One of my players wants to carve the secrecy runes on his armor and weapons. What is the consensus of opinion on this? Too, is the accepted interpretation of "personal hiding place or object" to mean a "personal hiding place" or "personal hiding object." Also, when it states "or" does it mean ONLY one at a time ... that is, you may only have one item so "runed" at a time?

I would say this is only any use if the armour/weapons are then put somewhere out of sight. You can't expect it to work when you're using/wearing them!

But if he wants to hide his mail away under the floorboards, then fine.

My interpretation is that you can have more than one thing hidden at once, as otherwise it's a bit feeble.

My impression is that in the spirit of the spell, thing that are hidden will become magically so. You can't really hide something that you are openly displaying, therefore I wouldn't allow the spell of secrecy on a (worn) suit of armour or a carried weapon (unless perhaps a hidden dagger or something).

As for the second part of the opening post, I would allow several spells to be active simultaneously.

Glorfindel

...on the other hand...

Gandalf, Elrond and Galadriel all openly wore a hidden ring. Granted, its a ring (and mighty ones at that!) and not a suit or armor (and it was elven magic as opposed to dwarf magic...) but nevertheless, I'd say that spells can hide from sight what the user wishes to keep hidden. So as long as the axe and armor remain unused, I would perhaps allow the spell to work on those.

Glorfindel

For the ring example, I would say (1) that might have been something more potent that said ability; and (2) it would have to be an item that "the eye can glide over" etc.

I view the runes as a way of being "extra hidden" whether it's a secret entrance or a hidden object, not "hidden when otherwise not" (e.g., make the grand entrance invisible).

In the sample adventure, the thing hidden with runes is also "just hidden hidden" for example.

Rob