Why doesn't anyone play D20 Glorantha?

[Deleriad]

Maybe it wouldnt need so much work. I see initiates and priests/lords of cults being like a prestige class. Various prerequisites to fulfil before you can enter a cult at a serious level. Lay members could just be ordinary classes, with one or two extra benefits from the cult, a minor ability. Possibly initiate-dom would be a few specific feats.

So, say you had to have a prerequisite of 12 levels of something, or a mix that added up to 12, then you could apply for the prestige class of Wind Lord or whatever. Along with the 1st level of your prestige class would come specific benefits of the cult wether you are a riunelord or priest.

That sounds like the right kind of lines. Worth remembering that to a certain extent magic for most people in Glorantha is too weak to represent in a game system. E.g. In the new HeroQuest, most people have 1-3 runes and are the equivalent of lay members in their local magical tradition. This means that basically, all you can do with your magic is draw upon it to help you a little. Initiating (and its equivalent) is seen as a far bigger and far rarer step than old RQ assumed.

In game terms that means you could easily say that most Gloranthan adventurers never learn more than a few basic cantrips to keep their swords and wits sharp. They tithe a little money to their favourite deity and occasional call upon the cults for magical support. Some adventurers will take their magic more seriously so will spend the time "gaining levels" in animistic, theistic or wizardly skills. It doesn't seem overly difficult to conceptualise.

The prospect doesn't exactly inspire me - it's not what I'm interested in - bit doesn't mean it can't be done.

For example, I would guess (from a read of D&D 4e) that you could represent runic powers as at-will and daily powers. I know that's not d20 per se but it shows that might be fairly easy to create d20 Glorantha.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

It sort of interests me as a challenge to see if it could be done.

Im sort of elaborating it in my head now. So, you would have to have certain levels in professions, or have certain bonuses for different cults. Like Issaries, you would have to have certain skills bonuses in Lore, or a Social skill, maybe have six levels in a 'merchant' profession (Could be like a Jack-of-all-trades), and have an 18 CHA.

If there were no 'magical' classes at low levels, like wizard or sorceror, then the people that weilded true power would be solely the runelords and priests. Unless, of course, the GM allowed sorcerors from the east in the campaign...

Low level professions could be the usual, soldier, pirate, sailor, thief, barbarian or primitive (Harrek), temptress (Jar Eel!), craftsman (Beat Pot Aelwin), etc., etc.. (Taken partly from the Conan rpg). You can imagine a Light Son to have been previously a Borderer or Barbarian or something, then have a few levels in soldier, (when he was stationed at the Sun Dome Temple), then, attaining the heights of runelordship after 8 levels of barbarian and 4 levels of soldier.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

For cults like Thanatar, Mallia, etc., Shaman could be a prestige class.

Also, its occured to me that you dont ever, really have to become rune level in any cult, unless it was a sort of monotheistic priest parallel. And even then, you could bypass all that religious stuff and attempt to attani power merely by heroquesting for it. Though cult agents would also be active on the hero plane.

 

[Grazelander]

Two years ago I ran a D20 3rd Age Glorantha campaign set in Balazar using Griffin Mountain. It worked suprisingly well as a diversion from my groups usual FR type play. Unfortunately after relocating I haven't developed it any further.

I used Balazar due to the lower number of cults available there and the characters could begin as pretty restricted Balazarings. I gave them 2 initial character classes one as barbarian and one other (no wizards or sorcerers and spirit shaman was available.)
Then allowed free multiclassing.
As they wanted to obtain magic they needed levels of cleric or shaman, ranger or bard.
I treat the runes as basically domains and cult membership as levels of cleric (5th level would be initiate)

Rune Priests and Lords would have been prestige classes but no-one ever got that far.

It called for lots of on the spot house -ruling as unusual situations did develop but all in all we had lots of fun and that's really what its about

 

[kintire]

So, say you want to build a character who is a god-speaker for an Orlanthi clan then you decide that this is a character class something like a cleric and then put the parts in that fit best.

But thats an easy one. What about a warrior with an interest in draconic Mysticism? Not the combat magics at all. Some people pursue magic that directly supports their day job, but some pursue magic because they believe its the right thing to do.

The problem with Glorantha d20 is that the character types are defined by culture, profession and religion, and there are many of each. To have a class or prestige class combo that covered everything you'd need hundreds. And even then it wouldn't be enough. And it wouldn't be a good fit either. Any fifteen year old Orlanthi can be an initiate: if the initiate prestige class is that easy to qaulify for, its not really a presitige class, is it?

The whole point of class based systems is that you sacrifice flexibility for ease of use. If you bring in so many classes you lose the ease of use, while still reducing the flexibility. If you're abandoning the benefit of the class system, why bother using it?

 

[Lord High Munchkin]

The real problem, it seems to me, is that the two systems have fundamentally divergent design solutions to the character modelling issue—even to approaching the matter from opposite directions.

One (as Kintire says) is based upon narrow initial choices, but later ever expanding options, while the other pretty much takes the opposite track with mythic ties narrowing down focus along certain paths.

Both work in their own ways, but swopping one for the other is always going to be a bit of a sow's ear.

Perhaps it would be more profitable, not to try and recreate a system with the other, but rather take the core aspects that one likes, and introduce them into one's favoured game system. This was examined in an old 'White Dwarf' (number 49 if I remember). It was an interesting article.

Regards