Bell Digest v930210

Date: Wed, 10 Feb 93 18:29:55 +0100
From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Digest Subscriptions)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: The RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 10 Feb 1993

This is an semi-automated digest, sent out once per day (if any
messages are pending).  Replies will be included in the next issue
automatically.

Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest.  If you 
want to submit articles to the Digest only,  contact the editor at
RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.

--
Send Submissions to: 		    
Enquiries to:		  
The RuneQuest Daily is a spin-off of the RuneQuest Digest and deals
with the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of
Glorantha.  			 Maintainer: Henk.Langeveld@Sun.COM

---------------------

From: pete@chem.UCSD.EDU (Peter Wotruba)
Subject: Horses in Prax
Message-ID: <9302091643.AA50592@chedccf0.ucsd.edu>
Date: 9 Feb 93 00:43:50 GMT

I remember from Cults of Prax (I think), that horses can not get any
nourishment from the plains of Prax - supposedly because they were not
part of Waha's Compact.  I have not seen any reference to this in
either Sun County, or River of Cradles.  Is this still true, or am I
misremembering my reference?  I do not have Cults of Prax here to
check.

---------------------

From: clay@morticia.cnns.unt.edu (Clay Luther)
Subject: Re: Yinkin / Shadow Cat
Message-ID: <9302091641.AA18608@charon.vortech.com>
Date: 9 Feb 93 04:47:43 GMT

>From: arthurr@thuban.crd.ge.com
>
>Has anyone ever seen a write-up on Yinkin (Shadow Cat), brother of Orlanth?
>If so, where can I find a copy?  Perhaps it is a dead cult, but it sounded
>interesting in the related literature (e.g., Orlanth background in
>"River of Cradles").  Thanks.

Oh yes, or at the very least include some information regarding what a
shadow cat is and can do, if anything special, such the one rewarded
in the Garhound Contest.

---
Clay W. Luther                                 clay@vortech.com
Software Engineer                             Vortech Data, Inc
Office (214) 994-1377                        Fax (214) 994-1310
                             Also cluther@morticia.cnns.unt.edu

---------------------

From: clay@morticia.cnns.unt.edu (Clay Luther)
Subject: Re: SKILL INCREASES
Message-ID: <9302091654.AA18622@charon.vortech.com>
Date: 9 Feb 93 05:00:26 GMT

>From: SPB1@vms.bton.ac.uk (Ghost Dancer)
>
>
>It was suggested that once one of these immediate increase rolls has
>been taken any outstanding increase chances would be wiped clean and
>the character would once again have to use the skill to have a chance
>of gaining another increase chance.
>
>Does anyone have any thoughts about this sort of a system?

While we don't use this system of immediate increases (though I have
forwarded it my players for their opinion), we do use a system to
reward good role-playing and to "fill in the gaps."

Good Role-Playing Rewards
At the end of the session, I give any palyers who role-played well
that evening a free experience check in the skill of their choice.  It
may even be a skill that they already had a check in for that evening.
They still must make the experience roll (fail a skill roll).

For trully outstanding role-playing, I award a free experience gain to
any skill of the player's choice, just as if he or she had made a
successful experience check.  I usually only give out one such reward
a session to the player who's playing impressed me the most.

In addition, I will sometimes fill in the gaps by giving the players
free experience checks in certain skills I select.  For instance,
while travelling up the Zola Fel in the boat, I allowed the players to
make "free checks" in boating at the end of the night (actually, a few
of them specifically stated that they were training with Grandad -
these did not get the free check).

---
Clay W. Luther                                 clay@vortech.com
Software Engineer                             Vortech Data, Inc
Office (214) 994-1377                        Fax (214) 994-1310
                             Also cluther@morticia.cnns.unt.edu

---------------------

From: clay@morticia.cnns.unt.edu (Clay Luther)
Subject: Re: Fun with Hazia
Message-ID: <9302091715.AA18660@charon.vortech.com>
Date: 9 Feb 93 05:21:58 GMT

>From: ade@insignia.UUCP (Adrian Brownlow)
>
>My PCs tried to dump it in Sor Els birthday beer to stonk out all the
>Lunar officers in Pavis. Perhaps they shouldn't have got caught
>painting Orlanth Runes on the Seven Mothers Temple. .....One
>Crucifiction Later...... No! Sor El ,, that most bonevolent ruler
>needed scouts for dangerous work..

My players are physically close to Sor-Eel at the momentd they cannot
decide if this man is a complete imbecile or if he *plays* at being a
complete imbecile.  To perform him, I affect a cross between Claude
Rains and John Hurt.

Any hints on Sor-Eel's motives and character would be appreciated.

---
Clay W. Luther                                 clay@vortech.com
Software Engineer                             Vortech Data, Inc
Office (214) 994-1377                        Fax (214) 994-1310
                             Also cluther@morticia.cnns.unt.edu

Well, it had been 987 years in outer space time when I got back.
Couldn't seem to find any of my friends to tell my interesting
stories to.

---------------------

From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (Alex Ferguson)
Subject: Priests and POW
Message-ID: <9302092311.AA08639@seram.dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Feb 93 23:11:46 GMT

So what do people think about having some kind of POW requirement for priest
and acolyte positions in RQ3?  Other than the "Test of Holiness", that is.
qIf I recall the RQ2 rationale for the POW 18 restriction on priests, it was
"so they could lead worship ceremonies", or something to that effect.

This isn't reflected in any way by RQ3 (apart from Magic bonus being
figured into Ceremony skill).  Should it be?  If not, a sensible
(non-adventuring) priest would sacrifice for divine magic until his
POW was 2, getting a 95% POW gain roll each holy day.  Repeat as
(un)necessary.  Silly?  You bet.

A possible fix would be to limit the chance of a successful Worship to
POWx5% (or POWx3%, or whatever) or Ceremony skill, whichever is the
lower.  This takes care of the POW 2 guy, and provides at least a bare
minimum POW requirement if you apply it to the standard 50% in ritual
magic requirement.  It would also provide a rational means of
comparing rival candidates for a post, without introducing an
artificial qualifying standard.

Thoughts?

Alex.

---------------------

From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (Alex Ferguson)
Subject: Mostly metals
Message-ID: <9302092005.AA08354@seram.dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Feb 93 20:05:23 GMT

Brandon Brylawski:
> I have always understood aluminum and quicksilver (mercury) to be the same
> metal, prepared differently, with aluminum having neutral buoyancy in water
> as well.

Yes it is.  But it's described as being _red_ in the boxed article in
Elder Secrets, where it is also associated with Lodril, very possibly
spuriously.

It certainly strikes me as _unlikely_ that two different forms of the
same metal would have different associations, but who knows?  It
struck _me_ as unlikely that they'd be different colours!  Of course,
the process of converting one to the other is left vague, so could
involve all sorts of strange things.  (And let's not drag (earthly)
Iridium or the like into matters just the complicate them.  :->)

> Is Bronze really associated with the Air? I thought bronze was from
> god bones and had no specific association

Either storm god bones, or from "where (Umath/Orlanth)'s parents once
loved": ie, mixed Earth and Sky (=Air).  Of course, it's not a "real"
Rune Metal in the usual sense at least.

> In most of the societies in these
> worlds, wearing a metal one hasn't "earned" through status or deeds is an
> error, ranging from an impropriety to a mortal insult to a capital offense.

This sounds like a quick way to get lynched by one's players...  "We
grab the  sword off the body...  Oh no, here come the Rune
Metal Police!"  :-)

Trouble is, this is left pretty open-ended in RQ3.  Do the cults let
initiates get Enchant ?  How offended do they get if someone
from outside the cult is seen strolling round with "their" metal?

Personally I feel there should be a more direct link between cult
runic association, and cult rune metals.  Maybe some kind of "default"
user condition.

Carl Fink:
>   Um, we were talking about minor offenses before.  For a serious
> offender, Monrogh might be appropriate.

We were talking about someone who breaks a geas.  This is specificly a
Monrogh-invoking offence.  However, I think it would be reasonable to
allow some interval in which the offender is allowed to make
recompense.  What I'm less sure about is whether the gift
corresponding to the broken geas should be lost immediately anyway, or
only after the attack.

>   Um, "Christ" is a title, meaning roughly "Annointed One" or "Chosen
> One".  "The Prophet" is clearly a title as well.  Mexican kids named
> "Jesus" are named with their deity's name, just as a kid named
> "Yamsur" (or "Orlanth") is.

So what is "Splendid" then, pray tell?  ("An epithet", if one wants to
be picky).  "Yamsur Stumblebum" I would have had less of a problem
with.  (I also note a "Yelmsfoot" in _River_of_Cradles_, which seems
reasonable).  Clearly attitudes as to what's blasphemous, and what's
reverential, vary widely, but "Yamsur the Splendid" -> "Splendid
Yamsur" is stretching it a bit.  Hadn't we decided this was something
of a Last-Minute No-Brainer in any case?  After all Yamsur isn't just
a god, but a necessarily obscure, _dead_ god.  "Gee, thanks, Mum,
Dad."

> >Enchantment and POW sacrifice: must it be the caster who supplies the POW
> >for an enchantment?
>   Yes.  Any reference in other sources which lets anyone but the caster
> sacrifice POW for an enchantment is incorrect.

The existence of such references suggests to me that this rule needs
work.  I would prefer this to work more like the RQ2 process: Rune
Lord donates POW, but doesn't need to know spell.  Unreasonable?  This
problem may be a symptom of the fact that there are no rules for
"group" rituals.

Steve G:
> > What are the runic associations of the various metals anyway?
[RQ2:]
> 		Tin : Air
> 		Silver : Moon
> RQ3 has Silver : Air; and no Lunar metal, nor affiliation for tin.

Silver seems to be "Middle Air" in general, since both Lunar cults and
Orlanth get Enchant Silver.

> I prefer the RQ2 affiliations (Tin being associated with Jupiter and Silver
> with the Moon in this-world astrology) so have amended all my material
> accordingly, and would junk aluminium as being too much a post-Enlightenment
> material.

A planetary association with Tin could be almost anything: Dayzatar
(sky dome in general), any of the Gloranthan "planets"... (Mastakos,
Tolat, Moskalf, err, forget the others).

So did Tin do anything amusing under RQ2 rules?  RQ3 is basicly "don't
bother enchanting".

> The origin of iron as given in DW24 suggests that its runic affinity must be
> Death (being designed by the Mostali to kill those pesky elves and trolls).

That was my feeling, though I didn't have a reference for such a
claim.  I think most of the cults with access to (Divine) Enchant Iron
have some kind of Death connection.  Orlanth is, after all,
Death-Wielder.  Yelmalio could be tricky though.  Loan from Dad?

> > Enchantment and POW sacrifice
> A specific case of the general gripe about POW in RQ3.

I don't know if I subscribe to whatever this general gripe is: my beef
is with the Enchant rules.

Alex.

---------------------

From: tzunder@cix.compulink.co.uk (Tom Zunder)
Subject: Greg is Wrong
Message-ID: 
Date: 9 Feb 93 21:05:00 GMT

God I loved Clay's description of how KoS effed his game. Very very
funny.  I agree totally, and fortunately although all my players own
KoS (they're all RQ refs as well) only one will read it (and he plays
Lhankor Mhy) so I can keep my fingers crossed. I mean they are
sophisticated and can cope with playing in a predefined milieu, as
they can in Trav, but I think they'd like to not know too much. I mean
I think KoS should have a very high SAN loss associated with it. In
many ways I wish I hadn't read it.  (But also I wanted to and am
secretly pleased I did). Oh the Apples of the Serpent!

---------------------

From: tzunder@cix.compulink.co.uk (Tom Zunder)
Subject: Red Moon, Glasnsost and AD&D
Message-ID: 
Date: 9 Feb 93 21:05:00 GMT

Although KoS is a pain and a blessing I think it leaves a broad area
for interpretation. I certainly am considering that Argrath may be a
composite.  Also the fall of the Lunar Empire may well have far more
to do with internal dissension than Argrath. I suspect that we may be
guilty of seeing a purely Orlanthi view of it all. If Greg produces a
Lunar view which is more sophisticated (the Lunars should have left
better records) then we might know.

I liked the idea that the Red Moon was still there and although the
future felt secular I might decided that in fact other bits, ie
Peloria are in better nick. I think Greg did the best and worst he
could with KoS. We all wanted to know but couldn't accept it in game
mechanics or an RQ supplement.

Could we keep AD&D out of this digest. I don't want a flamewar but
Zorak Zoran may be unleashed if such heresies are let loose again.

Non-Glorantha: I think that non-Glorantha is a good idea, but that it
needs a coherent background. Alternate Earth was a good idea and if
developed would have been enjoyable as the "other" setting. It needs a
rider in each book saying that one can leave out the RQ magic if it
grates (it does most of my players in a non-G setting). Non-specific
settings such as Daughters or Eldarad are pointless.

I have to say I would like to see Questworld redeveloped. I enjoyed
that and would like to have seen it grow. That would be a good place
for alterantive magic systems and cultures.

---------------------

From: carlf@Panix.Com (Carl Fink)
Subject: Danfive Xaron Units
Message-ID: <199302092011.AA12363@sun.Panix.Com>
Date: 9 Feb 93 10:11:19 GMT

Ade writes:
 
>Are there any references to Lunar penal battalions? If not it seems 
>they could be a groovy plot device.
 
My friend Mike McGloin is working on a Lunar Army supplement right
now.  Penal battalions included.
 
 
                         Pharinor "Fourth Punishment Legion" Arguentes

---------------------

From: okamoto@hpcc90.corp.hp.com (Jeff Okamoto)
Subject: Re: Rune Metals and Enchantments
Message-ID: <9302091932.AA04798@hpcc90.corp.hp.com>
Date: 9 Feb 93 19:32:50 GMT

> From: alex@dcs.gla.ac.uk (alex)
> Subject: Rune Metals and Enchantments
> 
> What are the runic associations of the various metals anyway?

> 	Quicksilver	:: water
> Aluminium?  (water, or heat?)  And

Actually, sa-metal (aluminum) is the metal for water.  Quicksilver
(mercury) is a Mostali metal.

> but what about Iron?  (death? stasis?)

Iron was created by the Mostali.  It has no elemental affiliation.

Jeff

---------------------

From: peterw@computer-science.manchester.ac.uk (Peter Wake)
Subject: Re: Greg is wrong
Message-ID: <9302091824.AA01809@r2j.cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: 9 Feb 93 18:24:29 GMT

The thrust of all this is that people feel confined by Glorantha.  You
get locked into all sorts of problems.  I remeber when I was playing
in a great campaign, and we were helping Starbrow and he was a real
cool guy and then it happened: I got the Wyrms Footnotes that revealed
that Starbrow's a woman.  What was my poor referee to do?  People are
really hung up on the official line for Glorantha and it's a bad
thing.

Greg Stafford talked about this problem a lot at Convulsion '92.  He
made clear that forthcoming stuff (that included KoS) would be
contradictory and muddled to try and give people more freedom.  KoS is
a 'historical document' not official game timeline or anything so it
could be complete fiction, or anything else that you choose in your
game.

The end of the line is that Greg (and I) think that your game is your
game and if you want Starbrow to be a man, or Argrath to be a toilet
sanitiser then so be it.  So Greg Stafford's not God and your campaign
isn't wrong if it's different from his.  OK!  Hail Eris!

The Chaosium/AH line is that future stuff will try not to screw you up
too much.
--
Peter Wake