New RQG dump 05 27 18

[styopa]

"Casual Use of Runes" seems confusingly written and inconsistent?

1) the example seems like it was written for a single toon, and then expanded to 2 toons?  "Vasana and Vishi are confronted when she tries to enter the Earth Temple in Prax. The priestess Varaneena asks her to demonstrate her loyalty to Earth..."?

2) more importantly, the example doesn't at all seem to represent the casual use of runes as previously described, ie to help choose what action the character pursues?

Finally, personally, the entire section could be much more simply and concisely presented in a "Players unsure of what to do in a given situation may certainly roll against their highest rune affinities to help decide their character's course of action." - it really rates no more of a mention or explanation.

[jongjom]

17 minutes ago, styopa said:

Vasana and Vishi are confronted when she tries to enter the Earth Temple in Prax. The priestess Varaneena asks her to demonstrate her loyalty to Earth

Good typo spots. I think it should read: 

Vasana and Vishi are confronted when they try to enter the Earth Temple in Prax. The priestess Varaneena asks Vasana to demonstrate her loyalty to Earth

IMHO it does look pretty casual. However, it might have been written better even though I feel I understood it. 

[Bilharzia]

Does 'toon' mean rune? 

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Bilharzia said:

Does 'toon' mean rune?

No, it means example character.

[Pentallion]

Some runes obviously have quantum entanglement.  I wonder what the Outer Atomic Explorers would have to say about that.

[Runeblogger]

I love these rules.   I hope my players will love them too.

BTW a typo on the last page: Vostor s uncertain --> Vostor is uncertain

Edited May 27, 2018 by Runeblogger

[Psullie]

5 hours ago, styopa said:

"Casual Use of Runes" seems confusingly written and inconsistent?

1) the example seems like it was written for a single toon, and then expanded to 2 toons?  "Vasana and Vishi are confronted when she tries to enter the Earth Temple in Prax. The priestess Varaneena asks her to demonstrate her loyalty to Earth..."?

2) more importantly, the example doesn't at all seem to represent the casual use of runes as previously described, ie to help choose what action the character pursues?

Finally, personally, the entire section could be much more simply and concisely presented in a "Players unsure of what to do in a given situation may certainly roll against their highest rune affinities to help decide their character's course of action." - it really rates no more of a mention or explanation.

Agree that it is a bit confusing, however in some cases it is not about rolling against their highest Rune but dicing against opposites or other against a specific Rune that is relevant to the scene. In one example (where in the section mentions columns), if your character had Harmony/Disorder 60/40 and you were deciding wether your character as compassionate you'd roll 1d100, on a 1-60 = yes, 61 - 00 = no. (This is very similar to the Conflicting Runes section that follows) Another, and one the example covers, is a test to convey strength of personality to another. This one is most open to abuse, as PC's would often spin outrageous yarns to convene their GM that their 90% Death Rune is relevant in every instance. Both are considered Casual Use as they are not intended to inspire or impassion.

I'm glad that session limits have been suggested, and I feel that this area does need detailed coverage in the rules as it will lead to players holding up play with implausible stretches just to justify more favourable dice rolls. 

 

[Roko Joko]

I'm guessing the left and right-hand columns mentioned in the Casual Use of Runes section are in the Runes chapter, which we haven't seen (I haven't), showing behaviors that are (left) and aren't (right) in accord with each rune.  If so a page reference would helpful.  If not the section is confusing AF.  (It's somewhat confusing anyway because of what styopa said.)

Edited May 27, 2018 by Roko Joko

[Mankcam]

I love these Runes rules, they are done well and finally we actually have 'real' rules for Runes 

In my BGB/RQ3 homebrew I did something similar - I used Runes as a casting % for Divine Magic, and also allowed it to use Complimentary Bonus rules.

So these new official rules are more or less in keeping with that concept, and my players will not have any problems adapting to them whatsoever.

Also the artwork in RQG looks gorgeous, its going to be a nice book on the shelves!

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by Mankcam

[g33k]

2 hours ago, jajagappa said:

No, it means example character.

I expect he'll circle 'round and clarify at some point, but I'm pretty sure @styopa uses "toon" (derived I presume from "cartoon") as synonymous with "character" (not just example character) in the sense of "Player Character."

[Sean_RDP]

The artwork is outstanding. Can't say enough about that.

I think the rules will work, but I have some thoughts. 

• Runes will require some buy in on the part of new players and old players; Runes will be affecting choices and personality. I like how that will create conflict and consequence. However, that means a player will need to be mindful of the consequences of role playing a certain way and the suggestion that their character does not have free will all the time. 
• Inspiration. Why is a character with a 90% in a Rune rolling to be inspired? I realize that is the example, but at 90% there is no question the character IS inspired by that Rune. At 60%/40% okay, a roll might be required but over 75% would suggest a strong affinity. I realize this won't be changing but its food for thought.
• Is 20% bonus enough to warrant the bother (opportunity cost) of an extra roll? Do players get excited about being inspired? OR is it just a mechanic to them? I suppose there is also the possibility of an experience roll involved for success to. I would like to see how this plays out on the Stream, hopefully it comes up.
• This sections suggests a higher degree of negotiation with the GM than in your typical d100 game. At least to me. I think that is a nice touch, does this reflect the rest of the rules as well, assuming I am not reading too much into it?

[Mankcam]

All good points. I think the player buy-in regarding Runes and Personality is a good thing. It is a feature of the setting, and helps define that the game is set in Glorantha.

I regards to Runic Inspiration I think the point is to let the dice help you decide, so any roll should have a chance. Otherwise you would just decide. Theres no reason that you can't do that either.

If you wanted to provide more player excitement regarding the Rune Bonus, then you can easily replace the flat +20% with CoC 7E's bonus/penalty dice where you roll an extra D1O and count the best score (just like D&D 5E's Advantage/Disadvsntage rules).

I can see the merits of flat modifers for general circumstantial modifiers, but if you use Bonus Dice for Runes then it'll certaintly add a fun flavour to the situation. (Mathematically it is more variable than the flat bonus however)

I may possibly do that with Runes, as my players are used to doing that with the CoC 7E Stunts.

 

Edited May 27, 2018 by Mankcam

[jajagappa]

1 hour ago, Sean_RDP said:

Why is a character with a 90% in a Rune rolling to be inspired?

Because you can still fumble and have some unexpected psychic shock!  Happened when I ran the QuickStart.  Poor Harmast, drew upon his affinity with Storm (90%) for inspiration and failed utterly (100).  Wasn't great timing either as they were busy fighting rock lizards.

Just because you are heavily motivated or influenced by a particular Rune (or Passion), doesn't mean you are drawing on it constantly to go over and above.  That's really what inspiration is about.  Later in the QuickStart when Harmast was fighting the Grey Dog Damakos, he succeeded quite well with his Hate(Greydogs), and that drove him to ensure his foe was completely dead.

1 hour ago, Sean_RDP said:

Is 20% bonus enough to warrant the bother (opportunity cost) of an extra roll?

Yes, most definitely.

1 hour ago, Sean_RDP said:

Do players get excited about being inspired?

Mine have.

1 hour ago, Sean_RDP said:

This sections suggests a higher degree of negotiation with the GM than in your typical d100 game.

Haven't found it so to date.

[Sean_RDP]

3 minutes ago, jajagappa said:

Because you can still fumble and have some unexpected psychic shock!  Happened when I ran the QuickStart.  Poor Harmast, drew upon his affinity with Storm (90%) for inspiration and failed utterly (100).  Wasn't great timing either as they were busy fighting rock lizards.

Just because you are heavily motivated or influenced by a particular Rune (or Passion), doesn't mean you are drawing on it constantly to go over and above.  That's really what inspiration is about.  Later in the QuickStart when Harmast was fighting the Grey Dog Damakos, he succeeded quite well with his Hate(Greydogs), and that drove him to ensure his foe was completely dead.

I can definitely see your point. The reason to roll / not roll in a given game is because there are consequences for failure.  I am not entirely convinced by that logic in this particular case, but that's more me thinking out loud. Thanks for the input.

[styopa]

7 minutes ago, g33k said:

I expect he'll circle 'round and clarify at some point, but I'm pretty sure @styopa uses "toon" (derived I presume from "cartoon") as synonymous with "character" (not just example character) in the sense of "Player Character."

Yep, I just meant toon as in the video game vernacular: a character.

 

[g33k]

Aren't there more-or-less symmetrical consequences around the success/fail roll?

That is, you suffer a PENALTY on your roll for failing it?

That's a potent dis-incentive to roll low affinities!

 

[g33k]

42 minutes ago, styopa said:

... toon as in the video game vernacular: a character.

<shocked silence>
Hand in your dice!!!  You, sir, are No True Roleplayer!

🤡

[styopa]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

Aren't there more-or-less symmetrical consequences around the success/fail roll?

That is, you suffer a PENALTY on your roll for failing it?

That's a potent dis-incentive to roll low affinities!

 

Remember that Rune Affinities are binary, summing to 100 so if A and B are paired, A might be 70 while B is 30.  Generally, I can't imagine you're going to have less than 50 in any Runic Affinity your character cares about trying to augment with.

Critical Success: On a critical success, the adventurer adds +50% to the chosen ability for an appropriate duration determined by the gamemaster. The Rune gets an experience check.
Special Success: On a special success, the adventurer adds +30% to the chosen ability for an appropriate duration determined by the gamemaster. The Rune gets an experience check.
Success: The adventurer adds +20% to the ability being augmented for an appropriate duration determined by the gamemaster. The Rune gets an experience check.
Failure: On a failure, the adventurer subtracts –20% from all further rolls using that Rune until they can spend a day meditating on the Rune.

Fumble: On a fumble, the adventurer immediately loses –1D10% from the Rune (which results in a corresponding increase in an opposed Power or Form Rune) and is overcome by psychic turmoil. This turmoil might last for a few minutes or a few days as determined by the gamemaster. Consult the Psychic Turmoil table for the duration. During this time, the adventurer cannot use that Rune at all (including Rune magic based on that Rune). The adventurer must even avoid acting in accordance with the Rune during that time
(I presume a fumble is ALSO a failure, although it doesn't explicitly say so.)

Mathematically, I'd guess the breakpoint for it to be "worth it" to try is actually somewhat UNDER 50%...42?  43?  At 50% chance, you'd have a 50% of +20, a 10% of +30, and 3% of +50% for a net potential plus of around 14-15%, and a net potential negative of 50% chance of -20 or net of -10%, so +4-5%...the odds of something beneficial are clearly in your favor even at 50%.

 

As one of my players already pointed out, if he really wanted to drive his favorite runic value up, on his 'off days' he'd try repeatedly to augment using its (low) opposite Rune in hopes of a fumble and a nifty +1d10% gain to his preferred rune.

[styopa]

1 hour ago, g33k said:

<shocked silence>
Hand in your dice!!!  You, sir, are No True Roleplayer!

🤡

Yeah, I know.  Never the twain shall meet.  I know you're not really serious but I think that view is kind of common - particularly for older gamers.  Personally, I think that's is regrettable.  I've gotten some great adventure ideas, to say nothing of terrific screenshot graphics for setting, etc even abilities and magic items inspired by the various MMOs I play.

[kaydet]

I find it a vulgar term, but to each his own. That being said, @styopa is very right in saying that there is a wellspring of inspiration in video games -- or really any medium involving storytelling. It would be foolish to ignore it out of some misguided sense of genre purity.

Great artists steal, after all.

[Yelm's Light]

3 hours ago, styopa said:

Yeah, I know.  Never the twain shall meet.  I know you're not really serious but I think that view is kind of common - particularly for older gamers.  Personally, I think that's is regrettable.  I've gotten some great adventure ideas, to say nothing of terrific screenshot graphics for setting, etc even abilities and magic items inspired by the various MMOs I play.

I 'member, back in the days of Eek You, we actually used to roleplay in MMO's.  (It was lots of fun, too.) 

[Marc]

19 hours ago, styopa said:

 

As one of my players already pointed out, if he really wanted to drive his favorite runic value up, on his 'off days' he'd try repeatedly to augment using its (low) opposite Rune in hopes of a fumble and a nifty +1d10% gain to his preferred rune.

Note that the section "Becoming Inspired" states that gamemaster approval is needed to make a roll.  If a player in a game I was running asked for something like that, they'd have to come up with some really ( I mean REALLY ) good justification for a roll.  

[seneschal]

We've just been given the title to the next supplement:  "Toons 'N Runes."

[Mugen]

On 5/27/2018 at 11:27 PM, Mankcam said:

I love these Runes rules, they are done well and finally we actually have 'real' rules for Runes 

In my BGB/RQ3 homebrew I did something similar - I used Runes as a % for Divine Magic, and also allowed it to use Complimentary Bonus rules.

So these new official rules are more or less in keeping with that concept, and my players will not have any problems adapting to them whatsoever.

Also the artwork in RQG looks gorgeous, its going to be a nice book on the shelves!

 

I think it would make perfect sense to base all 4 magic systems (counting Mysticism) on rune skills.

Of course, the MRQ1 error should not be repeated, but back in the days I toyed with the idea to implement Sorcery as a set of skills that can be use to bend your own runic skills.

[Joerg]

I hope that the pdf of the rules will have the option to view single pages. For electronic readers, a single column option would be even better...