Sorcery

[Quintus]

Nice.

See, I can either sit here, and do two thing:

1. I love the Book. Everything you wrote in there makes perfect sense. Awesome. Write more...

2. Great book. It has some flaws...

3. Ok book - how do you use it...

4. Not good. Makes no sense...

5. Waste of time...set down the basic rules first...and fix some things you left out and did not explain.

Now. I've chosen the last approach. Why? I really dont care to make your aquaintance. You got my money, that should be good enough for you, and I don't look for friendships on forums. Neither will I waste my valuable sugar and blow up your you know what...

What I do want, is answers, that make sense. Giving me a rant on this, that or the other without adressing the questions I raise, is hiding the fact that you don't know the answer, exept to what you write in your stories, instead of game mechanics.

I asked 2 questions. In return I receive a whole lot of attention, and no-one can give me a straight answer.

You created a world for dinosours. People that waited 20 years to hear what you have to say...thats absolutely funny. Now start talking to a new age of players - those that started playing 2nd and 3rd edition D&D. You will not convert them with ambiguous rules, missing or otherwise.

So you claim that you have to be 20+ years old...ok. I can create characters that are from 15-30...what kind of an excuse is that? And why would they not teach their young, new students the same spells and skills that they need in life as a starting sorcerer? And were speaking of spells. There are no power levels for spells...they just are.

No where does it say that spell X is more advanced than spell Y.

Your doing what a friend of mine used to do. He'd read a book, think it was a neat universe, and created a D&D game to fit into that concept. Nice. They lasted all but a few sessions...mostly beacuse once he exhausted HIS concept of what the world is like, and the author was not on hand to give him more info, he lost his footing.

Same thing here. Your taking a world you like, and have this conception of how it "ought" to be like, and write rules to fit that immage. Then you dont understand when someone like me takes the gloves off and challenges you!

Take it like a man and defend your believes. I'm still here writing. You may not like it, but I'm still reading your post, and the others, and rise to the challenge. And I bet everyone infolved with gain something from it.

Either:

1. A greater understanding of how the universe you write about IS NOT.

2. A greater understanding of how the universe you write about IS.

Either way - so what If I'm playing Devils Advocate...don't matter much to me...I have very thick skin.

So my friend, I thank you for your continued and empathetic defense of your work. Salute! But I still want to know why Wizards start with mere runes, instead of some basic sorcery skills, and some sorcery spells. That is all my dear Kamerad in arms...

Q...

 

[weasel_fierce]

Why does the D&D players handbook have level 9 spells, when you cant start with them ?

I mentioned it one of these multiple threads on the topic, but there's no inherent reason why a starting character should have access to everything in the world. Sorcery isnt particularly common amongst the normal folks. If you want to make it that way, then the burden is on you.

As written, most ordinary folks dont have a lot of magical stuff, except maybe a few rune tricks.


It seems your issue is that the rules dont give you what you expected (i.e. specific templated rules for beginning play with every option mentioned in the rules). I doubt this has ever been a design goal from the Mongoose folks. So it comes down to you expecting something that was never intended, nor promised.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

DBC, I owe you a burger. Even one of those unedible ones.

"Its a cat. Why doesn't it bark? I have dog. It barks. This cat is useless."
- Penny Arcade

Jeff

Firstly, awesome reference. I was thinking that, too.

Secondly, can it be one of those gummi burgers? I love those, they rage.

Actually, I harbor a bit of resentment against Metallica.

St. Anger, right?

Continuing this unrelated thread, one of the finest shows I ever saw was when Iggy Pop and PIL played down in Berkeley back in the mid-80s. John Lydon kept taunting the audience after pulling the amp feeds from Steve Jones' guitar during Iggy's set. A wonderful show!

Freaking awesome. I am rendered insane and frothy by twists of jealousy.

 

[Voriof]

Nice.
Either way - so what If I'm playing Devils Advocate...don't matter much to me...I have very thick skin.

Q...

Actually, you're playing D&D and that might be part of the problem. It has a peculiar effect on the mindset. The D&D mindset doesn't work that well when you're playing this game, as others far more eloquent than I have said.

Continuing this unrelated thread, one of the finest shows I ever saw was when Iggy Pop and PIL played down in Berkeley back in the mid-80s. John Lydon kept taunting the audience after pulling the amp feeds from Steve Jones' guitar during Iggy's set. A wonderful show!

Like Mr. Clown, I am transfixed with envy.

As to the other, I have no idea what a gummi burger is. I am afraid to ask.

Jeff

 

[richaje]

Freaking awesome. I am rendered insane and frothy by twists of jealousy.

Maybe at Tentacles, I'll tell you about the time Kurt Cobain stole all the hot dogs out of my refrigerator. Or when myself and a few guys from the Bosstones and Bim Skala Bim stole all of Goldfinger's booze while they were performing. On retrospect I screwed up by hanging out with too many Boston ska bands - if I had been smarter and hung out with the Orange County bands I'd be hanging out with Gwen Stefani instead of hanging on a gaming forum with you guys!

Jeff

 

[soltakss]

HOW do I create a Wizard, using the Sorcery Skill Rules and Spells?

1. A God Learner Sorcerer or a Dragonspeaker Mystic is not a 'beginning-level' character. They are both people in professions that takes some degree of time to master, to research, to study and to train into. They are not characters who are just starting out on the road of life, they are people in their 20s+ who have worked very hard to fit into their magic-based societies.

Judging on the requirements to be any good at God Learner Sorcery (i.e. learning the Five Manipulation Skills from books and/or a mentor as well as the costs of training, etc.) or Draconic Mysticism (i.e. Enlightenment and the costs of training, etc.) I thought it was plain as day that a beginning character with his initial points isn't really going to be able to do it. I mean, that's clearly obvious from the rules and the setting.

Why should we be restricted to playing 'beginning-level' characters?

Legendary Heroes has rules for writing up an advanced character from scratch, using lots of points, so I can't see why people can't start with Godlearner sorcerers or Dragonspeakers. Sure, they'll be sketches and not fully developed but they are a good starting point.

It does seem strange that there are no rules for starting as a wizard. You know, someone who has been an apprentice for a while and has started to learn sorcery spells and skills. For a game that has Glorantha Second Age as its prime game setting, in which the Godlearners are one of the main participants, it is very odd that we don't have any Sorcerer professions.

To me, it seems an oversight. Or, it is a deliberate ploy to stop us playing sorcerers.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

HOW do I create a Wizard, using the Sorcery Skill Rules and Spells?

1. A God Learner Sorcerer or a Dragonspeaker Mystic is not a 'beginning-level' character. They are both people in professions that takes some degree of time to master, to research, to study and to train into. They are not characters who are just starting out on the road of life, they are people in their 20s+ who have worked very hard to fit into their magic-based societies.

Judging on the requirements to be any good at God Learner Sorcery (i.e. learning the Five Manipulation Skills from books and/or a mentor as well as the costs of training, etc.) or Draconic Mysticism (i.e. Enlightenment and the costs of training, etc.) I thought it was plain as day that a beginning character with his initial points isn't really going to be able to do it. I mean, that's clearly obvious from the rules and the setting.

Why should we be restricted to playing 'beginning-level' characters?

Legendary Heroes has rules for writing up an advanced character from scratch, using lots of points, so I can't see why people can't start with Godlearner sorcerers or Dragonspeakers. Sure, they'll be sketches and not fully developed but they are a good starting point.

Uh.

What?

There are rules for starting as these characters. They're the "Starting with experienced characters" rules in the RQ corebook. That's...that's why they're there. Notice that even a Veteran-level character is only about 23 years old.

I...don't understand your issue, Sol. Unless you're somehow against using the established corebook rules to make a perfectly legal and valid character that meshes with the setting, or something.

My PCs did exactly this, as I spent ages explaining yesterday. They're not sketches; they're as fully developed as you like. The only difference is, the generic basic character creation is pretty 'weak' for reflecting people who have spent years studying and training in advanced disciplines like God Learner Sorcery or Draconic Mysticism. So they needed a few extra skill points, which the rules in the main core book has a section on allowing and using precisely for such reasons.

I think you might be getting bogged down in rhetoric or semantics here, because the rules for starting as a God Learner sorcerer or Dragon Mystics are perfectly valid. I've played over 20 sessions with characters made from them, myself.

 

[soltakss]

There are rules for starting as these characters. They're the "Starting with experienced characters" rules in the RQ corebook. That's...that's why they're there. Notice that even a Veteran-level character is only about 23 years old.

Yes, there are rules for making Veteran characters. Fine.

I...don't understand your issue, Sol. Unless you're somehow against using the established corebook rules to make a perfectly legal and valid character that meshes with the setting, or something.

Sorry, I wasn't being clear. I'll bullet-point the questions.

1. Are there any rules that allow you to start off with Sorcery Spells/Skills in a profession?

2. Is there a profession writeup for Sorcerous Characters?

3. If I wanted to start a sorcerer character, where would I look in the published rules for guidelines as to how to do this?

Perhaps it is quite clear and I have just missed the references.

Perhaps they are just created under the advanced rules and don't have a template to work off. If that's the case, then it's a shame as profession templates are very useful.

 

[Dead Blue Clown]

Perhaps they are just created under the advanced rules and don't have a template to work off.

Bingo. That's what I do. EDIT: Actually, I misunderstood that. I meant the 'experienced' rules in the core rulebook. I've not even read Legendary Heroes yet.

It's simple enough. You choose a cultural background and any reasonable profession as a base, like whatever the character did in his spare time (or most of his time) while he was initially learning God Learner Sorcery or Draconic Mysticism. Then with the 'experienced character' rules in the corebook, you buy his Advanced skills.

My characters are all Townsmen, and their classes are Explorer, Farmer, Craftsman and Scribe. This represents what they did in their teens while they were slowly learning the complexities of their culture's magic.

It's worked great in play, too. Our 24th session is next week.

If that's the case, then it's a shame as profession templates are very useful.

I'd do without them completely if I had my way, actually. I've always preferred classless character creation where everything is chosen as befits a character concept. But I recognise that a certain structure is a selling point for a lotta folks.

 

[simonh]

If that's the case, then it's a shame as profession templates are very useful.

I'd do without them completely if I had my way, actually. I've always preferred classless character creation where everything is chosen as befits a character concept. But I recognise that a certain structure is a selling point for a lotta folks.

They're not just useful for creating staring player characters, for players who may have never played a game without classes before and otherwise be a bit lost, but they also help when it comes to NPC creation time. One fast way to create believable and well rounded NPC characters is just to give them 3x or 5x their profession skills, instead of allocating out an arbitrary number of points, as for PCs.

They show what professions exist in a society and how the game system supports creating such characters. That's what they were used for in RQ3 to good effect, but MRQ seems to have missed that aspect of the idea completely.

 

[TRose]

One of the ways you can balance Godlearners versus other players is charge hero points to become one just like you do a rune priest or rune lord. Since they are more powerful charge what you think would be a fair amount of hero points, perhaps around 24. And you could also then charge them hero points to learn rune or divine spells as sorcery spells.
You can always find a way to balance out players if you put your mind to it, and without screwing over some body ewither.. Just takes a little thinking

 

[Gnarsh]

Why does the D&D players handbook have level 9 spells, when you cant start with them ?

Sure. But there are clear rules stating how you can progress from level 1 to a high enough level to use those spells. And clear rules for which spells can be used depending on which path you use to get there. And how the spells work, how many you get, how you gain more, etc...

I think the big problem here is that many players are coming from the idea of "classes", and not quite getting that RQ is not a class based game. Anyone can learn any skills. The starting professions just represent the things that a typical "young" person might have learned depending on what he did while growing up. Nothing more. And there will be skills that you can't learn from a starting profession. You have to find people to teach them to you as you progress.

It's up to the GM to decide how those skills can be obtained. He can choose to provide them to players using advanced skills rules and allow them to start with older characters with some of those under their belt. Or he can provide specific social structures within the world that one must join to learn them (cults, groups of wizards, orders of warriors, etc...). The rules are intended to just be backround and guidelines for GMs to use.

Having said all of that, there are still some issues. As this thread indicates, this isn't totally made clear to a new reader of the game. Sometimes, it's easy for those of us who've played in a classless game for a long time to forget that not everyone automaticaly assumes that skills not listed in a profession can be obtained via some other method, you just have to decide how along the way. Part of the problem is a lack of "meta-environment" feel to many of the books. They lay down the rules for each component, but don't always clearly explain how they can all fit together.

This can lead to confusion for newer players, and frustration as they look through the rules and don't see a rule written down for how players can use certain skills or abilities. Yeah. They could use their own imaginations, but I think it's wrong to just condescend those who don't automatically "get" what the authors of the books intended. I only took one communications class in college, and I don't remember much from that class, but one thing I *do* remember was that when you have a miscommunication between the source and destination of a communication, it's *always* the fault of the source. Always. Because presumably, the source is the one trying to communicate. Thus, the burden to ensure the the destination recieves the information properly is his.

This can tend to be forgotten in the publishing world, where it's about selling X number of copies of something. But it's really important. If someone doesn't understand the purpose of a set of rules in MRQ, or how to use something, or why it exists in the first place, it's likely because it wasn't explained well enough in said rules. Even if you *think* you explained it well, you obviously didn't because someone didn't understand. That's implied in the communication model I discussed above.

Could the request for information have been expressed better? Sure. But instead of telling him stuff like "I thought this was obvious!", why not actually just take the time to explain how the rules are intended to be used? It took about 3 pages to get around to that, and several people providing input. Call me silly, but it just seems like you'll sell more future product if your spending the time on the forums answering question (yes. even the "stupid" ones), rather then belittling the people who ask them.