Why?

[Yelm's Light]

Most annoying thing I've ever encountered in HQ: the mastery notation for ability levels.  Every time I read one I want to do so like a number or algebraic equation (i.e., x masteries + y base roll).  But nooooo...  To this day I have to mentally flip it.

So what possessed our beloved designers to do it that way?

[g33k]

I think it was revealed in an old copy of WF... #7?  #5?

 

 

They did it to get you, personally.  Random malice.  I'd call it "luck of the draw" but rumor says there were goat-entrails.

 

[jrutila]

I am not the designer, obviously, but to me there is logic behind the notation. You are always rolling under the target number of with a die. That's why the target number is first. After both sides have rolled you then compare the masteries (cancelling and bumbing), thus them being after the target number.

[soltakss]

Makes sense to me - 17M2 means target of 17, with 2 Bumps. Easy. 2M17 would be really confusing, now that I have played HQ, but a newbie would find it easy, 2 Bumps to make 17.

Using the Mastery symbol and calling them W (17W2) is far more a crime than having the Target Number first, in my opinion, and I am speaking as a huge Glorantha fan.

[Yelm's Light]

17 hours ago, g33k said:

I think it was revealed in an old copy of WF... #7?  #5?

They did it to get you, personally.  Random malice.  I'd call it "luck of the draw" but rumor says there were goat-entrails.

Must've been some pretty good entrails.  I hadn't even heard of RQ until the year after WF7 was published.

[g33k]

16 hours ago, Yelm's Light said:

Must've been some pretty good entrails ...

Damn.

Now I can't get the image out of my head:  Homer Simpson, "Mmmm... entrails!"

[Yelm's Light]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Damn.

Now I can't get the image out of my head:  Homer Simpson, "Mmmm... entrails!"

It's like a virus.  Now I'm seeing a whole scene in the old, raw, Tracey Ullman Show style with Homer elbow deep and shoveling it into his mouth.  And don't forget the can of Duff.

[Mankcam]

On 1/21/2018 at 4:51 AM, soltakss said:

Using the Mastery symbol and calling them W (17W2) is far more a crime than having the Target Number first, in my opinion, and I am speaking as a huge Glorantha fan.

Totally agree.

I understand doing it for flavour with HQG, but when HQ2 came out and it was generic yet it still used the Gloranthan Mastery Rune, which is just plain weird.

Let's hope any future generic editions of HQ rectify this, although I would prefer if the capital 'M' was used to represent Masteries with all genres

Edited January 21, 2018 by Mankcam

[Yelm's Light]

OK, next Why.

The Rokari Church is a barely-wallpapered version of the Catholic Church.  It has its Knights Templar (Order of Saint Gerlant), its Inquisitors (Order of the Golden Lance), its hospitallers (Order of Saint Xemela), and its copyists (the Humble Calligraphers, though they are far more independent in relation to the Church than their RW counterparts were).  It also has the Iron Blood 'School,' which supported crusading armies.  And with the Closing, it has its variety of sects splintering from it and that are mostly termed heretical by the Church (see:  Lutheranism, Protestantism, Anglicanism, etc.), which it does its utmost to stamp out or absorb.  All of this a millennium or more beyond the Bronze Age setting of the world.  Nevermind that, if anything, a church-based system would seem far more theist, whether poly- or mono-.

More generally, the entire idea of wizardry being overwhelmingly governed by churches in the first place is almost completely alien to fantasy fiction.  Wizards are mostly reduced to monastic types in Glorantha.  Yep, I get that Malkionism is the religion for an entire state, and even spills over into other regions (again much like the Catholic Church), but generalizing that to an entire magic system?  Bishop Gandalf, anyone?  Brother Merlin?  Friar Ged?  How many Church Wizards have you ever heard of in fantasy fiction?

If anything, wizardry should be based on the school model that is a very minor part of the HQ* rules.  Earthsea's School of Magic in particular comes to mind as a solid exemplar.

Thoughts?

 

*I refer to HQ generally here, whatever version you use.

Edited January 24, 2018 by Yelm's Light

[Mankcam]

The Zzubari are a prominent Sage caste, rather than just an isolative bunch of hoary old academic spellcasters. They may be advisors to the Talori, but I suspect  the Zzurbari may be pretty active in the affairs of state, depending upon their rank, and may be more involved in the day-to-day machinery of administration than the Talori are.

I guess Egyptian Priests were often Sorcerers as well, so there is some precedent for mixing the two.

Remember that the medeival comparison for The West is obsolete now; so I doubt that current thinking on any of the Malkioni sects will have any close analogies with the medieval Church. 

For me, the 'Why?' is 'Why were Malkioni so different in earlier editions to how they are going to be presented now?'

From memory, one of Greg Stafford's first stories was about the Malkioni hero Prince Snodal, so one would assume that Greg would have had an idea of Snodal's culture of origin.

How did it all change to present like a very medieval culture which felt out of place in an ancient world setting?

 

 

 

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by Mankcam

[Mugen]

It would have been simpler if the game used a d10 instead of a d20.

Masteries would simply be the 10s of your ability score.

[Yelm's Light]

2 hours ago, Mugen said:

It would have been simpler if the game used a d10 instead of a d20.

Masteries would simply be the 10s of your ability score.

That would only make the current notation look even more obviously bass-ackwards.  And then there'd be the issue of 10% fumbles.

Edited January 25, 2018 by Yelm's Light

[JonL]

On January 25, 2018 at 12:02 AM, Mugen said:

It would have been simpler if the game used a d10 instead of a d20.

Masteries would simply be the 10s of your ability score.

That would have quadrupled the frequency of tied-rolls. Ties are bad.   

[g33k]

1 hour ago, JonL said:

... Ties are bad.   

God knows *I* have never liked any of the jobs that had me wear ties daily!

[Mugen]

On 26/01/2018 at 7:29 PM, JonL said:

That would have quadrupled the frequency of tied-rolls. Ties are bad.   

It would double it, not quadruple.

Chances of a tie when you roll 2d10 are 10%. With 2d20, it's 5%.

That's also the chances of a tie when you add a roll-under mechanism and both characters have the same ability rating.

If abilities are different, your chances to roll a tie are equal to (10-difference)/100 for a d10, and (20-difference)/400 for a d20 . There's a range between lowest skill rating and higher skill rating where ties are not possible, and outside that range, chances are equal to 1 per point.

So, the chances of a tie range between 1% and 10% with a d10, and .25 to 5% with a d20, but the .25% has no equivalent with a d10, as it refers to abilities of 1 and 20.