wide and I just play a Benny Hill and start slaloming in and out this wall for disruption's effect to kill the 4 overpowered broos of the scenarii... I got some scars on my back but It work perfectly fine as enemies could not see the warding area.

After that, I ask the master if I could use a flower pot with the 4 wands inside to create a 3 meters length wall (blade)* that could continuously inflict Disruption. But the master told me no because Aldrya would not protect such flower pot (but a 4D3 disruption flower-pot-blade could be so much fun).

So the flower-pot-blade of Death never came to life...

*Since Warding is the power of a god protecting a place by creating a 3m high wall

[soltakss]

On 10/24/2017 at 8:42 PM, D said:

In RQ3 it's an enchantment and I don't think you can dispel those. Also isn't dispel magic spirit magic which means you need 2 points to dispel 1 point of divine?

Sorry, I meant Dismiss Magic 10, you need Dispel Magic 21 to smash a Warding. 

[g33k]

On 10/22/2017 at 10:26 AM, Zit said:

I would anyway always reward imaginative players.

I see a sharp difference here between "imaginitive" and rules-lawyer-y / loophole'ing.

Moreover, any time someone comes up with a dreadfully-effective combat-innovation that isn't explicated in the RAW, I am forced to ask:  WHY is it not in the RAW???!?  And if, in my judgement, the accumulated strategic & tactical minds of all the armies and all the adventurers in the game-world's past haven't ALREADY produced this innovation:  WHY NOT???!?

Mostly, I find that a close reading of the rules gives me a reasonable justification.

Sometimes, I come to the opposite conclusion:  "Yeah, sure!  You've been seeing the HulaHoop'o'Death for a few years now... and you had been hearing about it for, like, forever."

In this case, the principle of moving the Ward onto the person (effectively "inviting" them in)  is one issue.

Equally problematic, IMHO, is that "there is no 'there' there" -- nothing sacred to the god, no people, etc; you aren't even intending to protect anything inside the hoop...  so there is nothing TO Ward !  

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by g33k
typo

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

"there is no 'there' there" -- nothing sacred to the god, no people, etc; you aren't even intending to protect anything inside the hoop...  so there is nothing TO Ward !  

I definitely endorse this view!  

[Zit]

It's a point of view and there is no point here arguing about who's right or who's wrong. I consider myself that you protect the room inside the hoop and that the spell is bound to the space delimited by the wands. Speaking about RAW, these say that the Ward "protects an area" and the "air space above" it. Period. There is no mention of a condition of intending to protect anything else. And also "The Detect Enemies component will then detect anyone wishing to assault the area, steal an object, or whatever is appropriate to the manner of casting the spell". So I don't see here anything forbidding the Warding Hoop, but if you believe it should be, that's fine -but it is not RAW.

YGWV

[styopa]

7 hours ago, Zit said:

It's a point of view and there is no point here arguing about who's right or who's wrong. I consider myself that you protect the room inside the hoop and that the spell is bound to the space delimited by the wands. Speaking about RAW, these say that the Ward "protects an area" and the "air space above" it. Period. There is no mention of a condition of intending to protect anything else. And also "The Detect Enemies component will then detect anyone wishing to assault the area, steal an object, or whatever is appropriate to the manner of casting the spell". So I don't see here anything forbidding the Warding Hoop, but if you believe it should be, that's fine -but it is not RAW.

YGWV

Exactly.

Inferring some sort of religious context when none is described is simply houseruling in a softer format.  Nothing wrong with it, I houserule all the time.

 

[soltakss]

I saw Warding being used around a U-Bend once, there was a tunnel that sloped steeply down, then flattened slowly and then sloped steeply up again, with the Warding placed just above the flat bit, so you went through and out of  the Warding to get down and through and out of the Warding again to get back up, so double the fun.

[g33k]

On 11/17/2017 at 1:50 PM, Zit said:

It's a point of view and there is no point here arguing about who's right or who's wrong. I consider myself that you protect the room inside the hoop and that the spell is bound to the space delimited by the wands. Speaking about RAW, these say that the Ward "protects an area" and the "air space above" it. Period. There is no mention of a condition of intending to protect anything else. And also "The Detect Enemies component will then detect anyone wishing to assault the area, steal an object, or whatever is appropriate to the manner of casting the spell". So I don't see here anything forbidding the Warding Hoop, but if you believe it should be, that's fine -but it is not RAW.

YGWV

It depends, I notice, on the version of the rules.  For example, some say "... creates an area of safety for those inside ..." and for these I would rule that the RAW explicitly needs PEOPLE inside the Ward to be protected.  Foes attacking those Warded, or entering an empty Ward intending to attack (or leave behind a trap for) people who enter the Ward expecting protections... those ambushers also trigger the Ward by entering it with that intent.

This version clearly precludes a "Hula Hoop of Death" as a missile/ranged weapon (unless you put a small flying person inside:  Gloranthan Sprites come to mind; and a surprise maneuver in Trollball...) .

The original RQ2 version, in contrast, specifically (and repeatedly) says it protects an "area" (and the space above).  Clearly, this is a VERY different version of the spell!

 

Edited November 20, 2017 by g33k
RQ2 instance

[BWP]

So I can't help but picture the following "scene":

MORTAL WORSHIPPER: "Oh mighty Orlanth, I sacrifice to you so that you may enable the awesome destructive power of this hula hoop of death."

ORLANTH: "Wow, that sounds rad!  And it will fly through the air and everything!  Yeah baby, let's DO IT!"

LHANKOR MHY: "You know, the rules don't let you do that kind of thing."

ORLANTH: "Aw man.  Stupid God-Learners ...."

 

[styopa]

 

10 hours ago, BWP said:

So I can't help but picture the following "scene":

MORTAL WORSHIPPER: "Oh mighty Orlanth, I sacrifice to you so that you may enable the awesome destructive power of this hula hoop of death."

ORLANTH: "Wow, that sounds rad!  And it will fly through the air and everything!  Yeah baby, let's DO IT!"

LHANKOR MHY: "You know, the rules don't let you do that kind of thing."

ORLANTH: "Aw man.  Stupid God-Learners ...."

 

I don't care enough to look it up, is warding a general spell?
I can CERTAINLY see Eurmal as being *totally* into the idea, and maybe even encouraging bizarre applications. 

 

PARTICULARLY if they look or make someone look stupid.

[Tim Ellis]

On 10/25/2017 at 5:18 PM, styopa said:

Phht.  Just a lack of imagination there.

aka the "German Wheel"

Gold Wheel Dancer?

[Tim Ellis]

On Gondo Holst's Wagon.
Every version of the spell suggests the protection goes as far down as the wands penetrate - so if it is the "Interior" of the wagon that is protected then you can crawl under the wagon without triggering the warding - but bursting up through the floor would cross the boundary  - so for the "Hula-hoop of death" you would need to be able to throw the hoop so it landed on top of your foe (merely passing over their heads is not sufficient) - so you'd need to develop and train a "Throw Hula-hoop" skill, and the target would have the opportunity to dodge/parry (providing they struck the outside of the hoop...).  The size of your hoop would be limited by your ability to carry and throw the device, and since moving the wards (we will assume "relative to each other") breaks the warding, the hoop can't really be flexible, since distorting it will cause the pattern to break.

 

[Tim Ellis]

on "protecting those inside the ward"
 

Assuming you can create warding on a mobile frame and then drop this over an enemy, it would certainly suggest that they would take the disruption damage.  However, assuming that they survive, it does nothing to prevent them from stepping out of the hoop, and does not have any effect on any magic that they cast from inside the hoop.  If anything it may offer them a certain degree of protection from hostile magic you (or your allies) attempt to cast on them while they remain inside the hoop, and even cause anyone moving to engage them to take the disruption magic when they cross the boundary.  - I'm not convinced that this is the best use of your magic in terms of creating an offensive weapon 

[Furry Fella]

On 10/21/2017 at 5:00 PM, Pentallion said:

yep, good point.  The Cradle adventurers were not intending harm, they were simply flowing down the river.  Simply being made to move through the warding is enough to set it off.  And motion doesn't invalidate the warding as then, as Styopa said, all you have to do is lean against the wagon to set it in motion.  So we're back to marketing Hula Hoop of Death (tm) to all the Geo stores.  I'm back to thinking God Learner Forbidden Secret.

The issue here is that the sides are clearly hostile to each other - status enemy and would detect as such.

Would also add that all the wardings in question are actually static - all movement is relative. The Cradle is moving into / through the zone warded by the Lunars. The PC's wardings are having a spell cross their boundaries.

To me the clear point is all the descriptions say an Area with 3 meters above it. Nothing in any of the descriptions about about a zone below it is there? Indeed none of the descriptions say warding has a floor even - though I recall warding being described as a box or cube?

Regards Gondo Holsts cart - the wards are mentioned as being inside the cart and are also designed to keep the jacko-Bears in. Am looking for a reference that makes it clear it is the inside of the cart that is the protected space. So applying basic physics the warding has zero motion - the exterior of the cart moves but the interior is static. THe relationship is akin to why jumping in a truck does not lower the gross weight or the mass of the truck.

The proposal would seem to define several parts of this.

Alternatively define that the "Hula-hoop" has to have a base minimum side and mass such that it's a more than size 6 - preferable more than size 18 so it requires multiple flight rune spells. Then a say 8points of rune magic a bloody humungously awkward contraption let him. The trap is make damned sure 1 or more of the wards breaks, bends, fails so he commonly has to recast the warding 4 as well as 2 to 4 flight spells. To add insult to injury make him treat it like a special  item and make it out of something suitable (rare and / or expensive). To finish it off hit the PC with some version of cult spirits like the Orlanthi Impests and then Flint slingers if the message don't get through as Orlanth regards his "invention" as dishonourable. Have cult or related cult members start to react to him as if he might be illuminated as he has departed so far from "right" thinking and form?

[D]

Instead of throwing it, you could make a heavy duty frame and then let an earth elemental carry it underground at the depth of a meter or so, that way 2m is above ground and slowly moving, plus the gnome is too deep to be seen or hurt. Great as temple defenses and never in the same spot twice. You could have a lot of them and have an invisible, moving maze outside the temple entrance.

[styopa]

On 12/8/2017 at 4:14 AM, Tim Ellis said:

Gold Wheel Dancer?

Maybe that's why they rated a coin - "Geez, nobody ever was able to pull that off except them"

[g33k]

6 hours ago, D said:

Instead of throwing it, you could make a heavy duty frame and then let an earth elemental carry it underground at the depth of a meter or so, that way 2m is above ground and slowly moving, plus the gnome is too deep to be seen or hurt. Great as temple defenses and never in the same spot twice. You could have a lot of them and have an invisible, moving maze outside the temple entrance.

Or have the gnome be 5ish meters underground, positioned to come up to that critical 1m-deep height right under their shieldwall, timed to the round before the point of your cavalry wedge  hits.

We're getting pretty deep into  the question of "how much of those 'standard' military doctrines really even APPLY when there's magic on the field???"  We know that "shieldwalls" (and castle walls) are a thing in Glorantha (and the Forgotten Realms, and, and, and...), but (given magic) I really have to wonder why...

Edited February 7, 2018 by g33k

[D]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Or have the gnome be 5ish meters underground, positioned to come up to that critical 1m-deep height right under their shieldwall, timed to the round before the point of your cavalry wedge  hits.

We're getting pretty deep into  the question of "how much of those 'standard' military doctrines really even APPLY when there's magic on the field???"  We know that "shieldwalls" (and castle walls) are a thing in Glorantha, but (given magic) I really have to wonder why...

That's a great idea.

There's probably spells which will counteract these types of sneaky attacks. High counter magic or shield will stop the warding.

[g33k]

17 minutes ago, D said:

There's probably spells which will counteract these types of sneaky attacks. High counter magic or shield will stop the warding.

Dunno... once you load a mobile Ward onto a gnome, you can hit any spot on the shield-wall; can the defenders REALLY have their magical defenses in place in a reasonable time?  Can the entire shieldwall reasonably be Shield'ed?

This is a perennial discussion... in a world where "magic" serves as a surrogate for high-tech (one mage can kill many swordsmen at range; just like a modern soldier with a modern assault-rifle, etc), why are medieval tactics and strategies in place?  Plate was the apex of armor, then guns rendered armor obsolete; swords didn't go away, but the light swift swords (for unarmored foes) replaced the huge knight-killer weapons.  Similarly for castles -- once gunpowder-powered siege-weapons negated their walls, they became MUCH less militarily-important.

In most fantasy worlds (including IMHO Glorantha) available offensive magics would seem to dictate military doctrine different from what we see in the real world...  But in most fantasy worlds, the armies seem to be based on tactics/strategies/doctrines entirely uninformed my available magical options and/or magical threats.

I remain unimpressed by the handwave of "oh, there's other magic thsat counters the magic, so the mundane militaries look and act about the same..."

N.B. - there is a parallel to here to the notorious old Glorantha debate of "scientific - vs - mythical  explanations".  I hope not to go down THAT rabbit hole again !

 

[Joerg]

10 hours ago, g33k said:

We're getting pretty deep into  the question of "how much of those 'standard' military doctrines really even APPLY when there's magic on the field???"  We know that "shieldwalls" (and castle walls) are a thing in Glorantha (and the Forgotten Realms, and, and, and...), but (given magic) I really have to wonder why...

These formations are a magic unto themselves, and require extraordinary heroism to overcome. The scene where Arjunas's son fails to perform his father's formation breaking feat is probably the scene of the Vedas that comes to my mind first. I remember seeing a wonderfully choreographed movie sequence of the shields (never see the warriors behind them) closing in on the hapless would-be hero, ringing him in. A scene right from the most personal nightmare sequences.

Basically, the formation of a "we" beyond many "I"s makes a huge difference also magically. Skirmisher units are usually magical lightweights because they lack such cohesion.

Area effect mass destruction is the powerful exception in the Dragon Pass magical arsenal, and even there superheroes and dragons offer protection. These effects feed on those mass tactics and counter them. Other than such out of context scale magics, the formations form good defense or at least passive resistance.

[Furry Fella]

12 hours ago, g33k said:

Or have the gnome be 5ish meters underground, positioned to come up to that critical 1m-deep height right under their shieldwall, timed to the round before the point of your cavalry wedge  hits.

We're getting pretty deep into  the question of "how much of those 'standard' military doctrines really even APPLY when there's magic on the field???"  We know that "shieldwalls" (and castle walls) are a thing in Glorantha (and the Forgotten Realms, and, and, and...), but (given magic) I really have to wonder why...

Both Pavis and Sun County make it clear that significant magical defence is incorporated in almost any structure of significance . Indeed the stuff written about the Lunar attack o n Sartar makes it clear even a small fort like Rune Gate had formidable magical defense.

But the vast bulk of combat is not major godly representatives with Regiments of Magic support. There has been a good explanation of the clear differences between magic effects in White Bear Red Moon and that directly wielded by PC's - as the conflict escalates so does the influence of the Gods and thus their commitment to the contest - more godly involvement and "ownership" multiplies things plus the real dangers to the fabric of the Compromise.

"Historically" Gloranthan forces are rather significantly dispersed operationally and strategicly. Actually all the numbers I've read they are really rather small given the state and population sizes. Historically the Roman's keep over 40,000 combat troops in Britain - 3 full legions plus supporting Auxiliaries, then the significant numbers of point garrisons and 1 or 2 full "wings" of multiple Alae of cavalry (initially the Batavians and latterly the Sarmations ewho numbered 5,000+) - ignoring the Classis Britanica.

With Magic for better and more crops, magic for health etc populations and thus troops should be denser but aren't.

Think of the effort needed for regular troops to combat a reasonably mature middle sized party of PC's - that certainly takes co-ordinated

group tactics and many against one. Those conditions replicate relatively standard historical military tactics. Equally regular forces versus raiders and the general "small war" will again result in quite similar answers as are observed from history.

[g33k]

 

19 hours ago, g33k said:

...

I remain unimpressed by the handwave of "oh, there's other magic that counters the magic, so the mundane militaries look and act about the same..."

So, let me cut right to the chase:

11 hours ago, Joerg said:

These formations are a magic unto themselves...

Basically, the formation of a "we" beyond many "I"s makes a huge difference also magically...

If I have a PC involved in the sort of actions where this is relevant, what are the magic rules that I want to use?  What defenses am I raising, or do I need to overcome?  Spells, charms, what-have-you....

Ideally for RQ (cos that's my cuppa), but ANY official Gloranthan rules are fair game here.

 

[Joerg]

 

12 minutes ago, g33k said:

If I have a PC involved in the sort of actions where this is relevant, what are the magic rules that I want to use?  What defenses am I raising, or do I need to overcome?  Spells, charms, what-have-you....

For a close order infantry group, I would look for the skill used to keep formation. It could be a commander's skill, which means passive for the individual members of the file.

The mantra is "hold the line", so anything that keeps the character and his neighbors in the line and lets them refrain from breaking formation is what supports the magic. So, let's say you feel like the superior soldier, but the guy to your left is the unfortunate combination of a bully and a coward, and the guy to your right suffers from PTSD. What do you do to keep not only your own position but also those two guys in position? That's your contribution to the magic.

 

In a huge group dance, the individuals' dance skills would make up the rolls. Some sub-par performance might be adjusted for by superior success by others, retaining the overall impression of harmony.

In RQ it is easy to force imperfections: just ask for a series of rolls. (not done in HQ...)

 

Imagine a rite that demands that the 100 attendants all light a cigarette at the same time. Simple statistics will cause quite a few failures to light. The unlikely case of a perfect unison lighting of all 100 cigarettes probably gets a ritual bonus, but a certain number of failures is expected, and calculated for.

 

If you want to have a simple mechanistic way, have them sacrifice a MP to the unit standard in unison, with a 95% chance of success (same as rune magic).

[g33k]

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

The mantra is "hold the line" ... That's your contribution to the magic.

In a huge group dance, the individuals' dance skills would make up the rolls. Some sub-par performance might be adjusted for by superior success by others, retaining the overall impression of harmony.

As a handwave, I understand this.   But for gaming purposes (in the notorious "GNS Theory" model), or from a narrative-input perspective, what can I (RP'ing the commander of the shieldwall) do to harden my defenses?  What can I (RP'ing the commander of the attackers) do to break their formation?  Are there defineed mechanical knobs I can adjust?  Are there defined narrative keywords I can call upon?

When I pick up the dice, what am I rolling?  What can I add?  What can each side do to impose a penalty on THEM or gain a bonus for US?

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

In RQ it is easy to force imperfections: just ask for a series of rolls. (not done in HQ...)

That's just gaming the mechanics; that's not actually DOING something in-world, not character action.  What can my CHARACTER do to force imperfections -- or resist being forced into them?

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

If you want to have a simple mechanistic way, have them sacrifice a MP to the unit standard in unison, with a 95% chance of success (same as rune magic).

An interesting improvisation.  I like it!

But what does it DO?  The unit is now stronger, more "united".  When I pick up the dice, what am I rolling?  What's the difference -- to defender and/or attacker -- in the roll/difficulty/outcome if the unit sacrificed, or didn't?

I note, BTW, that this clever notion represents a patch over a "hole" in the rules, i.e. a rule not available to be used (that being said, it's perhaps not a terribly important hole -- mass combat IS the realm of wargames, after all:  the mass-combat games that RPG's branched off from 40some years ago to focus on individual heroes going on personal adventures...  HOWEVER, given that WBRM and NG are foundational/definitional documents for Glorantha, and the new RQG is evidently going to have a strong "Hero Wars" focus, the wargame-y discussion seems apropos...)

So, getting back to the mass combat in Glorantha... is there any "prisoner's dilemma" effect, where a lone non-sacrificing hold-out (or a few of them!) might have personally-better survival, at an extreme cost to the Unit?  I tend to think not, FWIW -- any "hold out" will represent a weak spot in the Line, and that tends to be where the defenders have the worst casualties.  The MP sacrifice offers some unit-benefit, but from a "selfish" POV the real buy-in is that you've joined into the protective magic, and the Unit defenses encompass you, too.

But what are those defenses, expressed as RPG-mechanics?  I'm going to keep bringing it back to this -- what are the mechanics?  What can I call upon (as attacker or defender) to enhance my roll, or impair my enemies roll?

Because I keep seeing all the ways that my PC's can invoke the game-rules to negate so many of the "ancient/medieval tropes," magic'ing my way past defenses that are derived from a world that never had to face magic-wielding "adventurers".

I see SOME magic for the defenders, but not on the scale of the physical defenses -- castles are a HUGE mundane investment of time & money and effort, and should be as hard a nut to crack magically as they are mundanely (similarly for the skilled soldiers of a phalanx or similarly-trained formations).  Show me the mechanics!

 

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by g33k
rpg

[styopa]

If we want to explore mechanics, a few principles come to mind:

- in the same sense that a single entity's power resists and delivers magical effects, I'd submit that there is some mechanism (focused on the unit standard?) by which soldiers in a unit become themselves an entity, and thus resist things collectively.  Squads, battalions, regiments, divisions, armies - all might 'collectivize' the POW of their participants at weaker and weaker individual component contribution, but collectively become more powerful.  Thus there's the Gloranthan parallel to the most ancient IRL principle of mass and concentration = efficacy.  I'd suspect 'collective resistance' is an easier thing to achieve than 'collective offense' thus explaining why the Lunars having figured the latter out makes them so formidable on the battlefield.

- formations THEMSELVES may have power.  A square/phalanx/schiltron might in the sense of the Earth rune make them stronger, less likely to break/run, etc.

- I personally LIKE castles, fortifications, and such in my fantasy world; I have always vaguely handwaved that any such fortification is imbued with powerful magics that make the "just have a 10cbm earth elemental wreck the foundations" functionally impossible (and conversely, still make such fortifications slow, complex, and expensive to build).  I'd love to actually have a mechanic behind this.

 

FWIW I'd submit the only spell I'm aware of in RQ3 that implied how staggeringly powerful "unit magics" would be is Xiola Umbar's Group Defense - think about this for a unit of 10 individuals? (10m dia sphere):

Group Defense 3 points
ranged, duration till dropped, stackable, reusable
This spell is active, maintained by the will of the casting priestess.
It creates a veil-like barrier which encloses a sphere 5 meters in radius centering on the priestess. All those contained within the barrier lose one magic point into this barrier when it forms-they may not choose to withhold the magic point or to add more points. 

Any creature attempting to pass the barrier automatically takes damage directly to a random hit location, ignoring armor, equal to the number of magic points in the barrier. This spell is stackable, in which case each person within the barrier spends 1 magic point per spell stacked, and the damaging effect is accordingly increased.
 

 

Edited February 8, 2018 by styopa