[Runequest] More RQ III (AH) Sorcery Questions

Styopa styopa1 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 28 13:47:46 EST 2011

I stole pretty much completely Sandy's sorcery rules, vows and all.
Off the top of my head, in those rules you're limited to skill/10 for
maximum manipulation, or skill/5 if you're a specialist in that field.

Then I took the Tekumel Sorcery spells, edited them to fit my
'Tekumelization' of Western Sorcery'* concept, and slapped them into the

* my point is that while the spells in the magic book are generic and
wonderfully flexible, they're almost too generic, and I like the idea of
complicated functional spells with fixed costs ending up slightly more
efficient/economical than the generics.  Basing them on the 'spirit magic
power yardstick' that 1mp does 1d3 damage, I might have a sorcerous zap
spell "Azure Eldritch Bolts" that is 2mp for 2d3, but the intensity is

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:17 PM, <royce at efn.org> wrote:

> Greetings All,
>   Thank you all very much for your helpful responses to my previous
> questions.  Having reflected on these answers, I have some follow-up
> questions.
>   Assuming that I wished to "fix" rather than replace the RQ III sorcery
> rules, do you have any thoughts on how the following house rules would
> work out?
> 1.  To limit crap-shots with low skill, high-power spell casting, limit
> magic points per spell to the tens digit of the skill for the spell in
> question.  For example, a character with 37% skill in Impotence could only
> spend up to 3 magic points on casting it.  (I stole the idea for this
> limit from OpenQuest.)
> 2.  To take advantage of house rule #1, tidy things up a little, and allow
> sorcerers to focus on specific spells, eliminate the manipulation (range,
> duration, intensity) skills.  If your character has 85% in Erectile
> Enhancement, then he or she can freely spend up to 8 magic points on
> range, duration, and/or intensity.
> 3.  Eliminate Free Intelligence.  An INT-based limit on manipulation seems
> unnecessary after house rule #1.  In that case, would it be best to limit
> the number of memorized spells to half of INT?
>   I know I'm already trying to impose on my fellow RQ'ers quite a bit
> already, but I have yet another question.
>   Assuming that I wished to replace the RQ III sorcery rules with
> something else, do you have any thoughts on importing Stormbringer or
> Elric! sorcery rules?
>   Which edition would import most easily?  Which is least imbalancing?
> Which is coolest?  Which is the most creepy?   :-)
>   Many thanks ahead of time for any and all responses.
>   Sincerely,
> Asher
> _______________________________________________
> Runequest mailing list
> Runequest at rpgreview.net
> http://rpgreview.net/mailman/listinfo/runequest_rpgreview.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rpgreview.net/pipermail/runequest_rpgreview.net/attachments/20110727/12f92a86/attachment.html>

More information about the Runequest mailing list