From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer) To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest) Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Fri, 15 Oct 1993, part 1 Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily) Sender: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM Precedence: junk The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha. Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM", they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying. 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 enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld) --------------------- From: mcarthur@fit.qut.edu.au (Mr Robert McArthur) Subject: Re: Storm Bull Message-ID: <199310140733.DAA14898@fitmail.fit.qut.edu.au> Date: 14 Oct 93 22:33:18 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1992 Mike Leseth writes > > Hello, I just started playing RQ this fall and I am enjoying it very much. > I'm running a Praxian Nomad (Bison Rider) Storm Bull Initiate. > After reading the Daily I have come up with a question reguarding the SB > cult. > > Is there a cult weapon for Storm Bull, or can they use any weapon? > My char is getting close to Rune Level, and I am trying to have him become > more like his god. At the moment he has a Battle Axe attack at over 100%. > I was just curious if I should try using a different weapon to follow closer > to the path of Storm Bull. Sigh. Started in fall and near rune level. It took me from 1984-1991 to get that far. Sigh. How time flys! Over 100% and not even rune level yet. Sigh. I like RQII (for the most part). Sigh. To be contructive though, my SB rune lord (yeah - no wimpy priest this!) uses a bastard sword (105%A,45%P) or a pole axe (85%A,30%P). In being SB, he used fanaticism a lot and thus hasn't really got much in shield...:-) To tell a story, the character - Phynaldis - matured with the bastard sword until one day he had his first real adventure away from his 'tribe' at the spike. With a group of newly found friends he found himself investigating a counterfeiting operation in the hills between Barbarian Town and Boldhome. The operation, run by some (I think) renegade lunars, was not obvious until after the enemy had been routed. During the final moments, in a mill on a river where the operation was based, the group of friends tried moving from one room to another through an open doorway. Beside the door on the other side stood a pretty normal lunar with a pole axe. One friend quickly ran through the door to get to the lunar. kchunk! Pole axe time! Parallel to the floor the axe swung and the knockback was tremendous. We could call the result a half-ling[mb]. Friend two tries same thing (a bit differently. kchunk. hmmm. some fast thinking. Mad rush for door. One kchunk. 6 disruptions in two rounds and the guard is no more - first time our GM has seen a total death by disruption! Anyway, Phynaldis learn't from then on that "big weapon hit hard. good kchunk sound. Ugh." Actually, his int is better than that.. So, starting out at about 25% he has worked up to 85%, while still keeping in with his bastard sword. Weapons: swords (SB does has the death rune after all), mace (from troll members), axes (King Elf I think enchanted an axe with Death). Probably not daggers, thrown weapons (unless they're big - ie. push a big rock off a cliff) or missile weapons. I certainly see SB as getting in their and meleeing, being very proud of his strength and bestiality. Robert --------------------- From: STEVEG@ARC.UG.EDS.COM (Steve Gilham Entropy requires no maintenance) Subject: GodLearning GMs on the Spirit Plane Message-ID: <01H432VGSTFM0042U1@UG.EDS.COM> Date: 13 Oct 93 18:40:23 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1993 In X-RQ-ID: 1984 watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson) wrote >The problem is that the GM has to be able to reconcile it with >classical Greek/Roman mythology, 17th century transcendental >magick and a host of other sources which make up the >mythomagical background for Glorantha (RQ). which has been quite clear in the recent discussion of the spirit world : many people have been starting from the grey featureless limbo of Victorian spiritualist influenced views of "the Other Side", with only recently some-one pointing out that real-world shamanistic descriptions referred to the greater vividness of the spirit world (cf also Huxley's descriptions in _Doorways of Perception_, if I have my reference correct from memory). Of course this has to do with the fact that the "entering the spirit world" was usually achieved by the shaman getting stoned out of hir gourd on amanita (either raw or as the urine of someone who took it raw) or similar substances, and was getting all sorts of interesting visual effect (not to mention the enhanced brightness perceived through dilated pupils). I'll also take this chance to plug the Ars Magica _Shamans_ supplement which manages quite effectively to resolve the dead-guys and the GodPlane/SpiritPlane issues, as well as providing a number of interesting things for the shaman to to to really mark hir out as a distinct type of magician; and into the bargain providing some useful insights into the Hsunchen. I'm sure all you out there are rule mechanicians enough o make the conversions. mleseth@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Mike Leseth) in X-RQ-ID: 1989 asked >Is there a cult weapon for Storm Bull, or can they use any >weapon? As a storm-rune cult, then technically the choice is sword by runic correspondences. OTOH, the choice could be per clan - so a Bison Rider might follow Urox in his StormBison aspect, and use the Bison Clan weapons. I don't off hand remember the clan weapons (tabulated in _Cults of Prax_) or the elemental affinities of the five main clans (except Sable:Moon and Morokanth:Dark) which would imply the clan weapons. Or one could argue some affinity for the axe through Urox's association with Ernalda. --------------------- From: T.S.Baguley@open.ac.uk (Thom Baguley) Subject: Subcults, spirits and so on ... Message-ID: <9310141120.AA17066@Sun.COM> Date: 14 Oct 93 13:02:45 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1994 SUBCULTS There has been an interesting discussion on Subcults. I'd never given the details much thought before. Subcults should emphasise a particular aspect of a god (usually emulating a particular cult hero or mythic act often at the expense of some other aspect of the cult). I think I would like to roleplay joining a subcult in this fashion. I agree with Nick about convincing the priests - though surely one should try and convince the god (or subcult god-aspect). Of course (in the current rules for cult advancement) the two are synonymous i.e. convince the examiners. Subcult worship is through the main god aspect and I would argue that reusable magic could be regained at any site holy to the main cult. I might even argue that any rune level with reusable subcult magic was automatically an acolyte of that subcult and hence could set up a (temporary) subcult shrine at any temple). However, I assume that associate cult magic can be regained at any holy site for the main god (when you worship Orlanth you worship Ernalda as his spouse). By my reasoning, then, associate magic can be renewed either by worshiping the main god or by worshipping the associate. I'm not sure whether anyone else would agree. It does, however, suggests that our current knowledge of worship and renewal of magic is rather vague. STATS and LINEARITY Under the RQ4 rewrite POW would appear to be linear for spirit combat (though not for MP vs MP resistance in spell casting). This seems more reasonable - good spirit combat skill allowing people to win against more POWerful opponents (sometimes). Size is non-linear because as height goes up linearly mass increases non-linearly (in most cases). This leaves the rules confused because the resistance table seems to be non-linear. SPIRITS & SKILLS & MAXIMUMS Spirits should forget physical skills rapidly (unless they possess bodies very often - maybe they relearn them more quickly if given a body). Spirits with fixed INTS can't improve skills easily and are limited by a skill maximum (5 * fixed INT?). Other spirits and people will be limited by normal skill maxima e.g. 100% + D6 + category bonus (not that this seems to apply to NPCs quoted in most publications). By the way ... if species maxima apply on the spirit plane how come human fetches (allegedly part of the Shaman) can go over 21 POW? SEVER SPIRIT Maybe Sever Spirit should be rewritten. However making it temporal seems a little too powerful. How about: 1) Creates a spirit sword (or better temporarily turns an existing sword into a spirit sword) which lasts for one attempted strike on DEX SR. 2) Spirit sword is used to strike target within range e.g. contact or POW in metres (use best sword skill). 3) Overcome MP as per current rules. To make up for the fact that cast chance, sword attack and resistance roll all have to succeed I would advocate the following modifiers to the MP vs. MP resistance roll according to sword skill success: Fumble Resistance roll fails and caster takes D6 general HP damage Fail/miss Resistance roll automatically fails Success Resistance roll at normal level Special Casters MP boosted by 50% for resistance roll Critical Casters doubled for resistance roll DRAGON PASS I just played Hearts and Minds from the Dragon Pass game from start to finish. It was the first time the Sartar player has won in any game I have played (previous Sartar best was a draw). I think (on balance) the Sartar side is slightly weaker (or maybe just slightly harder to play). My real reason for bringing this up though is several rule queries: 1) Do all defending units (including those who attack) get the benefits of defensive terrain? My understanding of the rules is that they do. 2) My opponent kept some lunar magicians within the glowline in order that their spirits could attack outside the glowline at full strength. I thought that the rules didn't support this. The rules say a unit within the glowline with a cyclic factor is at full strength and spirits are described as individual units in the rules. A second argument is that the spirit is not a ranged attack and probably not the spirit of the magician, but a bound or summoned entity (tied to the red moon). 3) Can a magician unit who has had its spirit destroyed engage in defensive spirit magic (my interpretation was yes). 4) How would other people order exotic magic in the exotic magic phase? In particular, could someone use the assassins to scout a stack (and discover whether any powerful units are in it) and then attack that stack with the Crater Makers or Stormwalkers special attack (destroying all the contents of that stack). I refrained from doing this as I thought it was a little unfair on my less experienced opponent (and because the rules don't refer to it). I feel obliged to get a second opinion on these rules as most of the decisions went in my favour and we are about to embark on the marathon game. Thom --------------------- From: yfcw29@castle.edinburgh.ac.uk Subject: Colins Spirit plane postYet More spirit stuff Message-ID: <9310141427.aa16774@uk.ac.ed.castle> Date: 14 Oct 93 13:27:17 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1995 Colin Watson writes : ----- >IMHO RQ GMs are *meant* to be God Learners. It seems reasonable to me >for GMs to seek a coherent theory to rationalise the nature of magic etc in >their campaigns. It really helps to have a framework to base ideas on, and >I think that the rules should provide one. Obviously the characters shouldn't >know how the framework operates (or even that it exists) but I think the GM >is entitled to know. ----- I am not too keen on this use of God Learner immagery. The GLs had a very mechanistic, lowest-common-denominator approach and a 'universal' rules set capable of encompasing all Gloranthan magic and myth would inevitably fall into the same trap. We can get round this partly by having well thought out, clear rules for those situations which commonly affect the characters, but we do not need those rules to be infinitely extensible. c.f my comments a few days ago about the traditional spirit combat rules. They work for most campaigns and I have nothing against them, but for my own games I need more detail, so I use the RQ4 stuff. The two sets of rules are completely incompatible, but both are equaly valid as representations of Glorantha, but with different emphasis. e.g. I might rule that spirit combat between embodied PCs and ghosts should use the old MP vs MP resistance table rules, while the shaman should use the spirit combat skill rules while on the spirit plane. This would be a sensible trade off of detail and playability as appropriate to the situation. ---- >>A problem with the "All Spirits = Dead Spirits" suggestion mooted earlier >>(esp. re: vegetation) is that I am *certain* that if you went to Big Elm >>Valley on the Spirit Plane you would see the spiritual form of the Big Elm >>(whatever *that* looks like), which is still very much alive and well. >I must say that I'm beginning to like this idea in principle. >Ok, let's say that the spirits of "spiritually significant" corporeal >entities can protrude into the spirit plane. ---- This has prety much always been the case. The spirit encounter rules in RQ3 mentioned places where the spirit plane and material plane coincided, so that disembodied spirits could interact with physical places and people. Perhaps The Bilg Elm is such a place. One of the spirit paths crosses the material plane at that point and so the visibility spell is not necessery. Perhaps the high POW of the tree bends the spirit plane towards it over time? About spirit travell: Nils Hammer's ideas about spirit travell using the skills and runic affitiations to moderate the characters movement along the spirit paths could be extended to include traits and passions, for those of us interested in using them. Which reminds me : There was an interesting posting in the Chaosium Digest about a 'Raw Passion' percentage system which is interesting. It seems like a very simple and easy to use idea, creating custom passions for each character during play. The rule was by Loren J. Miller for the Stormbringer game and is in Vol 2 no 2 of the Chaosium Digest on soda. Mail the line : send chaosium archives vol.2.2 to almanac@erzo.berkeley.edu for a copy. Simon Hibbs --------------------- From: watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson) Subject: spirit battles; SRs; swords Message-ID: <9310141407.AA03551@condor> Date: 14 Oct 93 14:07:40 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1996 ________ Loren J. Miller says: >CW> Yeah, I thought about massed spirit combat some more. I see three main >CW> ways it could work: >CW> 1) You can attack one opponent but defend against many (all). > >I think this is the best way to handle it. Otherwise a pack of >weakling idiot spirits could conquer a god. I suppose either you like this or you don't. I like the idea of godlike spirits having a hierarchy minions to defend them against packs of "weakling idiot spirits" (like Mundane rulers would have). I thought the potential politics would make the SP more interesting. If godlike spirits can just sit on the spirit plane being huge & oblivious & invulnerable to the throngs of lesser spirits then there is no real need for them to have spirit minions. No politics, just anarchy. (Not that I'm particularly averse to anarchy; it just doesn't make a very good roleplaying setting:-) >Leaving world balance aside, it is similar to the way that one person >can defend against as many spells as are cast against him, but can >only cast one at a time. This is a reasonable analogy, but it's not the only one. You could draw an analogy with real (melee) combat which paints a different picture. >The defense is not an action, but is the >"skin" of the soul resisting an attack, just as the bark of the tree >resists an axe. Yes, I think there is a problem with the way that POW represents your armour/HP/attack/parry/dodge all rolled into one for spirit combat. One big spirit (POW 20) can *easily* handle half a dozen lesser spirits (POW 10). If POW is a log scale, then it must be a very steep one. It only takes a difference of 3 or 4 POW to make the outcome of a spirit combat a foregone conclusion, in my experience. I haven't worked out the odds, but I'd guess that the effectiveness of a spirit in one-on-one spirit combat doubles with every 2 points of POW or so. It's that pesky restistance table again... :-) ___________ Nick Brooke (Strike Ranks): I missed this one first time 'round. >Could some stalwart defender of Strike Ranks ... please write a >defence of the existing rules? I would be amused to see it... Well, I'm not dogmatically in favour of strike ranks, but I think that quicker'n'dirtier systems tend to be more arbitrary and less fair on the players (up to the point where you might as well flip a coin as in the old D&D initiative system). Remember, first strike is *very* important in RQ; it's not so much a question of *whether* limbs will go flying, more often it's a question of *whose* limbs will go flying *first*. The CoC DEX initiative system is fine for CoC because players don't often get into combat (unless something goes horribly wrong, and then CoC isn't *meant* to be fair on the players anyway:-) and when they do the details are less important. CoC characters don't usually do tricky things in combat (there ain't many combat spells for instance), either they shoot or (if they're smart) they run away. There is a lot more potential for variety of action in RQ, especially as far as spellcasting is concerned. Obviously some actions will be quicker than others and I think that the SR system is a reasonably fair way of resolving this. Now, if you have a good GM and ameanable players I'm sure you could fudge SRs to make things a whole lot quicker, but I feel that eventually some disagreement is going to arise... Having said all this, I've seen better systems for determining the order of actions in other games. For instance, you'd be hard pressed to find a system quicker'n'dirtier than "Judge Dredd" RPG (a real fun game!). The number of actions per round is based more on skill than anything else. It works for gunfights, although I dunno about melee. Phoenix Command has a similar (but, needless to say, more complex) system for combat actions. I think I prefer systems where speed is determined more by skill than by natural ability & weapon length. It may not be entirely realistic, but it certainly seems more heroic. But I guess for now I'll just put up with SRs. ___ BTW, is anyone else concerned about how crap 1-H swords are in RQ? You can get a 1-H spear (which is near identical to a broadsword in game terms) for a fraction of the cost. The only advantage I can see is the ability to damage other weapons when you parry: but who ever parries with a 1-H sword? It makes me wonder how swords ever became popular historically. Shouldn't they have more AP at least? ___ CW. --------------------- From: allan@tcrystal.gla.ac.uk (Allan Henderson) Subject: resurrection : life after mutilation Message-ID: <29935.9310141452@sushi.tcrystal.tcrystal.glasgow.ac.uk> Date: 14 Oct 93 14:52:17 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1997 Graeme aks how to limit the effectiveness of resurrection. I like the arguement that healers will be few and far between, and if you couple this with loss of skills and abilities for the number of days dead (i.e forgetting about your life while on the spirit plain) then death in the wilderness really is the end. If you are lucky(?) enough to die in the city where there is a healer then there are several disadvantages to being brought back to life. 1) Chances are you were killed for a reason, this presumably has not gone away 2) In my own campaign a Humakti took it upon himself that a resurrected character had cheated death and set out to redress the balance. 3) What has happend on the SP could have altered the characters reason for existing, i.e. be converted to ancestor worship. 4) Put characters off ressurection by having the odd madman in the campaign who claims to have been brought back to life by CA. "but it made me mad !!!" Even if there is a possibility of getting resurrection then make sure that there is a heavy price to pay either financially or personally or both. Cheers Allan --------------------- From: kenrolston@aol.com Subject: Reply Message-ID: <9310141155.tn29465@aol.com> Date: 14 Oct 93 15:55:45 GMT X-RQ-ID: 1998 Graeme: Re: Gross Encounters and Mild Campaign in Dorastor Read the statements of intent prefacing the book and the individual Encounter and Risklands sections. The Encounters are a design-it-yourself gross campaign -- for mega PCs and experienced GMs who can rarely use scripted scenarios as written. The stats are labor-saving and useful as examples and benchmarks of heart-of-Dorastor denizens. The Riskland campaign, on the other hand, is explicitly for beginning and mid-level characters. It may be too tough for sensible, roleplaying, non-heroic PCs (my home playtest campaign packed up and left after the spiders appeared), but it is as close as I could come to an adaptable range for beginning or moderately experienced PCs. There is no intent that the Encounters could be used with the campaign; in fact, note that there is no Riskland entry on the encounter tables, and that the campaign explicitly states that there haven't been any significant chaos encounters during the two or three years of the new colony. Dorastor deliberately contains GM development and campaign material for all levels of play. I was originally excited by the Lunar caravan structure, too; in fact, that's what hooked me on Sandy's original design. But it turned out to be a greased rail, guided tour adventure structure -- hardly a suitable structure for experienced PCs and GMs. You can only tolerate such linear structures for experienced characters when there is a big mythic payoff -- like in the Cradle scenario. I wanted a campaign setting book -- not a scenario -- and I feel that Dorastor has a clever compromise structure that serves both low-level and high-level Gloranthan fans and RQ gamers. Like all compromises, it can't fully satisfy the exclusive, narrow appetite. Only the test of time -- whether folks attempt to set campaigns in the setting -- will prove whether Dorastor's compromises were productive ones. > My question for Ken: the drawing of "Arkat the Destroyer" on P11 (I >think): are the swords flanking the scene meant to be the Unbreakable >Sword? Why is Arkat human? Did the artist get inside info or is the >picture, as one of my correspondents suggests, just bad fantasy art? Grr. John Snyder is a hard-core RQ fan, and not a bad fantasy artist. The illustration was designed as religious art for an Orlanthi temple like the one in Oxhead. The facial features are hideous to suggest troll-like disfiguration, but the representation is basically human in line with the Orlanthi graphic tradition of representation of Arkat, emphasizing his humanity over his assumption of uz culture. The swords could well be intended by the Orlanthi religious artist to represent the Unbreakable Sword, but, as usual, the contemporary artist had no idea what the real sword looked like, and perhaps only a vague notion of what any real sword looked like. The interesting details of the goat-like fallen creature to the left, the relatively benign and helpless appearance of Nysalor at Arkat's feet, and the representation of the throne of Nysalor are all worthy of disputatious squabbling among Lunar art historians. Ken