Forums of the Megaverse®

I have always treated Rune Weapons as NPCs, not as tools that players can use and abuse as they see fit... they are just too powerful to be treated as a mere magical weapon. It is like any contact, colleague or henchman... yes they will do things for you, but they are not your slave and if you mistreat them, they will eventually turn on you like any other NPC would.

Some rules should never have been introduced, no matter how good the intention of doing so was. The idea that a Sentient Sword has no control over its powers is one of them. By their very nature Rune Weapons should have control over their powers... why else imbue a weapon with a soul when you could just merely enchant it with such abilities and not have to worry about dealing with an uncooperative intelligence?

The most likely reason is because those who created such weapons wanted the weapon itself to act as a check against the kind of power they were giving these weapons. Anyone can craft a sword, but once given to a warrior, you have no control of where or how that sword will be used. The same is true of enchanting it with powerful magics. Sure, you can be careful who you give it to, but what happens when the champion who used it to defend your people is slain and the weapon is claimed by his enemies to oppress your people?

Rune Weapons however have an intelligence within them... a soul that does more than act as an Eveready Battery to keep the enchantments empowered. It makes sure that only those who it feels are worthy can use the weapon... but even those who prove worthy can sometimes fall from grace... or be coerced into going against the purpose of such weapons. It is at these times when it is the weapon who becomes the final arbiter of how its power will be used. A Rune Weapon designed to protect the innocent is not likely to let itself be used to commit whole sale slaughter... even if its wielder is an otherwise righteous defender of the weak. A blood-thirsty blade that revels in the carnage of battle will resent being held back when there is an army begging to be devastated.

Of course, some weapons will have desires that also go against its original purpose. Many Rune Weapons created during the Elf-Dwarf War developed intense prejudices against one side or the other... and may refuse to help any member of their hated race (even helping is in the weapon's nature) or may desire to slaughter every member of that race they encounter, regardless of the intention of the individual.

The simple fact is that nearly every example of Rune Weapons written up has given these powerful weapons control over their abilities without the need of this "Freewill" power... almost as if that power were not actually needed. Others have abilities that their owners can't control or prevent (that are not curses per say... in that they can't be removed through remove curse spells).

Rune Weapons are not slaves to their owners, unable to prevent them from using the weapons powers... but are partners with them... with an equal say in how those powers are used. These are not the mere enchanted weapons one have an Alchemist enchant for mere gold (or favors)... but a sentient weapon that will not take kindly to being mistreated... no more so than anyone else would take kindly to such treatment.

If that's the houserules you want to roll with, that's fine, it's not like the Palladium Police are going to kick in the door to your game room and confiscate your DM screen for misuse or anything.

Honestly, I think the system you have is just fine, it makes for some dynamic interactions and the need to occasionally wheedle your way into getting something useful done if you'd previous snubbed it by accident. But my intention was to highlight something I see all too often in RPG forums.

1: GM posts a question asking how to solve a detailed setting problem.
2: further posts and interactions reveal the GM has been operating under so many layers of houserules and home interpreations of cannon rules to reveal that the fairly normal and simple solutions posed by many are not invalid in canon but only seem too simple due to the large amount of Headcannon the GM has built up to the point they don't even realize how far they have gotten from the actual written material.
3: The GM acts a bit defensive when this is pointed out to them, claiming their rules are a natural and logical interpretation of the given material.

and you know what? In this case I won't even say you are wrong, it's a pretty good system for balancing such powerful weapons. My point is the problem you posed origionally (How to keep a rune weapon from being stolen) is only so difficult because you made your setting so it's very difficult (assuming many will actively try to steal it, assuming the Rune weapon will resist attempts to hide it). In other games i've played, not only do rune weapons, while they have personalities, are still fundamentally willing to help and don't ever argue with a players use of them except as it might violate their alignment, but also most people in big cities know better than to even try stealing it. I mean, that sword can suck your soul in one hit--what mercenary is going to be insane enough to take a job to go steal it? Who is going to pay that much? Plus even if you do find a merc willing to take the job, what if they use it's powers to rip who hired them from his mind? then you'd have that same guy with the soul-drinking sword coming for YOU. Though as you admited, as the adventuer gains fame and fortune the number of attempts will naturally dry up as word of the horrible fates of the last three people who tried to steal it gets around.


And you know? That's just as legitmate a way to play them as what you do, and probably more in line with what later published rules appear to intend for them to be played as. Personally I tend to fall somewhere between the two extremes in how I run them, I just object to your firm assertations that your way is the Right Way(tm) to play rune weapons.

Giving a thorough read of the "Free Will Consciousness" power presented in Dragons and Gods, there is still nothing that says that Rune Weapons without this power can't control the use of their powers.

This power allows the following

1) Can bond with anyone of their choosing regardless of alignment. Rune Weapons normally can only bond with one of a compatible alignment... thus this allows an Evil Sword to bond with a person of Good Alignment if it so desired (possibly to corrupt them... or to prey upon a prejudice that the person may have... an intense hatred of Elves for example). If it chooses not to bond with someone, it can convince them to not press the issue by dealing damage to them.

2) They have their own agenda (which may or may not run contrary to the purpose for which they were created). This means that if you choose not to do as they wish they can and will as they (the weapon) sees fit. More importantly though, they can USE those abilities even when their wielder doesn't want to use it. For example... a Rune Sword with the power to throw fire balls and desires to see every Elf dead can and will throw fire balls at any Elf it comes across... with or without the permission of its owner. This is different than regular Rune Weapons who need another to actually use the powers they have... but there is nothing in the description that says that these more typical Rune Weapons HAVE to let their powers be used... only that they can't activate them of their own accord (can't throw that fire ball unless their owner wants to throw one... but they can prevent their owner from throwing one if they don't want to be used in such a manner).

This power can lead to some rather interesting situations where the Weapon acts of its own accord... often to the detriment of the owner. Imagine trying to explain to a magistrate that it was the weapon that used its powers to murder an elven child... not the owner of said weapon. Likewise, such weapons can drag their owners into all sorts of undesired adventures... often to placate the weapon so that the owner can use its powers when he desires (though always at the whim of the weapon). In effect, it makes the weapon the senior partner... chances are it only needs the owner to carry it (it certainly doesn't need him to use its powers).

3) These weapons can not be mind controlled or possessed (got to admit... never thought about attempting to control the rune weapon's mind or possessing it) and has an effectively high MA attribute (assuming most tend to have a more average score).

Finally... going back to the original rules on Rune Weapons... there is again no mention that Rune Weapons HAVE to let their bonded owners use their powers. Yes, most rune weapons that have an owner of compatible alignment will let their owners use their powers as the owner desires... as it is the only way those powers can be used (the weapon can't cast spells itself, so has to let the owner cast them if it wants those spells to be used), but if the owner is acting in a way that it doesn't approve of... it can decide not to let those abilities be used.

For example, a regular rune weapon of good alignment with the power to cast Fire Ball has an owner with an intense hated for elves... so much so that the owner is willing to murder them for little or no reason. The Rune Weapon has no desire to kill a defenseless opponent, so when an elven child accidently spills water on the owner and said owner tries to use the weapon to murder the child with a fire ball, the weapon has the power to deny its owner access to its spells (as it is contrary to the way it wishes to be used). However if that same sword also had the power to heal and that child was dying... it could beg and plead with its owner to use its powers to heal the child (which the owner would likely refuse due to his hatred of elves). While the weapon is willing to let its power to be used, it is the owner who has to use the power... the weapon can't use it on its own.

Now with the Free Will power, this weapon could decide to use its power of healing on the child even when the owner has no desire to heal a dying elven child... it doesn't need its owner to channel its powers. For limited use powers (so many times per day) this can be a problem as the weapon may use up all the uses for that period of time, preventing the owner from using it when a more desperate need arises.

Most Rune Weapons want their powers to be used... it makes their current situation of being trapped in such a state a little more bearable. That doesn't mean that they have to let themselves be used in a manner they don't approve of... they are not slaves, but rather a partner who needs someone to use their powers as they usually can not use them themselves. Most owners who bond with a rune weapon will realize this and will respect the weapons desires... though there will be a few who try to force the weapon to do as they command... and often learn that such actions aren't wise.

The only ability that a Rune Weapon can't control is the damage they inflict when used as an ordinary weapon. A rune sword that can inflict 5d6 damage will deal that much damage whether or not the weapon wants to or not. The rune weapon that can throw Fire Balls can deny that power to prevent it being used on an innocent child, but it can't prevent its owner from using the weapon as a weapon to bludgeon, stab or otherwise kill the child in a more mundane fashion. Of course, being denied the powers of the weapon is likely to draw the attention of the owner who might not appreciate being denied such powers to do as they desire... possibly distracting the owner from the act it was about to commit.

A natural reading supports the opposite: If this power says they can, then those without can't, otherwise the wording is horribly contrived for no reason. why call it free will and highlight how it's ability to chose whom it bonds with or what it's used for, if any rune weapon can do that? That's not how we read other powers in this game. we don't assume those who don't have some form of a see aura power can see auras.

Also you ignore how Atlantis says explicitly says things to the contrary and that the magic explicitly enslaves the rune weapon to it's wielder. They are slaves to their owner. flat out. Black ink, white paper, canon publication. and one of the most widely purchased and distributed books in palladium's history at that, with an entire section dedicated to explaining how rune magic works, so it's not like it's an obscure rule either.

Because the object is infused with the life essence of the creature that empowers it, the object possesses the alignment of that life essence, as well as its personality and intelligence. The magic that enslaves the being also forces it to serve he who dares to wield the weapon. However, while the being cannot prevent the weapon wielder from drawing on
the weapon's powers, it does not have to be polite, friendly or helpful.

kiralon wrote:Woundhealer
Sightblinder
Stonecutter
Farslayer
Coinspinner
Mindsword
Wayfinder
Shieldbreaker
Townsaver
DragonSlicer
Soulcutter

You forgot Doomgiver

JuliusCreed wrote:

kiralon wrote:Woundhealer
Sightblinder
Stonecutter
Farslayer
Coinspinner
Mindsword
Wayfinder
Shieldbreaker
Townsaver
DragonSlicer
+doomgiver
Soulcutter

You forgot Doomgiver

Oops I did indeed.
Giving someone woundhealer and watching them wade into combat with it is always worth a laugh or 4.

I'm GMing a campaign I made up based off of the Necrom the Undying Campaign. I took the demon rune sword idea and multiplied it 12 more times and the results have been pretty satisfying. So far, various swords have been dropped off at the end of dungeons or sitting in the end boss' hands.

"You walk into the room and the woman picks up a large, purple sword that looks oddly familiar..."

So far, the players have thrown four weapons into the mouth of Mt. Nimro:

Necrom the Undying
Lycanthus the Everliving (got the idea from another thread where someone suggested it. REALLY liked that name. Was a fun fight for the players too)
Megrak the Eternal
Voipyd the Perpetual

But they still have 9 more swords to find, fight (if they can't gain control of them before someone unwittingly becomes the sword's pawn), and then properly dispose of (general party consensus is throw them into a volcano, lol)

Zemarg the Timeless
Detro the Endless
Hanux the Continuous
Mal-Khazi the Relentless
Ulric the Infinite
Dlugat the Unceasing
Faindru the Interminable
Usbhaum the Deathless

And finally, the "overlord" of the demon swords of sorts,

Kevin the Unmerciful.

Overall, it's been fun seeing how each sword's personality, traits, abilities, curses, etc., all turn out, and how the players determine how to dispose of it. Pretty fun stuff.