Bell Digest v931019p1

From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Tue, 19 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: eosgg@raesp-farn.mod.uk (Geoff Gunner)
Subject: Humakt ...
Message-ID: <9310181355.AA19393@raesp-farn.mod.uk>
Date: 18 Oct 93 13:55:10 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2035

re: Roland M. Volz's comment that 'IMHO, is that Humakt is not the god of
soldiers ...  Humakt is a god for warriors, especially those who have lost
causes.'

Bit of a problem, there.  Count the number of initiates likely.  Sartar has
a pop. of 200,000 (from memory); 90% *at least* are going to be Orlanth or
Ernalda, then there's Issaries (most people in towns), Chalana Arroy, etc.
So lets be *REALLY* generous and say that there are 1% who would like
to worship ANYTHING in the Humakt line (remember; Humakt severed his blood
ties, an awesome thing for a barbarian to do).  That gives us ... 2000 humakti.
Spread out all over Sartar.  I wonder, how many major temples there are going
to be ?  Zero, perhaps ?  And minor temples ?  Doesn't it take at least 100
initiates for even a shrine ?  Unless you de-restrict Humakt, you'll depopulate
him out of Godhood.

And secondly; Gods are supposed to be ideals.  Show me a christian who *lives*
as Christ instructed.  The idea of beer-swilling, unshaven oafish soldiers
turning up drunk at the Humakt rituals and getting a severe frowning-upon by
the Commander of the Temple lies close to my heart.

Some conclusions:

For shrine requirements, etc, use the average MP's sacrificed on holy days to
get an idea of the power of that holy place.  Ten fanatics are worth at least
a hundred indifferent worshippers.

For initiates, junk the '10% of time' required for cult service.  Sure, people
will tithe (leave that at 10%), but who wants 10% of a load of farmer's time ?
If your players are really gung-ho about their religion, then let them offer
their time to the temple elders, to proove how dedicated they are.  Much more
valuable, and that way the priests get to know those who are *really* dedicated
to the cause.

And the initiates of a cult don't have to be the image of their god - quite
unlikely.  Have spindly, timid storm bullians who only joined the cult because
they're the only sons and their pa threatened to brain them with a tankard if
they didn't.  Or a mean and spiteful Chalana Arroy priestess, embittered by
all the pain and suffering she's seen.

Don't make Glorantha a stereotype - it's got a lot more to offer.

Geoff.

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

From: scn/G=Neil/I=NA/S=Harold/O=Siemens_plc/OU1=Congleton@mhs.attmail.com
Subject: 1-H Swords are useful!
Message-ID: <9310181336.AA14284@Sun.COM>
Date: 18 Oct 93 14:32:08 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2036

Colin Watson comments:

>concerned about how crap 1-H swords are []. The only advantage I
can 
>see...It makes me wonder how swords ever became popular

>Well, one handed weapons do let you use shields effectively -
and 
>shields can be jolly useful...

1-H swords are popular 'cos they are preferred by Orlanth who
really likes sword due to a tip from a minor Snow spirit who
recogised
their mobility use and rebellious nature. This is because shields
make excellent sledges and the 1-H sword can be used for
steering!....... :-)

Neil Harold

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

From: mstrong@cix.compulink.co.uk (Mike Strong)
Subject: Odds
Message-ID: 
Date: 18 Oct 93 14:56:13 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2037


In-Reply-To: <9310180818.AA21564@glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM>


Simon Hibbs comments:

>An increase from 50% to 55%...

This is all wrong, surely. You are simply considering the relative 
percentage changes, as seen by the possessor of the skill that increases 
(ie an absolute increase of 5% from 50% to 55% is relative change of 
55/50=110% => increase of 10%). Such a scale is naturally non-linear, 
being a simple geometric progression. However, in absolute terms, as 
seen by the outside world, it's still only an increases your actual 
chance to achieve something by 5%. Switching your example around 
slightly, if you start with 5% in a skill and get an increase of 5%, 
your *personal* view is that you have doubled your ability - however, 
you've still only got a 10% chance of success.

There is an old riddle based on this relative percentage quirk which 
goes something like this. I am 10 years old, and have a brother who is 5 
years old which makes him 50% my age. When I am 15, he will be ten, 
which would make him 66.6% of my age. When I am 20, he will be 15, which 
makes him only 75% of my age. Since he is obviously catching up with me, 
how old will I be when he is 100% of my age? Now, we can all see the 
flaw in this, and would all agree that the 5 year increments mentioned 
here are fairly linear.

Mike

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

From: sandyp@idcube.idsoftware.com (Sandy Petersen)
Subject: Sandy Petersen
Message-ID: <9310181500.AA03061@idcube.idsoftware.com>
Date: 18 Oct 93 05:00:08 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2038

begin 666 .tar.111.Sandy_Petersen.attach
M'YV0:=R0*8/'A1PZ9@`H7,BPH<.'$"-*G$BQ(HB+-C*"`'`QQHP;-39>'`E#
MY,B1-FJ`O%B#A@T8-62`M$%CI$H;-SA6W,FSI\^?0(,*'4JTJ-&C2),FWYF.>6((A11I=TE'7GB"K.L48>13KGXYV3'H2&
M"^T=>6**(!@Q*::/D6$6EBI&45ED97U(1QURN#'E8^B%D8:K=+P1J8H!N95K
MCS1.!:64F.(I81'DH0'B&ZQZJ.L2;TQ!JGM7H)$&&RJR2FQ9GGKK1I]WR($5
MNFF,6"%636:X8;*UZGI$81AFA894((HH+0KB#LLG")&QQ:MF^I:!55EBU/&M
MCW7``:6N<]0QAK0C\CE'"D5F7-:^986!7AIMP`$NP7B8+!6R6!&*ZI]AZ(&6
M5`,]"L(=W*EHF(P!4OZ1AV5_LK=EE=6&$8;*IJA;AMCNA@&EYS"6889JUK=K(7IR6$'
MLFHU>O0<^]*E[(=TS>@6CA;:R*264PHTK%MH!_TRAC*S0?,)9P;XAA!XTZ_CRL>8*.D8;4P4JNHJ/I@0"'TB?SZ&.S<\0XIX]GBR&C
MPW0`'8887_L8)I1/?VBHC,ZU:N(4;%59).`J9O@&'#8"B^H8S'TJ)1)IO+[B
M'8:1,8?@4[:QKNQ^4CZS0-SM**RDC9XWQ^VN2XT\&7DX0QTVPSB:O0@M:5"4
M^WA5HQ2QC4=>TU6SCD"8@>A*"&^XPZXN5C^R":LNX<*0AC@4M2H!K5E-2H.D
M,#>F@"S)1UR2`Z"P9*)2*2`(;!A=D1Z#MC9(2DRZ@Q^T1&4[J6"J0P092Z4B
M!;1VI8<-4MJ7',B@.JGDX0Y5,]$5VB4MK*BN#0$Q#,J4Q#UZ%>E#1X@,=VQD
M.2%&JT+A0P^N3J>6D!7F7%09"'J:M*[SB&!_7TN/".#(ADI-KPYN:`'Z'N6M
MV]EL7WT;XHA:X+YJ784-:VC?^S#5AB(9T&/OK8@Z%E2(V
MW,Y[*E)5CZKF*J-A#02R@HP;MF6J)$@058\9S!1#ACRPP<^7IW.#Z[BB(@JR
MP8)7TV.[/%06@IBL+>U""]!,Q:0>V6U?NT.5"+*`%KK$2"IS&"3.#D:>97F(
M#M>#C'>H%+.ZL!!@J#)5F-Z`.3=YBTF&R8.)K)"&@PS0A(O"T:4<>+.<$12E(E4124U:!A;&<(8V6Z>*E'007[E!E3A:
MP[?`Y2I\.C0(4B@"",C)!G/2ZV9E`R$(/'6SNB!U8YYTG$Z#)JQF"2D@\(0?
M&L*#3FN!%$,KU55+GZ34A-X,2%9+'D8UVJPKU,5$0C`F"DNZM$,!#9*9FF,:
MU.(J,XF,29HC)='2ZBI'[@L.91E=Y-!21X*I15>)XEZ.)-:L10(.2%I,T2]5
MM->R<*V%)51=,`F#E33(C`P=0U62$I@5])0T#2W0G`N!Q=B3#88YKIH4550'
MV6%%YH!X:U)%%U-#]SQ&!V:AZQI\9`+OU(\[:["A+_L%I3OH"G*:@1YG09"$
M8<6H#'VS%:K,P!P<(4&\,`24C2(&`A1D"(Q:6R9PIP*&B[3%3?C+DADU-8I*NHD"\EC5AD
M@C*/AP:"9S%>%L19?G!KPR!0^LKQ#&=XH8AK-MFTK6UB.AL?@%DHN,=R1U@5
M$P/X"EDB/+7GNT%#7PN\/!!7X2P,0E*6F;8GI/0`2U@Z&E@,1DTSJYTZU9U6
MKW&S-];P_-"=&=I;5E2JJ-C%^EP@F#6I;3TI7)O("`6U:93,4"0PBPD.@.H+
MT&[=(4,A,D:)4EWL\"<&=27JR"-3IHK`?`)VRC`/`Q.+NYI%K>4]9WIEL!!P
M00!FL[WW2F^H7>QZ1(]<6%J)V]I61M*:#)/<0UX
MI=HU2L/"BU'QV-K"WT7*X&MHVJ%\3`9A%SS11!>9Q1N*ZF[O")R+WDY9UAJG
MPC$-!-UJB[0,A<4FTH&%4;*1KG3$71`\H5HK?4-EFVY$8MLOV1<_>9\M6KAV4M8T6-A)9B5CZY+TEI57)Y'\*6MFP8]MQ5;<3E
M$F_J@FR?ES@B-"\+8U?W8AA&Y&7]XBY6Q2N2,C`%4U`J@C!'I"P-\S"$UR&<
MAS'F<@9HM5$?8UDC0U0HHS+OERQ*!S.54VM)Y5`[`S4^P%$IY
MLS=LT3>TDRF!4U>$HU)M(36)\T(%Y#B2`CE=UDSR8SD"P4*@PSEF<1YS.&*C
M`R6F@SJ]`S22PCK8!#MMA2I?:#NXTV47Q3N^0R?M(SP"U"[&4TS*-9D?K$QND$S+=#+.!$VV)$T]
M5DTI$R.NPT;;Q'W=U#W"&$XJ,D[E1"6O,Q7JY%`.)S[O%$\51D]Z8$]>TBSZ
M=&G]]',`)0>%1E`&)8T^XT[!V%=U$U'<5U^E5E%5.5CG`4H=]5$A-5+-12PH
MI5(LY5)P\BL<5U,^8BI6-"V/L7T]M2*"&50G4IA&95;::%L.Q50%%Q!0!0)2
M5256$X$J@E5:Q55>E8!8]$&\0E;9B"4)
MR5<.-9=B\4I08DQAD%%_B2J&)0>(I5BH8B,H2!>/%09]23,B9^]F$W4B0Y"C]PXZ<5@VB*
M-DV,UC=1"&GN1*24%IG[)$>:%CZYYEUE`%X)]P:T1C^FUFP)N&IHXFI$=VQ]
MHFRUMJI5-Q446E_IP6MNX&N4*"7!5G>)=G>RFFRI6FI4YVRI$FWB0VVI=VW9
M5A?;QJJ66!;?E@;A=D+WHR+E]@;G=CW%LFYUZFYN&6_U2&_5(:)5_AQ56*G@J0F!F\GBFIQGYNB81^W@V5;(]IBLB4WD;@GF/
MH7D?6'A_Y2YJ0URCAT0&AWABXT[]YF->XIWO5-[@^
!`7D?
`
end

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

From: jdegon@vega.iii.com (jdegon)
Subject: SWORDS
Message-ID: <9310182035.AA23524@enrico>
Date: 18 Oct 93 06:35:26 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2039


---
Simon Hibbs writes:
>I think swords were more popular than spears for several reasons. First,
they
>are much easier to learn how to use effectively. Spears can only thrust
and
>axes can only cut, swords can do both. Also, even if you have a shield, it
>is useful to be able to block with your weapon as well. Swords have no
>minimum range like spears, once you get inside a spear wielder's guard
there
>is nothing he can do, similarly for axes which need space to swing. Swords
can
>be carried more conveniently than either spears or axes and can be
prepared
>quickly anyway. Of course, how you could weigh these factors into the game
>is a moot point. The fact that all Barbarian Belt (Theyalan/Orlanthi)
>characters get a base 30% in 1H Sword attack and parry is a bit tempting
>(Genertela pack players book).
>
Swords were rather popular amongst any who could afford them due to their
devastating effectiveness against a lightly armored opponent.. The fact
that the more common soldier used a spear was more evidence of poverty or
lack of technical sophistication than anything else.

I don't know if the versatility of a sword can accurately be represented in
a roleplaying combat system though.

-----------------------------------
Westlake_Tim:
>Well, during the dark and middle ages, they weren't! They were only 
>really used as dress weapons, real combat was done with things like 
>flails and maces as these could effect people in heavy armour (chain 
>etc). It wasnt until the advent of gunpowder when armour became 
>unpopular that swords became widely used as real combat weapons. The 
>holywood image of people in chain beating each other with swords is a 
>bit of a falicy.
-----------------------------------
Completely apart from their combat value, swords were as much a status
symbol as you could have, valued for their difficulty of construction,
beauty, and cost.

Jim DeGon
Berkeley, CA

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

From: joe@sartar.toppoint.de (Joerg Baumgartner)
Subject: Re: Greg's revisionism
Message-ID: 
Date: 18 Oct 93 20:49:22 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2040

Paul writes: (X-RQ-ID: 2028)

>  Many people have mentioned the revisionist history of the origins of
>Yelmalio.  I will point out another example (there are hundreds, I'm sure.)
>In the Genertela Book, set in 1621, Moirades is listed as King of Tarsh.
>In King of Sartar, pages 119 & 127,  Moirades is said to die in 1610 and to
>be succeeded by his son Pharandros.

>  This sort of thing is irksome if one is trying to write a scenario set
>in Tarsh in the 1610's, for example.

In KoS p.147 (bottom paragraph) it says (1617 ST):
"King Moirades agreed, and ordered his priests and generals to help 
Fazzur."

On p.152 (1625) "... King Moirades sent his own general to quell the 
subsequent raids.

On p.154 "The first person to react was King Moirades of Tarsh, who 
sent his army to seize control of Aldachur."

Only on p.157, well into 1630 ST, King Pharandros is mentioned. Mostly 
as brother of Estal Donge, by the way, with whom he was confined to the 
City of Wonders (1632) (which BTW on p.152 "disappeared from the world 
forever." (Winter 1624/25).

On p.28 Moirades was alive even shortly before when Mularik jumped the 
walls of Furthest ("The horsemen of the queen ... captured the [evil] 
king, and killed him.")

>  What do people think?  Should we take RQ material as canonical for future
>submissions?  Is Glorantha splitting into two worlds, Greg's rapidly shifting
>one and the more permanent RQ Glorantha?

>  Anyone have any speculation as to why Greg changed his mind on Moirades'
>death date?  It seems gratuitous.  The Elmal/Yelmalio changes make some
>sense, but this playing around with death dates of mortals does not seem
>'forced' by mythic considerations.

Given the evidence I gave from KoS, I doubt that he did change his 
mind. He gave several (possible?) timelines for the Hero Wars, check 
e.g. Minaryth Blue's "Events of my life" (p.211) which have the merit 
of coming from a contemporary sage and active member of Argrath's ring. 
(See the incomplete footnote 53 on p.24; I heard the rumour that the 
"death" was actually only subterfuge, and that the Purple Seere became 
the Blue Sage.)

>  BTW, this is not a simple change that can be smoothed over by saying 'one
>of the scribes who wrote the Composite History of Dragon Pass got the date
>wrong'; rather, the story of Moirades and Pharandros takes several pages
>and is intimately interwoven with much of the history.  Thus it is a real
>change.

My advice: Ignore the dates given on pages 119 and 127. Moirades 
figures prominently until ca 1630 throughout KoS with exception of 
these two entries. With the additional "proof" from the Genertela Book 
I see no reason not to let Moirades grow 72 years old.

The ascension of Pharandros as king in 1610 may be true at the same 
time. If we look at the Frankish kings and the Anglosaxon Kings 800 AD 
+- 50 years, we often find the son and heir crowned while the father 
still lived, to provide a smooth transition (worked almost never), and 
regardless of inheritance customs otherwise followed.

Temporal inconsistencies are a burden on Glorantha which predate KoS. 
Harrek the Berserk enters the Kingdom of Jonatela, and is transported 
from there into the Lunar empire, about 15 years before it is released 
from the Syndics' Bane, which fell in 1496 ("History of the Lunar 
Empire, The Fifth (or Hon-eel's) Wane" in Heroes 1.6) or in 1500 
(Genertela Book).

And I am sure if we look closely, we'll find other slips as well. I'm 
pretty sure that at the time of writing the Genertela Book Greg didn't 
use the revisionist history approach deliberately (yet). I know from my 
own efforts on my campaign world that it is nearly imossible to avoid 
inconsistencies when designing a whole world incuding its history.

But I agree that we can try and create an interactive "true Glorantha 
pool" on the internet. Only: What about all the unlucky people without 
net access, or those with wildly deviating campaign histories? The "One 
True Way" trap seems to catch us here, too.

Joerg
-- 
--  Joerg Baumgartner   joe@sartar.toppoint.de

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

From: watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk (Colin Watson)
Subject: weapons; resurrection
Message-ID: <9310182101.AA00969@condor>
Date: 18 Oct 93 21:01:07 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 2041


Thanks to those who gave comments about the benefits and drawbacks of 1-H
swords. To recap: I was concerned about how expensive broadswords were in
comparison to cheap-and-cheerful 1-H spears (same damage, same SR, same AP)
and I wondered why people would use them.

From the reaction I think an important factor, which I hadn't fully
considered, is the portability of swords. It should be much easier to carry
a spare broadsword around than a spare shortspear. I think the difference
should be somewhat more than 0.5 ENC!
I also think that swords should have more AP (or spears should have less).

And, of course, Sandy Peterson's ideas about weapons damaging each other
make good sense. (My sorceress gets really annoyed when her Greatsword is
damaged by a pesky pike!).
_________________
Graeme A Lindsell:
>I've become a bit worried about the great advantages RQ seems to
>give the 2 handed weapons. [...] The only advantages with
>using 2 1 handed weapons are the ability to parry on the same SR
>you attack and the coverage shields gives against missile fire.
>Are there any others?

Well, the coverage of shields vs missile fire *is* a fairly big advantage,
especially in battlefield conditions.
And big shields can give a lot more AP to parry with than 2-H weapons.
But the main bonus of using a two-weapon combination comes when one of
your arms is incapacitated. If you wield a two-handed weapon and you lose the
use of an arm then you're in deep trouble. If you use two weapons then
at least you have the option of parrying (or maybe attacking) with your good
arm the next round. (I'm fairly certain that real troops wouldn't think like
this, but from a game point of view it makes a big difference).
In my experience, characters with weapon+shield seem to last longer than
two-handed maniacs. They don't deal as much damage, but they *survive* longer.
_____________
Resurrection:
I'm not in the habit of taking "King of Sartar" too literally, but I thought
I'd have a look at what it had to say about Chalana Arroy and Resurrection.
Sure, it says CA priestesses sometimes raise the dead. But then it goes on to
say that the process CAs use to recover their major magicks is rather unusual:
in fact it mentions, cryptically, that "7x7x2 participants" are required for
the ceremony to recover use of their mighty spells (presumably to recover
re-usable Resurrect). Does anyone know what this means?

If it's open to interpretation, then it could radically affect the
availability of Resurrection in a campaign:

- If the 98 "participants" merely have to be initiates of the Orlanth pantheon,
  then things are easy: the priestess can recover Resurrect any time she likes.
- If the "participants" have to be CA initiates then things could get
  trickier. Consider peoples' estimates of the number of CA initiates around:
  eg. Sandy Peterson estimates 100 such initiates in Boldhome (pop 10,000).
  So nearly all the initiates have to be available (for several days) in order
  for the priestess to recover her Resurrect spell. Considering that normally
  only 10% of initiates will be on duty, it looks like the only times which
  are convenient for all would be the Holy Days...
- Now, if the "participants" had, themselves, to be priestesses then this would
  merit a grand occasion indeed! Maybe only on High Holy days, once in a blue 
  moon (heh).

These three possible options give plenty of scope for controlling the amount
of Resurrection available.

___
CW.