Bell Digest v930129

Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 18:04:55 +0100
From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Digest for Fri, 29 Jan 1993

This is an (almost) automated digest, sent out once per day (if any
messages are pending).

Send Submissions to: 		    	
Enquiries to:		  
The RuneQuest Digest is a mailing list on the subjects of Avalon Hill's
RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.
Maintainer: Henk.Langeveld@Sun.COM


From: (Shannon Appel)
Subject: A New Mailing List
Message-ID: <>
Date: 28 Jan 93 01:14:54 GMT

Just to let you all know, I'm starting up a new mailing list called
'The Chaosium Digest.'  It will be a forum for the discussion of all
of Chaosium's "other" games (ie Pendragon, Call of Cthulhu,
Stormbringer, Elric!, Hawkmoon, Superworld, Ringworld, Worlds of
Wonder, etc).  Games which already have their own mailing lists (ie
Runequest) will _not_ be discussed.

If you'd like to be added to the new Chaosium Digest, drop me a line



From: (alex)
Subject: Sun County
Message-ID: <>
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:59:56 GMT

Posted this to, but not a lot of response.  (Though
thanks Clay.)  Hence, trying again...
And talking about ol' Sonny Boy... does it strike anyone (apart from me)
that the revised Yelmalio cult description in Sun County isn't as revised
as it might be?  (Not the only one either: at least one GoG divine spell
talks about "stacking with a successful divine intervention", rather

In particular, the Light Captain business.  The new write-up says the
LC is "titled" a Chief Priest... now does this mean (or does it not)
that the LC must _be_ a Priest, at least at a Major or Great Temple?
(I would guess that at a minor temple Light Servants would likely fill
all three posts.)  This would seem reasonable, and consistent with RQ2.
(And if not, then the High Priest isn't allowed to talk to him!)
But if so, what are we to make of the suggestion that the LC is also
encouraged to be a Light Son?  Reasonable-seeming and RQ2-consistent
too, but _not_possible_ under RQ3 rules!

Sun County provides at least one possible answer itself: Invictus,
Light Captain of Sun County is a Light Son and Acolyte, but not a
priest.  Since this is as close to a Rune Lord-Priest as it's possible
to get under RQ3 rules, not too bad.  But the write-up also implies
that _first_ Invictus became LC, and _then_ an Acolyte.  This seems
a little odd, to say the least, as it would result in a "Chief Priest"
unable to conduct Worship ceremonies.

Within the context of the current cult write-up, I would interpret
this to mean that the Light Captain of a Sun Dome Temple should be
either a Light Priest, or both a Light Son and Acolyte.  I would be
happier if some kind of RLP position were possible, if only for the
post of LC, but this seems to be outwith the scope of the current
rules.  Admittedly, the only rules distinction between a LS/A and
LS/LP would be the additional marriage restrictions that fall on the
latter: they are otherwise equivalent wrt Rune Magic, gifts & geasa,
allies, and indeed time/tithing requirements.  But it seems a little
odd in cult hierarchical terms.

Other quibbles:
Lay Membership: I confess I don't understand the current thinking on
lay members.  Initially I thought they were being omitted from the
short forms only, but most long write-ups lack them too.  Surely
most cults should have some kind of "Outer Temple: Admit One" status,
even if this has little in the way of requirements or benefits.

Should Yelmalio be in this category?  I would think so, since although
the Yelmalions are notorious isolationists, Sun Dome mercenaries need
not be initiates, and this seems to be the only accepted mechanism for
outsiders to join the cult.

Initiates: whatever happened to beast people, and more to the point,
griffins?  (Dragonewts are Obviously Right Out.)  Theories?

Light Priests: no POW-based requirement?  This seems odd.  I'm not
sure I much like the RQ3 test of holiness, but no POW test at all
is going a bit far, surely.  Do many people stick with the old 18
POW restriction, or some variant thereon?

Mongroth: POW of 60?!?  That's a bit stiff for geas-breaking.  Do
people play this strictly as written?  Mind you, breaking a Humakti geas
is worse, but no surprises there.  Personally I'd prefer a more sliding
scale for retribution, but this might be in keeping with Yelmalion

Yelorna: are we going to get a revised/reprinted write-up for RQ3?

Other Sun County observations: (is there an author in the house?)

Notable Personalities: only three priests are mentioned, suspiciously
few for a great temple.  Has MOB simply not mentioned the others, or
do Light Servants make up the numbers?
		     : a Dayzatar-worshiping librarian?  This seems
a little odd,  Isn't D. supposed to have more of a monastic/hermetic
cult, rather than a Yelmic Lhankor Mhy?

Militia Units: two Corianders?

Yamsur: slightly confused here... isn't Yamsur the Splendid supposed
to have been a Godtime entity?

Solinthor: why would he have become a Yelm the Elder cultist, given
the lack of Yelm worship in the area, particularly during the period

Shine, dudes...
Alex Ferguson.
ARPA:    UUCP: alex@glasgow.uucp
BANGNET: ...!mcvax!ukc!!alex     JANET:
"You mean you could have walked the galaxy and you simply never bothered?"


Subject: Re: RuneQuest Digest for Thu, 28 Jan 1993
Message-ID: <>
Date: 28 Jan 93 09:30:17 GMT

I'd like to make a point about the experiment done on chain vs. blunt weapons:
It is valid for chain, but it is not valid for padding.  I've done SCA-style
fighting with just a quilt gambeson on my torso before, and I've taken a
few hard blows to the body.  I felt them but they didn't really hurt.  However,
were I wearing chain and no padding I would have been hurt:  In other words,
I've worn a "flexible" or "soft" armor that is VERY effective against blunt
weapons--moreso than it would be against edge weapons.

I think the "errata" in this instance were written on the "dis sounds good,
George" principle rather than from real experimentation or modelling.


From: (Thom Baguley)
Subject: RE: RuneQuest Digest for Thu, 28 Jan 1993
Message-ID: <9301281926.AA09381@Sun.COM>
Date: 28 Jan 93 09:01:26 GMT

>From: (P A van Heusden)
>Subject: Re: RuneQuest Digest for Wed, 27 Jan 1993

>If you've ever worn chain, you'll see why this rule is in there. Crushing
>blows get through quite easily, sword points do not. Essentially, someone 
>over here made some home made some chain (damn good stuff, using rings far 
>smaller than those used in the medieval version). Being a bunch of raving
>psychotics, we tried this stuff out. The two tests were: (1) Take knife
>ordinary switchblade) and stab the guy wearing chain. Result: None. It was
>stopped. Dead. The impact was spread out by the links very effectively. 
>(2) Punch chain wearer as hard as possible. Result: Extreme pain on both
>the puncher just having hit a whole pile of steel rings, and the wearer (who
>was wearing no padding) just having had a clump of steel rings forced into
>his chest.

Point taken (I know someone who was stabbed whilst wearing chainmail - the
would-be mugger was very surprised when the knife broke).

>Conclusion: Soft armour vs. blunt weapons is not too effective. So, why did
>they use hammers and things against plate? (1) They were easy to make, so
>the average grunt could stand a chance against a downed knight. (2) Momentum.
>A war pick is a wonderful thing... tons of momentum, equates to tons of force
>on a very small point, equates to one hell of a blow. Swords, on the other
>we just fine for cutting up the peasants, but bounched off anything hard.

Again, point taken. Mind you, RQ plate is field plate (as per late medieval
armour) or we'd have to reduce critical hit chances for it (maybe those Mostali
will think of something).

>So, I like the new rule. Let me add a further one: Against very hard armours,
>eg. plate, natural weapons do half damage. There's no way a claw is going to
>break metal. This means that a knight can go wrestling with a bear... unless
>he loses his balance (good possibility) or is crushed to death (even better

This is fairly sensible.

There is some confusion in the RQ rules regarding soft armour: what
they really seem to mean is flexible armour (e.g. chain). My comments
were mainly intended for soft (i.e. padded) armour such as leather (or
bezainted and ringmail which include a layer of leather). My personal
preference is to stick with simpler rules unless the new rule is a
clear improvement (or common sense). Meanwhile I'll think the armour
changes through before applying them.


    _/    _/  _/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/  _/    Human Cognition Research Lab
   _/    _/  _/        _/    _/  _/     The Open University
  _/_/_/_/  _/        _/_/_/_/  _/      Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, U.K.
 _/    _/  _/        _/  _/    _/       Tel: +44 908 65-4518  Fax: -3169
_/    _/  _/_/_/_/  _/    _/  _/_/_/_/


~From: (Dicks M)
~Subject: RE RQ III errata
Message-ID: <>
~Date: 29 Jan 93 11:34:24 GMT

On the subject of overlapping armour, have any of you seen the new
RQIV rules?  The 'new way' of doing things is to have the weaker
armour contribute only half it's A.P's while counting as double ENC!!
I don't have the stats here with me, but this means that bezainted (4
A.P) worn under any hard armor except stiff leather or cuirbouilli
only counts as 2 A.P and weighs 15 ENC for an average suit. OUCH!

We,ve been using this rule for about 3 months now and it does work
quite well, making the classic 'ringmail & cuirboulli' scam totally
unusable.  However, as P A van Heusden and others before him think, we
also have made soft leather exempt from this rule. Oh, and did you
realise that your average Athurian knight in his plate & chain with
soft leather padding under (yes, I do know that this is totally and
utterly historically inaccurate, but personally I like 'Excalibur', so
bear with me), would have a total armour ENC of 3.5+30+(2*25) =
83.5!!!!! No wonder they fought from horseback!!!!

>Against very hard armours,
eg. plate, natural weapons do half damage.

I like this!!! Anybody got any ideas on the 'you hurt your hand when
you punch a brick wall effect'?? How about, any damage in excess of 3
(standard A.P's for a fist parry) + A.P worn on location go as stun
damage to your fist?? You'd get, say 1pt back per melee round, but if
you go to negative h.p in that location then you can't use it i.e
you're hopping around rubbing your sore and bruised knuckles!!! This
sort of rule would probably only apply to people that aren't that used
to using their fists i.e martial artists would probably be exempt,
animals such as a bear definitely would.

And another thing........ I can't remember who submitted the article,
but the 'pebble in a pond' ideas were brilliant.

 Any thoughts?

 - Arganth


From: SPB1@VMS.BRIGHTON.AC.UK (Ghost Dancer)
Subject: Never Trust a .......
Message-ID: <9301291530.AA05039@Sun.COM>
Date: 29 Jan 93 15:29:00 GMT

"Never trust a magic sword that was made in the Clanking City. I once
heard of one that had FireBlade set in it, the only problem was that
it would sometimes ignite of its own accord. The guy who owned it sure
got through a lot of scabbards!!!"

[Tale overheard in a Tavern, originator unknown]

"Never trust a Yelmalio to be polite, they never lie"

[Old Pavic Saying]

"Never trust a friend you owe money to"

[Old Pavic Saying]

"Never trust a friend who owes you money"

[Old Pavic Saying]

"Never trust a good pub guide written by Trolls"

[Berlitz guide to Troll Realms]

"Never trust a God to grant you Divine Intervention when you need it"

[Last known words of Bren the cynic before he was tragicly struck down
by a freak lightning bolt on a clear day, his smoking boots can still
be seen on display in the weather bureau Pavis, Pavis 1619 ST]

  /! \  Alternative
 /-!-/  Realities               Jarec
/  ! \  Games Club              e-mail: SPB1@VMS.BTON.AC.UK