>But in my experience, players only twist rules 'based on a misplaced
>comma' if the comma matters. In other words complex games are more prone
>to this than simple ones.
I agree. Well said, Frank! (and what a fine name, too ;-))
>but I want my games user friendly. Especially as a gm. And as a gm I would
>love to be able to make a scenario with the following sentence: "The party
>is attacked by a large group of Feral Broos-15"
>Ha en god dag!
The same to you, wholehearthedly (buonagiornata!)
>Ever tried letting the players roll resistance for eachother? To ease
>the>work load of the gm?
Ehi, why am I so "in solido" with you, today?
Tim Byrd wrote:
>I was happy to have rules that I could use to reign in player abuses. On
>the other hand, very complex rules
>played right into their hands, as many of them were "rules lawyers" of the
>type you described:
A part from RQ, I started a small D&D campaign two weeks ago with eleven-twelve y.o. children as players. I used the D&D rules because people with more experience of eleveners than me adviced me to do so. I strongly recommend to use the appropriate kind of rules for the appropriate range of players (and/or GM)-age. My senior group started to play (with d&d rules) when we were 17. Now we are 30-32 (time is a subjective subject ;-)) and we use RQ3 (with a strong push of house-rules) but I hope to upgrade to HW as soon as possible...
Steve:
>(BTW, anyone notice that with HW we'll have to change our language?
>When you "roll up" an HW character, you're not 'rolling' anything...)
That's part of the miracles of the new millennium (for those of you who
think that we have already entered the third one...).
>Sigh. That was supposed to be private. Normally I am much more
>civil....
errare humanum est ;-)
nihil humanum ad me alienum sit (I didn't checked my dict, here, sorry for
the mistakes).
>There are ways to tighten up the 100 words (remove second mention to
>being born in Jonatela for example) but else it is good.
>Comments?
Thanks, Wesley and Steve (and Jeff too, for the following comments).
>I would place a runelord around 10w.
I assumed that HW20 = RQ3100%, am I wrong or is this a MG (mine Glorantha)
choice (that I am unaware of?)
So (IMG) a RuneLord with 110% Bastard Sword A, becomes a RL with a 2W
ability and it usually more skilled than circa 98% of those whom he meets.
Is my question clear?
The issue of the Iron Sword: I assume Steve means that it is a non-enchanted (RQ3) iron sword which reduces the effetcs of magic. We usually have enchanted Iron in Glorantha, so this is no ordinary (even if more cheapy) "magic sword" at all!
>Devotees go to temple everyday and spend 4-5 hours in prayer or service
>and sarficice a sheep a week. Their God says "Joe Humakti is my
>friend!" You get access to all affinities, feats and can learn the
>cult secret.
This is awful! 4-5 hours a day in prayer is something that I doubt even the
Pope (in RW) would enjoy! Wesley, I hope you are joking...
I remember reading in the RQ rules that the frequentation of ritual
services, in G (as in the RW) is not at all so important, if you (PC)
understand and apply the basic value of your own cult in your everyday life.
Really IYG, you guys use these assumption? How much time should Onlaught
spend in praying to Humakt, then??
Ciao
Gian
Powered by hypermail