From jmiller at capital-engineering.com Thu Aug 1 01:15:25 2002 From: jmiller at capital-engineering.com (Jerry Miller) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:15:25 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #35 - 15 msgs In-Reply-To: <20020729215109.E61564C1D0@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <000001c238a5$19983540$2c00000a@w2kjmiller> unsubscribe -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of rq-rules-request at crashbox.com Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 2:51 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #35 - 15 msgs Send RQ-Rules mailing list submissions to rq-rules at crashbox.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to rq-rules-request at crashbox.com You can reach the person managing the list at rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of RQ-Rules digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Movement (David Smart) 2. Re: Movement (Brad Furst) 3. Re: Movement (Alan Chambers) 4. Re: Movement (aescleal at btinternet.com) 5. Bloody Foreigners! (aescleal at btinternet.com) 6. RE: Bloody Foreigners! (Pontus Amberg) 7. Human variation? (Den, Tony T) 8. Researching spells (N.J. Effingham) 9. Transfer [Characteristic] spell (MurfNMurf at aol.com) 10. Dammit, Jim--I'm a doctor, not a veterinarian! (J and/or Ellen) 11. Re: Dammit, Jim--I'm a doctor, not a veterinarian! (Steve Perrin) 12. Re: Movement (Jeremy Martin) 13. Re: Dammit, Jim--I'm a doctor, not a veterinarian! (Jeremy Martin) 14. Re: Movement (Andrew O. Mellinger) 15. Bow - Too close to shoot (Jim Bickmeyer) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 15:29:23 -0500 From: David Smart To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Movement Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Actually, good sir, I rather liked strike ranks. They came in very handy when introducing people new to RPGs in general to RQ. David Steve Perrin wrote: > > In my Quest Rules I use the characters STR and CON divided by 2 as the > number of meters moved per round. 3m/round is just plain silly. Do you mean > Strike Rank? I've done away with Strike Ranks in my games. I invented them, > I can discard them. > > Steve Perrin > www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Guy Hoyle" > To: > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 5:39 PM > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Movement > > In most of the iterations of RQ that I have seen, movement is always fixed > (for humans, 3m/round). This seems curious to me, as it doesn't really allow > for people who can move really really fast (except via magic). Am I missing > something? has anybody experimented with other movement methods? > > Guy > > Galactic Overlord. Drama Critic. Swear fealty to Torgon at > http://www.cafepress.com/torgonthrone/ . Torgon has spoken. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules --__--__-- Message: 2 Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 15:18:48 -0700 Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Movement From: Brad Furst To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > On Friday, July 19, 2002, at 05:39 PM, Guy Hoyle wrote: > >> In most of the iterations of RQ that I have seen, movement is always >> fixed (for humans, 3m/round). This seems curious to me, as it doesn't >> really allow for people who can move really really fast (except via >> magic) >> . Am I missing something? has anybody experimented with other movement >> methods? On Friday, July 19, 2002, at 10:26 PM, Brad Furst wrote: > RQ4:AiG used variables. > 3m/round, however, really is excellent. We try variations, but keep > returning. I will explain more later. It's late tonight. I meant 3m/StrikeRank. Sorry. Our local games assume 1 SR = 1 second of time, 60 SR = 1 minute. In RQ3, this may require (depending upon the campaign) six rounds per minute _or_ 12 SR per round. In RQ2, there is no discrepancy. We allow 1m/SR a free movement regardless of other declared activity. Movement of 3m/SR allows one other declared action (e.g., attack/parry/dodge). Running/sprinting disallows other combat activities, but allows a movement rate of { 3m * 3-(ENCumbrance/STR) } We use 3m/SR for all standard humanoid characters. We have deliberately dropped that to 2m/SR for: a lame (clubfoot) human SIZe 16 a SIZ = 10 [lame] human whose leg permanently lost 1 HP due to withering disease a SIZ = 5 fully functioning hobbit/halfling a SIZ = 5 fully functioning duck The key issue for movement and distance, for us, is this: At long range (bowshot range or magic range), how many attacks does a charging character risk while closing to hand-to-hand melee? Steve, how do you determine the answer to this question? We simply count down the Strike Ranks. Brad Furst esoteric at crashbox.com There are three kinds of people in the world today: those who can count and those who can't. --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "Alan Chambers" To: Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Movement Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 23:52:31 -0400 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com If you want to do a variable movement for humans, you could reverse the Dex SR adjustments. DEX Rank SIZ Rank WEAPON Rank 1-9 1 meter 10-15 2 meters 16-19 3 meter 16-19 4 meters Or use the average of Size and dex. Personally I'm happy with the 3 meter rule. Alan --__--__-- Message: 4 Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:49:02 +0100 (BST) From: aescleal at btinternet.com To: rq-rules at crashbox.com, rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Movement Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com AFAIK Movement starts on the characters DEX SR, so if you have a lower DEX SR, you can move faster. Cheers, Ash > from: Guy Hoyle > date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 01:39:17 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Movement > > In most of the iterations of RQ that I have seen, movement is always fixed (for humans, 3m/round). This seems curious to me, as it doesn't really allow for people who can move really really fast (except via magic). Am I missing something? has anybody experimented with other movement methods? > > Guy > > Galactic Overlord. Drama Critic. Swear fealty to Torgon at http://www.cafepress.com/torgonthrone/ . Torgon has spoken. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules --__--__-- Message: 5 Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:53:22 +0100 (BST) From: aescleal at btinternet.com To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bloody Foreigners! Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Is my French letting me down, or do Oriflam still produce a version of RQ? From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Aug 1 02:23:16 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:23:16 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #35 - 15 msgs References: <000001c238a5$19983540$2c00000a@w2kjmiller> Message-ID: <02ac01c238ae$93183f60$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> darn scared another off Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Miller" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 11:15 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #35 - 15 msgs > unsubscribe > From wolf.wasna at web.de Thu Aug 1 06:59:01 2002 From: wolf.wasna at web.de (Wolf Wasna) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 22:59:01 +0200 Subject: Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] Bloody Foreigners! Message-ID: <200207312059.g6VKx0W16749@mailgate4.cinetic.de> I just asked them, and here's what they said: Hello Wolf, En effet, nous ne produisons plus rien de nouveau pour Runequest depuis la sortie de HeroWars. Ludiquement, Eric Nieudan Arch?on/Oriflam >-----Message d'origine----- > >Bonjour, > >J'aimerais savoir si vous produisez encore des produits de >RuneQuest (nouveaux?), ou si vous vendez seulements des articles >qui vous en restent. > >merci en avant, > wolf Meaning in plain english: Since HeroWars has been published, they aren't anymore producing anything new for RQ... So am I now entitled to my own cult as God of Superfluous Translations? cheers, wolf oriflam webpage for RQ is http://www.editions-oriflam.com/categorie.asp?categorie=1 original message --------------------- >Is my French letting me down, or do Oriflam still produce a version of >RQ? From their website it looks like they still publish it, or have they >just got dead stock still in their warehouse? >Anyone that can shed sone light on the matter would be revered as a >linguistic god! ______________________________________________________________________________ WEB.DE MyPage - Ohne Computerkenntnisse in nur 5 Minuten online! Alles inklusive! Kinderleicht! http://www.das.ist.aber.ne.lustige.sache.ms/ From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Aug 1 10:24:46 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:24:46 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Brad Furst and Stephane Francois take note References: <001901c235bc$f73d2ae0$2cc64942@frkt5> <002b01c235c8$b96795a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: <003f01c238f1$e418cea0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> I just tried to send you copies of revised Character Creation and Combat chapters for SPQR and they bounced. Please get me some correct email addresses so I can resend the chapters. I now return you to your regularly scheduled discussions... :) Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.htm From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Aug 1 10:42:39 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:42:39 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Brad Furst and Stephane Francois take note References: <001901c235bc$f73d2ae0$2cc64942@frkt5> <002b01c235c8$b96795a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <003f01c238f1$e418cea0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: <004101c238f4$63924060$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Stephen Mooney, yours bounced because the file was too big. I took out the largest element and tried again. Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Perrin" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 5:24 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Brad Furst and Stephane Francois take note > I just tried to send you copies of revised Character Creation and Combat > chapters for SPQR and they bounced. Please get me some correct email > addresses so I can resend the chapters. > > I now return you to your regularly scheduled discussions... :) > > Steve Perrin > www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.htm > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From bick10 at attbi.com Sat Aug 3 05:44:59 2002 From: bick10 at attbi.com (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 12:44:59 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bow - Too close to shoot References: <000d01c2374c$5b101ce0$cb0a0a0a@dohealth.com> <3D45DFE3.51AE501C@libra.seed.net.tw> <003d01c23766$e35cd920$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <3D46B1D3.96143AE4@concentric.net> Message-ID: <001f01c23a5e$a8b70a20$6401a8c0@attbi.com> I would like to thank everyone for their input and thoughts. I know I was quite on the list during your responses. However, I forwarded all these to my players. They helped in providing a point of view that wasn't JUST that of the "Evil GM's". It made at least one of the bow using players less resist. (The worst offender.) I think what I will try is a compromise. - An attack penelty of -25% to fire the bow once engaged in melee. They will need to move otherwise their opponent will get inside the bow or avoided it completely. - If they are not able to move due to obstacles or multiple opponents, they will not be able to perform the scoot and shoot. - Deffinetion of engaged in melee; Once the opponent has made a melee attack and remained to fight the archer. - The the archer is able, they can always get a shot at the target coming in. I feel that this should be addressed in a role-playing fashon but some players prefer to take an attitude of, "the rules don't say I can not." Now I am forced to devise rules. Jim - Just trying to keep the fantasy real. From MurfNMurf at aol.com Sat Aug 3 07:10:56 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002 17:10:56 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mystery spell Message-ID: <18a.bc63d1b.2a7c4f60@aol.com> Hi gang, I'd been putting the finishing touches to my homebrew RQ Sorcery document,; dropping a few more spells in, when we acquired a new computer. Somehow in transfering stuff over to the new machine the Sorcery thing didn't make it, and I'm *now* attempting to rebuild the darned thing. I'm just about back to where I was previously, but am *still* missing a few spells... One spell whose name I forgot (maybe *Revanentment* or something) allowed the Sorcerer to contact some sort of extra-dimensional Thingy (Demon maybe?), and communicate with it and offer it food (a sacrifice, IIRC) in an effort to make it friendly. Each time the spell was used and another tidbit was given, the Sorcerer's chance of getting the Thing to be his pal increased. At some point, the Thing would decide it didn't want to eat the Sorcerer, and would show up and do his bidding without requiring the usual control-type spells. IIDC, the Thing would then attack one Sorcerer-specific target. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Sounds kinda Call of Cthulhuish to me? Help! -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From siniestro at eresmas.net Sat Aug 3 08:15:14 2002 From: siniestro at eresmas.net (Vampire) Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 00:15:14 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Question about RQ 3 damage rules Message-ID: <3D4B0472.AA89D954@eresmas.net> Hello all. I'm dusting off my Runequest rules to play a campaign in the siege of Constantinople in 1453. I came across some interesting combat rules, but as my copy is the Spanish version, I don't quite get the english terms. I work as a game translator, so it's not knowledge of english what I lack, but trying to match terms. Questions: "strike rank" are these the numbers that are modified by your size, dexterity and length of your weapon to decide initiative in combat? "Damage Bonus" this is the extra die of damage you get if your added Strentgh+Size pass a certain threshold, right? Now onto the juicy bits [quote] RQ2 had Impales (for Stabbing weapons), Slashes (for Chopping weapons) and Crushes (for err . . Crushing weapons). An Impale did maximum damage plus rolled damage, a Slash did rolled damage rolled twice and a Crush did your damage bonus rolled twice (in addition to the normal rolled damage of course). [/quote] Maximum damage: Maximum possible damage for the *weapon*? okay, so a ddager that does 1d4+2, would do 6 points, right? In my version of the rules an impale all damage was doubled.. this has changed? Rolled damage: what's this? On second reading, if I got an special success with a stabbing weapon, case in point, the dagger, I do the maximum damage of the weapon, plus I roll the damage for the weapon and on top of it I add the damage bonus. like this 6 points plus 1d4+2 plus 1d4 bonus... whoah! A slash, I simply roll the weapon damage twice. And for a crush I only roll the damage bonus. mmm, maybe this is compensated because the crushing weapons have the highest damage values? Anybody know of a website that has rules for armor that take into account the effectiveness of armor against thrusting, slashing and crushing effects? Case inpoint: chainmail is very good against cutting attacks but not so good against arrows or mace blows. From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Aug 3 10:10:00 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 19:10:00 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bow - Too close to shoot References: <000d01c2374c$5b101ce0$cb0a0a0a@dohealth.com> <3D45DFE3.51AE501C@libra.seed.net.tw> <003d01c23766$e35cd920$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <3D46B1D3.96143AE4@concentric.net> <001f01c23a5e$a8b70a20$6401a8c0@attbi.com> Message-ID: <3D4B1F58.BC65F664@earthlink.net> Jim Bickmeyer wrote: > > - An attack penelty of -25% to fire the bow once engaged in melee. They > will need to move otherwise their opponent will get inside the bow or > avoided it completely. > - If they are not able to move due to obstacles or multiple opponents, they > will not be able to perform the scoot and shoot. > - Deffinetion of engaged in melee; Once the opponent has made a melee > attack and remained to fight the archer. > - The the archer is able, they can always get a shot at the target coming > in. > > I feel that this should be addressed in a role-playing fashon but some > players prefer to take an attitude of, "the rules don't say I can not." Now > I am forced to devise rules. And don't forget that anyone in melee range probably won't allow the archer to just stand there and get a full draw on his bow. So damage from the arrow could be lessened by either the archer's Str bonus (if one exists) or by one die type with no pluses ((d6+1 become d4). Or the archer can choose to just stand there (no Dodge or parry) and just focus on getting a full draw. If he does that..well.. damn shame about that True ed iron blade to the abdomen. Yep. Damn shame. David Smart From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Aug 3 10:49:13 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 19:49:13 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Question about RQ 3 damage rules References: <3D4B0472.AA89D954@eresmas.net> Message-ID: <3D4B2889.9C60FBAA@earthlink.net> Vampire wrote: > > Hello all. Hello! > I'm dusting off my Runequest rules to play a campaign in the siege of > Constantinople in 1453. Oooh! That's sounds fun! > Questions: > > "strike rank" are these the numbers that are modified by your size, > dexterity and length of your weapon to decide initiative in combat? Yes. Add the Strike Rank number associated with a character's SIZ modifer, DEX strike rank rating, and weapon modifier length to get the character's final Strike Rank rating with that weapon. > "Damage Bonus" this is the extra die of damage you get if your added > Strentgh+Size pass a certain threshold, right? Yes. > On second reading, if I got an special success with a stabbing weapon, > case in point, the dagger, I do the maximum damage of the weapon, plus I > roll the damage for the weapon and on top of it I add the damage bonus. > > like this 6 points plus 1d4+2 plus 1d4 bonus... whoah! I don't believe that's correct. A special success is considered an impale. For an impale, you roll the normal weapon damage _twice_. For example, your dagger impales so you would roll 2d4+4 plus roll for STR bonus once. Now, if the impale was also a critical, then damage would be double the maximum possible impaling damage or ( (8+4)*2 ) = 24. And arrows are considered impaling weapons. Good thing there were no elves in Constantinople. ;-) > A slash, I simply roll the weapon damage twice. > > And for a crush I only roll the damage bonus. mmm, maybe this is > compensated because the crushing weapons have the highest damage values? Not quite. Both slashing and crushing weapons do a "special knockback" on a special success that almost guaranteed to sent the target flying. > Anybody know of a website that has rules for armor that take into > account the effectiveness of armor against thrusting, slashing and > crushing effects? > > Case inpoint: chainmail is very good against cutting attacks but not so > good against arrows or mace blows. There are no canon rules in RQ3 (that I recall) that reduce weapon damage based on armor rigidity. I also don't recall any website that has house rules covering this topic. Doesn't mean there aren't any, though. Even if you don't find any, what you _do_ find will be worth the search. David Smart From talmeta at optonline.net Sat Aug 3 09:06:15 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 19:06:15 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction Message-ID: <3D4B1067.22F3A33A@optonline.net> If anyone is interested, for years and years I've maintained a 'second copy library' of all the 3rd edition RQ supplements. Since the wife and I are angling for a mortgage, I'm putting all my seconds up on eBay, a few at a time. Most are in mint condition, still in shrinkwrap, but a few are used (ones I bought from previous owners, etc.). By the end of the week I should have the entire run online. A search on eBay for RuneQuest will bring them up, or you can search for my userid (talmeta). -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - One day my Boss asked me to submit a status report to him concerning a project I was working on. I asked him if tomorrow would be soon enough. He said, "If I wanted it tomorrow, I would have waited until tomorrow to ask for it!" (New business manager, Hallmark Greeting Cards.) From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Aug 3 11:45:53 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 09:45:53 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Question about RQ 3 damage rules References: <3D4B0472.AA89D954@eresmas.net> <3D4B2889.9C60FBAA@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3D4B35D1.813FA47F@libra.seed.net.tw> Um... I know I'm gonna get in trouble for mentioning 'that game', but old Dungeons & Dragons (first ed at least, maybe all the way through to now) had an Armor Class modifier in the weapons chart. Each weapon would have a different modifier to combat based on what armor was being used - sounds like just what you are looking for. Don't know anyone who ever used it, though. If you have access to the book(Player's Handbook), but don't get the notation, scan it and send it to me. I live in Taiwan and haven't seen a PH in a while... You might just want to make blanket rules for your game: all non-metal armor is -1 AP versus piercing weapons, +1 vs crushing; all hard metal armor is ... Good luck! Jeremy > > > Anybody know of a website that has rules for armor that take into > > account the effectiveness of armor against thrusting, slashing and > > crushing effects? > > > > Case inpoint: chainmail is very good against cutting attacks but not so > > good against arrows or mace blows. > > There are no canon rules in RQ3 (that I recall) that reduce weapon > damage > based on armor rigidity. I also don't recall any website that has house > rules covering this topic. Doesn't mean there aren't any, though. Even > if > you don't find any, what you _do_ find will be worth the search. > > David Smart > ______________ From s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr Sat Aug 3 16:56:15 2002 From: s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr (Stephane FRANCOIS) Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 08:56:15 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Question about RQ 3 damage rules In-Reply-To: <3D4B0472.AA89D954@eresmas.net> Message-ID: > [quote] > RQ2 had Impales (for Stabbing weapons), Slashes (for Chopping weapons) > and Crushes (for err . . Crushing weapons). An Impale did maximum damage > plus rolled damage, a Slash did rolled damage rolled twice and a Crush > did your damage bonus rolled twice (in addition to the normal rolled > damage of course). > [/quote] > > Maximum damage: Maximum possible damage for the *weapon*? okay, so a > ddager that does 1d4+2, would do 6 points, right? In my version of the > rules an impale all damage was doubled.. this has changed? > > > Rolled damage: what's this? > > On second reading, if I got an special success with a stabbing weapon, > case in point, the dagger, I do the maximum damage of the weapon, plus I > roll the damage for the weapon and on top of it I add the damage bonus. > > like this 6 points plus 1d4+2 plus 1d4 bonus... whoah! > > > A slash, I simply roll the weapon damage twice. > > And for a crush I only roll the damage bonus. mmm, maybe this is > compensated because the crushing weapons have the highest damage values? This is the RQ2 rules. RQ3 simplified things and only kept the Impale for thrusting weapons (double damage for the weapon), and critical with the weapon doing maximum damage (damage bonus is unaffected). Ti illustrate this, let's look at a guy with 1d4 damgage bonus hitting his target with a dagger (1d4+2), broadsword (1d8+1) and mace (1d8) RQ3 Special result : dagger 2d4+4+1d4, broadsword 1d8+1+1d4 and mace 1d8+1d4 (slashing/crushing no special effects) RQ3 critical (wich is also a special) : dagger 12+1d4, broadsword 9+1d4 and mace 8+1d4 RQ2 Special result : dagger 6+1d4+2+1d4, broadsword 2d8+2+1d4, mace 1d8+2d4 RQ2 Critical - a critical is also a special dagger 12+1d4, broadsword 18+1d4 and mace 8+2d4 A more restrictive interpretation of "rolled damge" is "dice value", discarding any fixed amount and damage bonus, making the specials 6+1d4+1d4/2d8+1+1d4/1d8+2d4 and critical 10+1d4/17+1d4/8+2d4. From bick10 at attbi.com Mon Aug 5 08:57:08 2002 From: bick10 at attbi.com (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 15:57:08 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Question about RQ 3 damage rules References: Message-ID: <003701c23c0a$9c21de40$6401a8c0@attbi.com> Stephane FRANCOIS > Ti illustrate this, let's look at a guy with 1d4 damgage bonus hitting his > target with a dagger (1d4+2), broadsword (1d8+1) and mace (1d8) > > RQ3 Special result : > dagger 2d4+4+1d4, broadsword 1d8+1+1d4 and mace 1d8+1d4 (slashing/crushing > no special effects) > RQ3 critical (wich is also a special) : > dagger 12+1d4, broadsword 9+1d4 and mace 8+1d4 My reading of the rules and my play was that a Critical is full weapon damage by passing armor, but NOT a special success. So Crit with the Dagger would be; 6+1d4 damage, defender recieves no armor protection. The Special damage and Critical damage effects are kept separate. Also, don't the rules state double weapon damage. My group prefers to read that as weapon damage rolled twice. I know many prefer one roll and double that. For even more complication and to give Slashing and Crushing weapons their specials back we implemented RQ4(draft) special effect rules. Slash - Full weapon damage to Head, Limbs or Abdomen, normal weapon damage otherwise. Crush, Ignore half armor on all locations. Jim Bickmeyer From reldred at viablelinks.com Tue Aug 6 02:07:30 2002 From: reldred at viablelinks.com (Bob Eldred) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 09:07:30 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction In-Reply-To: <3D4B1067.22F3A33A@optonline.net> Message-ID: Dammit, Tal! I want that River of Cradles. But no credit card. There should be special dispensation for old RGPNet members. Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com]On > Behalf Of Tal Meta > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:06 PM > To: RuneQuest Rules @Crashbox > Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction > > > If anyone is interested, for years and years I've maintained a 'second > copy library' of all the 3rd edition RQ supplements. Since the wife and > I are angling for a mortgage, I'm putting all my seconds up on eBay, a > few at a time. Most are in mint condition, still in shrinkwrap, but a > few are used (ones I bought from previous owners, etc.). By the end of > the week I should have the entire run online. > > A search on eBay for RuneQuest will bring them up, or you can search for > my userid (talmeta). > > -- > talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > One day my Boss asked me to submit a status report to him concerning a > project I was working on. I asked him if tomorrow would be soon enough. > He said, "If I wanted it tomorrow, I would have waited until tomorrow to > ask for it!" (New business manager, Hallmark Greeting Cards.) > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From kruch7 at cox.net Tue Aug 6 02:21:18 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 12:21:18 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction References: Message-ID: <009a01c23c9c$20e44230$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> actually you don't; have to have a credit card to use pay pal Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Eldred" To: Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 12:07 PM Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction > Dammit, Tal! I want that River of Cradles. But no credit card. There > should be special dispensation for old RGPNet members. > > Bob > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com]On > > Behalf Of Tal Meta > > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:06 PM > > To: RuneQuest Rules @Crashbox > > Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction > > > > > > If anyone is interested, for years and years I've maintained a 'second > > copy library' of all the 3rd edition RQ supplements. Since the wife and > > I are angling for a mortgage, I'm putting all my seconds up on eBay, a > > few at a time. Most are in mint condition, still in shrinkwrap, but a > > few are used (ones I bought from previous owners, etc.). By the end of > > the week I should have the entire run online. > > > > A search on eBay for RuneQuest will bring them up, or you can search for > > my userid (talmeta). > > > > -- > > talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine > > AIM - talmeta > > ICQ - 12594453 > > Homepage - > > > > One day my Boss asked me to submit a status report to him concerning a > > project I was working on. I asked him if tomorrow would be soon enough. > > He said, "If I wanted it tomorrow, I would have waited until tomorrow to > > ask for it!" (New business manager, Hallmark Greeting Cards.) > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From talmeta at optonline.net Tue Aug 6 08:11:58 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 18:11:58 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction References: Message-ID: <3D4EF82E.2AF77C7D@optonline.net> Bob Eldred wrote: > > Dammit, Tal! I want that River of Cradles. But no credit card. There > should be special dispensation for old RGPNet members. For you, I'll make allowances. :) -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - hey God, i think you owe me a great big apology From talmeta at optonline.net Tue Aug 6 08:39:18 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 18:39:18 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction References: <3D4EF82E.2AF77C7D@optonline.net> Message-ID: <3D4EFE96.D1D44CA5@optonline.net> Speaking of which, it's all online now. Even a shrink-wrapped copy of Land of Ninja.... :) -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - 10. We recently received a memo from senior management saying, "This is to inform you that a memo will be issued today regarding the memo mentioned above." (Microsoft, Legal Affairs Division) From kruch7 at cox.net Tue Aug 6 09:18:48 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 19:18:48 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction References: <3D4EF82E.2AF77C7D@optonline.net> <3D4EFE96.D1D44CA5@optonline.net> Message-ID: <019a01c23cd6$7448a120$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> arg Look like I will be making your downpayment for the house :) Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tal Meta" To: Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 6:39 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction > Speaking of which, it's all online now. Even a shrink-wrapped copy of > Land of Ninja.... :) > > -- > talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > 10. We recently received a memo from senior management saying, "This is > to inform you that a memo will be issued today regarding the memo > mentioned above." (Microsoft, Legal Affairs Division) > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From reldred at viablelinks.com Tue Aug 6 09:51:56 2002 From: reldred at viablelinks.com (Bob Eldred) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 16:51:56 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction In-Reply-To: <3D4EF82E.2AF77C7D@optonline.net> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com]On > Behalf Of Tal Meta > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 3:12 PM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ Items for Auction > > > Bob Eldred wrote: > > > > Dammit, Tal! I want that River of Cradles. But no credit card. There > > should be special dispensation for old RGPNet members. > > For you, I'll make allowances. :) OK, I just took you up on it. Bob From jerrym at lanset.com Tue Aug 6 15:42:49 2002 From: jerrym at lanset.com (jerrym) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 22:42:49 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one Message-ID: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> nope, don't think so ken.... I stopped the list from going to my work inbox and started it going to my home inbox so I could read it at my leisure... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release Date: 7/10/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From kruch7 at cox.net Tue Aug 6 20:49:22 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 06:49:22 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> Message-ID: <013e01c23d36$ec9c74c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Ah kewl wb so to speak :) Ken SO am I the only person out here who when playing RQ prefers 2 edition Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 1:42 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one nope, don't think so ken.... I stopped the list from going to my work inbox and started it going to my home inbox so I could read it at my leisure... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.375 / Virus Database: 210 - Release Date: 7/10/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Aug 6 21:25:17 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:25:17 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> <013e01c23d36$ec9c74c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Message-ID: <000d01c23d3b$f106e180$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello My first message here :-) > SO am I the only person out here who when playing RQ prefers 2 edition No you're not. I am very fond of RQ2 and so are the other players of the gang. Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Aug 6 21:45:09 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:45:09 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> <013e01c23d36$ec9c74c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> <000d01c23d3b$f106e180$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <001201c23d3e$b8271170$0102600a@otvfrap043> > My first message here :-) My 2nd message: Do you guys know this site: http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~ty2m-iwsk/rq/ It contains an incredible amount of gaming knowledge... Too bad I can only understand the tables and not the texts! Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From talmeta at optonline.net Tue Aug 6 21:48:43 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 07:48:43 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> <013e01c23d36$ec9c74c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> <000d01c23d3b$f106e180$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D4FB79B.25EFBBF2@optonline.net> > > SO am I the only person out here who when playing RQ prefers 2 edition Actually I prefer 3rd (well, to be honest, I prefer 5.0 - my personal set of house rules) - it was the first version I encountered, and had many of the features my gaming style needed... :) -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - "No sir, I don't like it." From alanchambers at attbi.com Tue Aug 6 23:27:32 2002 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 09:27:32 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: <001e01c23d0c$19f6c5e0$b6f4bbd0@alf> <013e01c23d36$ec9c74c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Message-ID: <003801c23d4d$05424340$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 6:49 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one > Ah kewl > wb so to speak :) > Ken > SO am I the only person out here who when playing RQ prefers 2 edition Nope. I prefer a lot of the 2nd edtion rules to the 3rd. Right now I'm doing a mix of both, mostely 3rd edtion spells with 2nd edtion rules. Alan From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Aug 7 00:42:51 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 07:42:51 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:45:09 +0200 Gianni wrote: > > My first message here :-) > > My 2nd message: > > Do you guys know this site: > http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~ty2m-iwsk/rq/ > > It contains an incredible amount of gaming > knowledge... Too bad I can only > understand the tables and not the texts! Woah! This site is nice! I've got to find an online Japanese-English translator. David Smart -- Morituri Omnulus Mori -- From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Aug 7 00:57:32 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 16:57:32 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: Message-ID: <001b01c23d59$97aa2890$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hey David > Woah! This site is nice! I've got to find an online Japanese-English > translator. Let us know if you find a serviceable one! Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From kruch7 at cox.net Wed Aug 7 01:26:12 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 11:26:12 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one References: Message-ID: <00a801c23d5d$99046490$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Well for me a lot of it was in English hmm is my browser broke ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Smart" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:42 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off another one > On Tue, 6 Aug 2002 13:45:09 +0200 Gianni wrote: > > > > My first message here :-) > > > > My 2nd message: > > > > Do you guys know this site: > > http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~ty2m-iwsk/rq/ > > > > It contains an incredible amount of gaming > > knowledge... Too bad I can only > > understand the tables and not the texts! > > Woah! This site is nice! I've got to find an online Japanese-English > translator. > > David Smart > > -- Morituri Omnulus Mori -- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Aug 7 16:43:08 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:43:08 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: [ml] efficacite des armes selon l'armure de la cible References: <20020806184827.14708.qmail@operamail.com> Message-ID: <000f01c23ddd$b1ba7990$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello Colin > Further to Gianni's post, I dug these figures out from the AD&D 2nd Edition Players Handbook. Thanks for the research. I was too lazy to do it myself :-? > Weapon vs. Armour Type Modifiers > ================================ > Armour Weapon Type > Type Slash Pierce Bludgeon > > Full Plate -4 -3 0 > Of course, these figures are for D20-scale. For percentiles, just multiply by 5. The modifiers are then applied to the attacker's weapon skill. Hmmm... I feel it's not really 'BRPS-flavoured', though. The BRPS mostly renders armour protection through armour/protection points. I would simply use the figures in the Weapons vs Armour table as armour/protection points bonuses. > Thus, a fighter using a broadsword (slashing weapon) against an opponent wearing full plate armour would suffer a (4 x 5) = 20% penalty on his/her weapon skill. Using my system, a fighter using a broadsword against an opponent wearing full plate armour would have the damage inflicted by his weapon reduced by 4. > This would, of course, reduce chances for critical hits, impales or whatever. I agree that your system would enable to take the above into account, whilst mine would not. At this point, I guess it all boils down to a matter of game flavour. Gianni From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Thu Aug 8 12:20:44 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 10:20:44 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: [ml] efficacite des armes selon l'armure de la cible References: <20020806184827.14708.qmail@operamail.com> <000f01c23ddd$b1ba7990$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D51D57C.9365DF0E@libra.seed.net.tw> Hey, When I recommended using the D&D books, I also had in mind using it as a damage modifier (basically changing AP against different weapons). I admit I hadn't thought of the 'changes crit chances' either. Looking at the whole chart, do you think it's fine as is, or needs some scaling? For example, if cuirboilli has a modifier greater than its original AP, does that seem right or possible? Could you send us the final chart when you're done? Thanks, Jeremy Gianni wrote: > Hello Colin > > > Further to Gianni's post, I dug these figures out from the AD&D 2nd > Edition Players Handbook. > > Thanks for the research. I was too lazy to do it myself :-? > > > Weapon vs. Armour Type Modifiers > > ================================ > > Armour Weapon Type > > Type Slash Pierce Bludgeon > > > > Full Plate -4 -3 0 > > > > > Of course, these figures are for D20-scale. For percentiles, just multiply > by 5. The modifiers are then applied to the attacker's weapon skill. > > Hmmm... I feel it's not really 'BRPS-flavoured', though. The BRPS mostly > renders armour protection through armour/protection points. I would simply > use the figures in the Weapons vs Armour table as armour/protection points > bonuses. > > > Thus, a fighter using a broadsword (slashing weapon) against an opponent > wearing full plate armour would suffer a (4 x 5) = 20% penalty on his/her > weapon skill. > > Using my system, a fighter using a broadsword against an opponent wearing > full plate armour would have the damage inflicted by his weapon reduced by > 4. > > > This would, of course, reduce chances for critical hits, impales or > whatever. > > I agree that your system would enable to take the above into account, whilst > mine would not. At this point, I guess it all boils down to a matter of game > flavour. > > Gianni > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Aug 8 22:11:36 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 07:11:36 -0500 Subject: Website Translators (was Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off..) References: <001b01c23d59$97aa2890$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D525FF8.638544A4@earthlink.net> Gianni wrote: > > Hey David > > > Woah! This site is nice! I've got to find an online Japanese-English > > translator. > > Let us know if you find a serviceable one! > > Gianni > webmaster of basicrps.com The best one I've found so far is at: http://www.worldlingo.com/products_services/worldlingo_translator.html Unfortunately, it absolutely butchers website frame layouts and can't translate frames (since it apparently can't handle foreign language frame references). SysTran has a great engine but they don't provide free website translation. They expect the web publisher to pay for it and the price can be as high as US$24000 per year. I'm still looking though. David Smart From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Aug 9 01:17:30 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 17:17:30 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: [ml] efficacite des armes selon l'armure de la cible References: <20020806184827.14708.qmail@operamail.com> <000f01c23ddd$b1ba7990$0102600a@otvfrap043> <3D51D57C.9365DF0E@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <001101c23eee$b8dc9e80$0102600a@otvfrap043> hello Jeremy > Looking at the whole chart, do you think it's fine as is, or needs some > scaling? For example, if cuirboilli has a modifier greater than its original > AP, does that seem right or possible? Why not... > Could you send us the final chart when > you're done? Er.. I'm not doing anything! I just sent it so that it could spark some ideas! sorry Gianni From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Aug 9 23:31:58 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:31:58 +0200 Subject: Website Translators (was Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: darn scared off..) References: <001b01c23d59$97aa2890$0102600a@otvfrap043> <3D525FF8.638544A4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000501c23fa9$235178c0$0102600a@otvfrap043> > The best one I've found so far is at: > http://www.worldlingo.com/products_services/worldlingo_translator.html If you enter 'Military Science' as the subject, it works pretty well... G. From MurfNMurf at aol.com Sat Aug 10 12:24:29 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 22:24:29 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Mystery Spell Message-ID: <1a2.6af8362.2a85d35d@aol.com> Ok, here's another RQ spell I remmeber reading about *somewhere* on the WWWeb, but am now unablre to find. It was called *Season*, IIRC, and it allowed a Sorcerer to use X amount of Intensity to alter old, or even turned foodstuff to edible condition. Does anyone know where ican find the particulars, or am I just dreaming the stuff? :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From peter at maranci.net Tue Aug 13 14:55:48 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 00:55:48 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item In-Reply-To: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> References: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> Message-ID: I haven't kept up with the list as carefully as I might, but has there been any discussion of Chaosium's upcoming release of a new edition of the Basic Role-Playing system? If so, my apologies - I must have missed it. Anyway, I can't help but wonder what the implications might be for RQ. The level of compatibility has got to be incredibly high, so we might be looking at an RQ-compatible commercially published system for the first time in...how long? I mean, how long since something like that has been seen in game stores? Of course it's virtually a certainty that it won't go anywhere, nor sell much, but we can hope! On a totally different tack, I'm trying to work up a new type of magic item for my site, and I could use some opinions and input. The enchantment would be based on the magic item imbuement system which I posted here long ago. I'm talking about charms which increase specific skills. This actually seems like an incredibly obvious concept, so maybe I missed something again. A typical charm would increase the chance of success with a specific skill. My thought is that the mechanic to use would be +1d6 or 3% (determined by the enchanter on creation of the item), and as for POW cost to create a charm...what would be reasonable? 2 points of POW? I considered making it variable depending on the usefulness of the skill, but that's hard to justify in-world. I also considered requiring the "sacrifice" of points in the requisite skill, but that doesn't feel right at all, and I can think of no other instance in which a skill can be deliberately used up in that way. A successful roll (or perhaps a special/crit) would be needed in the process of the enchantment. Obviously there's a lot to think about here. Charms could be improved (i.e. the imbuement could be stacked), but I think the cost would have to escalate dramatically. Perhaps charms should work only for the imbuer? Or be unable to increase the total chance of success to greater than the skill of the original enchanter? Some charms might work for entire skill categories; very rare charms might work for *all* skills. Perhaps charms should require attunement, like powered crystals? I'm tempted to work in "lucky" charms as well, which increase the chance of making a Luck roll by a certain percentage. Children might pass on the secret of making such charms using shiny stones and bits of string. That sort of thing. Any thoughts? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! Adventures, art, an online game, NPCs, magic items, sheets, rules & much more: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Aug 13 15:23:58 2002 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 23:23:58 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> Are they really going to issue a new edition of BRP?? I had heard they were just going to re-print the old edition. I think it would be great if an updated edition of BRP were made available as my RQ games had little to do with Glorantha anyway; it was the rules I used, not the setting. Rich Allen > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com > [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of Peter Maranci > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 10:56 PM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item > > > I haven't kept up with the list as carefully as I might, but has there > been any discussion of Chaosium's upcoming release of a new edition of > the Basic Role-Playing system? If so, my apologies - I must have > missed it. From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Aug 13 16:44:36 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 08:44:36 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> Message-ID: <002201c24294$e3fb85a0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello > Are they really going to issue a new edition of BRP?? I had heard > they were just going to re-print the old edition. That would be a disappointment... there isn't actually much in the old edition of the basic role playing system. No magic, nothing about vehicles nor creatures. > I think it would be > great if an updated edition of BRP were made available as my RQ games > had little to do with Glorantha anyway; it was the rules I used, not the > setting. Well in France and in Italy we _did_ have expanded versions of the basic role playing system, which included magic, creatures, etc. They were both pretty popular but I feel the interest dwindled since (a) they were not supported by extensions in France and (b) although they were in Italy the company that published them went bust (see http://www.stratelibri.com/giochi/capitol/stratelibri/BASIC.htm) Gianni webmaster basicrps.com From slposey at concentric.net Wed Aug 14 01:21:20 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 09:21:20 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3D5923F0.8265078C@concentric.net> Peter Maranci wrote: > > I haven't kept up with the list as carefully as I might, but has there > been any discussion of Chaosium's upcoming release of a new edition of > the Basic Role-Playing system? If so, my apologies - I must have > missed it. > > Anyway, I can't help but wonder what the implications might be for RQ. > The level of compatibility has got to be incredibly high, so we might > be looking at an RQ-compatible commercially published system for the > first time in...how long? I mean, how long since something like that > has been seen in game stores? Are you discounting Elric!/Stormbringer in that assessment? Stormbringer 5e (really revised Elric! rules) was released just this year. A very nice game IMO. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From slposey at concentric.net Wed Aug 14 01:22:56 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 09:22:56 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> <002201c24294$e3fb85a0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D592450.15776F6B@concentric.net> Gianni wrote: > > Hello > > > Are they really going to issue a new edition of BRP?? I had heard > > they were just going to re-print the old edition. > > That would be a disappointment... there isn't actually much in the old > edition of the basic role playing system. No magic, nothing about vehicles > nor creatures. Indeed, I would hope they'd at least also reprint the MagicWorld book from "Worlds of Wonder" as a companion piece. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From slposey at concentric.net Wed Aug 14 01:31:18 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 09:31:18 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> <002201c24294$e3fb85a0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D592646.37A355CE@concentric.net> Gianni wrote: > Well in France and in Italy we _did_ have expanded versions of the basic > role playing system, which included magic, creatures, etc. They were both > pretty popular but I feel the interest dwindled since (a) they were not > supported by extensions in France and (b) although they were in Italy the > company that published them went bust (see > http://www.stratelibri.com/giochi/capitol/stratelibri/BASIC.htm) Damn, those look incredibly cool, are the rules really close to BRP? I don't suppose there's English translations available anywhere (I'd be willing to work on such if not)? Do you know of any way to get copies (English or not) in the US? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Aug 14 01:49:26 2002 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 16:49:26 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item Message-ID: Hello All, >Stephen Posey >>Gianni wrote: >> >> Hello >> >> > Are they really going to issue a new edition of BRP?? I had heard >> > they were just going to re-print the old edition. >> >> That would be a disappointment... there isn't actually much in the old >> edition of the basic role playing system. No magic, nothing about vehicles >> nor creatures. > >Indeed, I would hope they'd at least also reprint the MagicWorld book >from "Worlds of Wonder" as a companion piece. the website doesn't make it clear, but my guess is it's just BRP. Which is a shame in some ways (although the listed prices is very good). What would be nice would be to se all three WoW games back in print, as both Magic World and Future world were solid litle games (less convinced by Super World but was never a Super Hero fan). Chaosium could be on to a real winner with this actually. How about a West World (Cowboy BRP), Horror World (CoC lite), Spy World (James Bond / U.N.C.L.E.)? Noy much effort needed to put together a solid BRP based game for each genre taht could quite easily put some of teh d20 behemoths out there to shame... Regards, Nick Middleton From peter at maranci.net Wed Aug 14 10:24:56 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 20:24:56 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> References: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> Message-ID: I just looked over the Chaosium page for the new BRP, and although the book cover looks beautiful and is obviously a new design, there's no mention of it being a new edition. Unfortunately the image is pretty low-res, and although I worked it over with my graphics filters I just couldn't get the smaller text to resolve - so it COULD be a new edition, or maybe not. The site isn't too informative. Tried to check the ISBN to see if it had changed from the original edition, but A) I don't know that a different ISBN necessarily means a different edition (in fact I doubt it), and B) I can't find the ISBN of the original BRP, so I have nothing to compare the new one to. Say, wouldn't Steve know? Doesn't BRP use his concepts? Steve? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! Adventures, art, an online game, NPCs, magic items, sheets, rules & much more: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From steveperrin at surfcity.net Wed Aug 14 10:57:48 2002 From: steveperrin at surfcity.net (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 17:57:48 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <002c01c2432d$9ba89060$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> The only folks who know are the Chaosium. BRP was done while I worked for them, so it was strictly under their aegis, not mine. Greg wrote it, anyway, even though it is my system. So I have no idea. Steve www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Maranci" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 5:24 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP I just looked over the Chaosium page for the new BRP, and although the book cover looks beautiful and is obviously a new design, there's no mention of it being a new edition. Unfortunately the image is pretty low-res, and although I worked it over with my graphics filters I just couldn't get the smaller text to resolve - so it COULD be a new edition, or maybe not. The site isn't too informative. Tried to check the ISBN to see if it had changed from the original edition, but A) I don't know that a different ISBN necessarily means a different edition (in fact I doubt it), and B) I can't find the ISBN of the original BRP, so I have nothing to compare the new one to. Say, wouldn't Steve know? Doesn't BRP use his concepts? Steve? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! Adventures, art, an online game, NPCs, magic items, sheets, rules & much more: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From tiberius at runequest.za.org Wed Aug 14 16:27:30 2002 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 08:27:30 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ III Sorcery Rules Message-ID: <63567.196.8.112.21.1029306450.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> This has possibly been debated before: Insofar as RQ III magic is concerned, the Spirit and Divine rules work, although they can be a bit difficult to understand. But does anyone get the feeling that someone said "Hey, we need some sorcery rules here" and just tacked them on at the last minute before it went to print? To my group, the sorcery rules just don't work. Every sorcey using character has eventually given it up as being a waste of time, or a new character has been rolled up. I don't know, maybe its just laziness or we have seriously misinterpreted the rules - which is unlikley as we have been palying for 10 years and have re read the rules many times.Ciao Tony From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Aug 14 16:53:00 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 23:53:00 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ III Sorcery Rules References: <63567.196.8.112.21.1029306450.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <004601c2435f$587964e0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> I was certainly not happy with them as they went out. Far too complex for the return. Check out my Sorcery rules in SPQR. Of course, you'd have to subscribe... :) Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 11:27 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ III Sorcery Rules > This has possibly been debated before: Insofar as RQ III magic is > concerned, the Spirit and Divine rules work, although they can be a bit > difficult to understand. But does anyone get the feeling that someone > said "Hey, we need some sorcery rules here" and just tacked them on at > the last minute before it went to print? To my group, the sorcery rules > just don't work. Every sorcey using character has eventually given it up > as being a waste of time, or a new character has been rolled up. I don't > know, maybe its just laziness or we have seriously misinterpreted the > rules - which is unlikley as we have been palying for 10 years and have > re read the rules many times.Ciao > Tony > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Aug 14 18:06:21 2002 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:06:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ III Sorcery Rules Message-ID: <7278587.1029312381597.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> I get the feeling they weren't so much tacked on at the last mo as not playtested with a bunch of min/maxers enough. I also believe that whoever designed them didn't appreciate the effect of exponential spell durations... > from: tiberius at runequest.za.org > date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 07:27:30 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ III Sorcery Rules > > This has possibly been debated before: Insofar as RQ III magic is > concerned, the Spirit and Divine rules work, although they can be a bit > difficult to understand. But does anyone get the feeling that someone > said "Hey, we need some sorcery rules here" and just tacked them on at > the last minute before it went to print? To my group, the sorcery rules > just don't work. Every sorcey using character has eventually given it up > as being a waste of time, or a new character has been rolled up. I don't > know, maybe its just laziness or we have seriously misinterpreted the > rules - which is unlikley as we have been palying for 10 years and have > re read the rules many times.Ciao > Tony > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Aug 14 18:28:16 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 10:28:16 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> <002201c24294$e3fb85a0$0102600a@otvfrap043> <3D592646.37A355CE@concentric.net> Message-ID: <002d01c2436c$8f7602c0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello Stephen > > Well in France and in Italy we _did_ have expanded versions of the basic > > role playing system, which included magic, creatures, etc. They were both > > pretty popular but I feel the interest dwindled since (a) they were not > > supported by extensions in France and (b) although they were in Italy the > > company that published them went bust (see > > http://www.stratelibri.com/giochi/capitol/stratelibri/BASIC.htm) > > Damn, those look incredibly cool, are the rules really close to BRP? They are based on the original (1981?) Chaosium BRPS booklet with some additional rules for magic and creatures (the original booklet features a D&D-like mediaeval setting, the additional booklets have specific rules for the various non-mediaeval settings) > I > don't suppose there's English translations available anywhere No. > (I'd be > willing to work on such if not)? The company went bust... I don't know who's holding the rights right now. > Do you know of any way to get copies > (English or not) in the US? I only own the original booklet and the Egyptian expansion (which won the 'best rpg supplement' award at LuccaGames, the Italian equivalent, I guess, of GenCon). I was stupid enough not to buy the other expansions when they were available (and pretty cheap too... they were priced between 7.5 and 9 euros). I haven't been able to get hold of the missing booklets, neither on Italian auction sites nor in 2nd hand shops :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Aug 14 18:33:35 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 10:33:35 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <20020808121812.760584C013@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <003101c2436d$484f5490$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello > The site isn't too informative. This is an understatement :-) The picture shows a sort of spacecraft flying into a Cthulhoid monster so one would think there are rules for flying craft and big scary monsters but then maybe not :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From pontus.amberg at chello.se Wed Aug 14 21:06:13 2002 From: pontus.amberg at chello.se (Pontus Amberg) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 13:06:13 +0200 Subject: SV: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <003101c2436d$484f5490$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <000001c24382$9ab974d0$be1ad2d9@brainst8> Spacecraft? It looks like ship to me. /Pontus -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] F?r Gianni Skickat: den 14 augusti 2002 10:34 Till: rq-rules at crashbox.com ?mne: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP Hello > The site isn't too informative. This is an understatement :-) The picture shows a sort of spacecraft flying into a Cthulhoid monster so one would think there are rules for flying craft and big scary monsters but then maybe not :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Aug 14 21:27:27 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 06:27:27 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <000001c24382$9ab974d0$be1ad2d9@brainst8> Message-ID: <09a101c24385$91a7cd80$38c04942@frkt5> Yeah, it's some sorta Kraken devouring a ship that has a black sail depicting a roaring tiger within the Moorcockian symbol of Chaos--must be a hapless Pan Tangian vessel. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pontus Amberg" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 6:06 AM Subject: SV: [RQ-Rules] BRP Spacecraft? It looks like ship to me. /Pontus -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] F?r Gianni Skickat: den 14 augusti 2002 10:34 Till: rq-rules at crashbox.com ?mne: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP Hello > The site isn't too informative. This is an understatement :-) The picture shows a sort of spacecraft flying into a Cthulhoid monster so one would think there are rules for flying craft and big scary monsters but then maybe not :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Aug 14 21:37:47 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 13:37:47 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <000001c24382$9ab974d0$be1ad2d9@brainst8> <09a101c24385$91a7cd80$38c04942@frkt5> Message-ID: <000d01c24387$03f06f90$0102600a@otvfrap043> > Yeah, it's some sorta Kraken devouring a ship that has a black sail > depicting a roaring tiger within the Moorcockian symbol of Chaos--must be a > hapless Pan Tangian vessel. My. I hadn't realised my eyesight had got so poor :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Aug 14 21:46:15 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 06:46:15 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <000001c24382$9ab974d0$be1ad2d9@brainst8> <09a101c24385$91a7cd80$38c04942@frkt5> <000d01c24387$03f06f90$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <09da01c24388$334701e0$38c04942@frkt5> I could be wrong. It's dawn here, and until I pop in my contacts, I wear eyeglasses with a long-outdated prescription, so I may be simply projecting my fondness for the Young Kingdoms in a Rorschach way. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gianni" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP > Yeah, it's some sorta Kraken devouring a ship that has a black sail > depicting a roaring tiger within the Moorcockian symbol of Chaos--must be a > hapless Pan Tangian vessel. My. I hadn't realised my eyesight had got so poor :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Aug 14 22:49:58 2002 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 13:49:58 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP Message-ID: Hmm, could people be talking at cross purposes? The cover of the new BRP at Chaosium's website is the artwork intended for the now cancelled Straights of Chaosu SB/DLoM adventure, whereas I think this discussion began with an Italian(?) edition of BRP with additional rules material in. I could of course be completely mistaken, but the Kraken eating Pan Tangian Galley does sound like teh Straights of Chaos cover... "J and/or Ellen" .net> cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP rq-rules-admin at cr ashbox.com 14/08/2002 12:46 Please respond to rq-rules I could be wrong. It's dawn here, and until I pop in my contacts, I wear eyeglasses with a long-outdated prescription, so I may be simply projecting my fondness for the Young Kingdoms in a Rorschach way. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gianni" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP > Yeah, it's some sorta Kraken devouring a ship that has a black sail > depicting a roaring tiger within the Moorcockian symbol of Chaos--must be a > hapless Pan Tangian vessel. My. I hadn't realised my eyesight had got so poor :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Aug 15 00:41:26 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:41:26 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: Message-ID: <09e301c243a0$ab7512c0$38c04942@frkt5> I think they just used the SB/DLoM artwork that they'd already paid for so that it wouldn't go to waste. See http://www.chaosium.com/brp/index.shtml. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP Hmm, could people be talking at cross purposes? The cover of the new BRP at Chaosium's website is the artwork intended for the now cancelled Straights of Chaosu SB/DLoM adventure, whereas I think this discussion began with an Italian(?) edition of BRP with additional rules material in. I could of course be completely mistaken, but the Kraken eating Pan Tangian Galley does sound like teh Straights of Chaos cover... "J and/or Ellen" .net> cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP rq-rules-admin at cr ashbox.com 14/08/2002 12:46 Please respond to rq-rules I could be wrong. It's dawn here, and until I pop in my contacts, I wear eyeglasses with a long-outdated prescription, so I may be simply projecting my fondness for the Young Kingdoms in a Rorschach way. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gianni" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 6:37 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP > Yeah, it's some sorta Kraken devouring a ship that has a black sail > depicting a roaring tiger within the Moorcockian symbol of Chaos--must be a > hapless Pan Tangian vessel. My. I hadn't realised my eyesight had got so poor :-( Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From slposey at concentric.net Thu Aug 15 01:30:37 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:30:37 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New BRP, plus new magic item References: <000001c24289$a11ed3a0$0a01a8c0@MAIN> <002201c24294$e3fb85a0$0102600a@otvfrap043> <3D592646.37A355CE@concentric.net> <002d01c2436c$8f7602c0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <3D5A779D.FF6DE78@concentric.net> > > (I'd be > > willing to work on such if not)? > > The company went bust... I don't know who's holding the rights right now. Well rats. > > Do you know of any way to get copies > > (English or not) in the US? > > I only own the original booklet and the Egyptian expansion (which won the > 'best rpg supplement' award at LuccaGames, the Italian equivalent, I guess, > of GenCon). I was stupid enough not to buy the other expansions when they > were available (and pretty cheap too... they were priced between 7.5 and 9 > euros). I haven't been able to get hold of the missing booklets, neither on > Italian auction sites nor in 2nd hand shops :-( Hmmm, if you run across any used (or otherwise) copies of them that you don't want (e.g. on eBay or something), I'd be interested in acquiring them. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From nikk at cyber-rights.net Thu Aug 15 02:56:06 2002 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:56:06 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery Message-ID: <200208141656.g7EGu7802146@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I'm surprised no-one mentioned Sandy's sorcery system, which I personally think is excellent (of a little number heavy at times). I tihnk the latest version is at http://www.poppyware.com/dunham/glorantha/sorcery.html Although there are other cariant systems knocking around by Paul Reilly, David Cake and others. But all of the links for those systems have gone dead, except for David Cakes which you can download in postscript format from ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/runequest/sorcery/david-cake-sorcery.ps Hope that helps! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.1 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com wl0EARECAB0FAj1air8WHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzXP1 AJ4/7c0NtFEed47SME9VrlRXHK7UwACeJsq49+7t6PveZyWjem/KJxHr758= =rbYG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Aug 15 03:18:24 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:18:24 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery References: <200208141656.g7EGu7802146@mailserver1.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <000d01c243b6$98c5bd80$38c04942@frkt5> Yeah, the Sandman's sorcery system rocks. And I believe that a sorcery system SHOULD be complicated, as opposed to folk/spirit/battle (for the uneducated masses) or divine/rune/cult magic (for the dogmatically devoted). Sorcery should be as versatile as players can possibly keep track of, thereby helping to explain why there are so few sorcerers. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:56 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I'm surprised no-one mentioned Sandy's sorcery system, which I personally think is excellent (of a little number heavy at times). I tihnk the latest version is at http://www.poppyware.com/dunham/glorantha/sorcery.html Although there are other cariant systems knocking around by Paul Reilly, David Cake and others. But all of the links for those systems have gone dead, except for David Cakes which you can download in postscript format from ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/runequest/sorcery/david-cake-sorcery.ps Hope that helps! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.1 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com wl0EARECAB0FAj1air8WHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzXP1 AJ4/7c0NtFEed47SME9VrlRXHK7UwACeJsq49+7t6PveZyWjem/KJxHr758= =rbYG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From rico at ricosweb.com Thu Aug 15 03:28:08 2002 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 11:28:08 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery In-Reply-To: <000d01c243b6$98c5bd80$38c04942@frkt5> Message-ID: <001601c243b7$f4d7ba50$cb0a0a0a@dohealth.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com > [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of J and/or Ellen > > And I believe that a sorcery > system SHOULD be complicated, as opposed to I don't agree with that. A game system can model a complicated system in an uncomplicated way. The rules can be easy to follow, balanced, well thought out, etc., while still giving the impression that the system is so complicated that very few individuals can/will put up with it. The mechanics of the game should be separate from the feel, IMHO. My limited attempt at improving Sorcerery has been on my site for quite a while now: http://ricosweb.com/Sorc.asp Rich Allen From rog_benham at hotmail.com Thu Aug 15 07:26:56 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 22:26:56 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery Message-ID: In a similar vein was Sandy Petersen's RQ Tekumel with the Magic stat to determine whether the PC could actually use magic at all.  I've used this in my current campaign with a homegrown runic based sorcery system, and it severely restricts the number of sorcerors in the game, adding to the general wonder and power of those that are there! >From: "J and/or Ellen" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery >Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:18:24 -0500 > >Yeah, the Sandman's sorcery system rocks. And I believe that a sorcery >system SHOULD be complicated, as opposed to folk/spirit/battle (for the >uneducated masses) or divine/rune/cult magic (for the dogmatically devoted). >Sorcery should be as versatile as players can possibly keep track of, >thereby helping to explain why there are so few sorcerers. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:56 AM >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery > > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >I'm surprised no-one mentioned Sandy's sorcery system, which I personally >think is excellent (of a little number heavy at times). I tihnk the latest >version is at > >http://www.poppyware.com/dunham/glorantha/sorcery.html > >Although there are other cariant systems knocking around by Paul Reilly, >David Cake and others. But all of the links for those systems have gone >dead, except for David Cakes which you can download in postscript format >from > >ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/runequest/sorcery/david-cake-sorcery.ps > >Hope that helps! >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: Hush 2.1 >Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com > >wl0EARECAB0FAj1air8WHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzXP1 >AJ4/7c0NtFEed47SME9VrlRXHK7UwACeJsq49+7t6PveZyWjem/KJxHr758= >=rbYG >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From peterm at maranci.net Fri Aug 16 03:47:41 2002 From: peterm at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:47:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms Message-ID: <3492.216.118.190.11.1029433661.squirrel@140.186.45.27> Recently I had an idea for a new kind of magic item for RQ; something that seems so obvious that I can't believe someone didn't already create it. Charms. Lucky charms, that is (no cereal jokes, please), which increase the owner's chance with a specific skill. For example, a little bridle made of horsehair which increases the owner's chance to Ride by a certain small percentage. Or a tiny silver arrow that improves Bow Attack similarly. The thing is, there are a number of decisions to make about how charms would work. Some questions: 1. How much should a charm improve a skill? I'm thinking that the enchanter should be able to choose at the time of creation, either rolling 1d6 or taking a flat 3% (in other words, using the experience gain mechanic). This would allow more variation among charms. 2. How much POW should it cost to make a charm? Does 2 points for +1d6/3% sound reasonable? 3. Restrictions/Requirements? There are many of these. For example, I'd think that the enchanter who makes a charm should have to make a check against the applicable skill when they craft the charm. And perhaps the charm can only increase the skill of the owner up to the skill of the enchanter when it was crafted, so that if Bob the Enchanter has a Ride skill of 78% when he makes a +3% Ride charm and gives it to someone with a 76% Ride skill, it only increases their skill to 78%, not 79%. Also, I don't think that the charm should be factored in when making experience rolls. Should direct contact with the charm be required for it to be effective? Should there be a limit to the number of charms which can be used at one time by one person? Perhaps they need to be attuned, like powered crystals, in which case only one could be used at a time. Or perhaps the limit should be POW/3 or POW/2. 4. Bonuses? I think it should be easier to make a charm by using appropriate substances, or rather it should be harder to make a charm out of an *inappropriate* material (or materials). For example, making a Ride charm out of horsehair is appropriate - making it out of metal is not (unless it was a piece of metal taken from a bridle, perhaps). The GM should apply a negative modifier to the creator's Enchant roll for inappropriate substances (by how much?). Contrariswise, magical substances should make it *easier* to enchant, or possibly in the case of powerful magical materials reduce (but never completely eliminate) the required POW. This sort of logicshould probably apply to ALL sorts of magic items! 5. Stackable? I'm inclined to make the charm enchantment stackable, so that more powerful charms can be created. But this would be easy to abuse, so I'm thinking that the POW cost to stack charms should increase exponentially: 2 POW for the first 1d6, 4 for the second, 8 for the third, and so on. Sound reasonable? 6. What about charms for entire skill categories (i.e. Agility, for example)? Or for ALL skills (that would be incredibly powerful). Also, what about charms that improve Luck rolls, or resistance to disease? There should be charms which improve the chance to cast specific spells, and maybe some which work for all spells, too. Though again that would be very powerful. 7. Special success? What happens if the enchanter specials or criticals their Enchant roll for a charm? What if they special/crit the required skill roll for the skill? What if they special/crit both rolls? What would the effects of a Fumble be for either roll? Anyway, just some ideas. What do you think? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Aug 16 05:13:15 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 14:13:15 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms References: <3492.216.118.190.11.1029433661.squirrel@140.186.45.27> Message-ID: <00bc01c2448f$cf340460$41a84942@frkt5> Seems to me that, in real life, people carry lucky charms all the time, but when they REALLY need the luck, they stroke it in some way. In game terms, maybe a charm works at a quarter or half strength (or not at all) unless the owner uses one hand to touch the charm and maybe expend some magic points. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Maranci" To: Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 12:47 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms Recently I had an idea for a new kind of magic item for RQ; something that seems so obvious that I can't believe someone didn't already create it. Charms. Lucky charms, that is (no cereal jokes, please), which increase the owner's chance with a specific skill. For example, a little bridle made of horsehair which increases the owner's chance to Ride by a certain small percentage. Or a tiny silver arrow that improves Bow Attack similarly. The thing is, there are a number of decisions to make about how charms would work. Some questions: 1. How much should a charm improve a skill? I'm thinking that the enchanter should be able to choose at the time of creation, either rolling 1d6 or taking a flat 3% (in other words, using the experience gain mechanic). This would allow more variation among charms. 2. How much POW should it cost to make a charm? Does 2 points for +1d6/3% sound reasonable? 3. Restrictions/Requirements? There are many of these. For example, I'd think that the enchanter who makes a charm should have to make a check against the applicable skill when they craft the charm. And perhaps the charm can only increase the skill of the owner up to the skill of the enchanter when it was crafted, so that if Bob the Enchanter has a Ride skill of 78% when he makes a +3% Ride charm and gives it to someone with a 76% Ride skill, it only increases their skill to 78%, not 79%. Also, I don't think that the charm should be factored in when making experience rolls. Should direct contact with the charm be required for it to be effective? Should there be a limit to the number of charms which can be used at one time by one person? Perhaps they need to be attuned, like powered crystals, in which case only one could be used at a time. Or perhaps the limit should be POW/3 or POW/2. 4. Bonuses? I think it should be easier to make a charm by using appropriate substances, or rather it should be harder to make a charm out of an *inappropriate* material (or materials). For example, making a Ride charm out of horsehair is appropriate - making it out of metal is not (unless it was a piece of metal taken from a bridle, perhaps). The GM should apply a negative modifier to the creator's Enchant roll for inappropriate substances (by how much?). Contrariswise, magical substances should make it *easier* to enchant, or possibly in the case of powerful magical materials reduce (but never completely eliminate) the required POW. This sort of logicshould probably apply to ALL sorts of magic items! 5. Stackable? I'm inclined to make the charm enchantment stackable, so that more powerful charms can be created. But this would be easy to abuse, so I'm thinking that the POW cost to stack charms should increase exponentially: 2 POW for the first 1d6, 4 for the second, 8 for the third, and so on. Sound reasonable? 6. What about charms for entire skill categories (i.e. Agility, for example)? Or for ALL skills (that would be incredibly powerful). Also, what about charms that improve Luck rolls, or resistance to disease? There should be charms which improve the chance to cast specific spells, and maybe some which work for all spells, too. Though again that would be very powerful. 7. Special success? What happens if the enchanter specials or criticals their Enchant roll for a charm? What if they special/crit the required skill roll for the skill? What if they special/crit both rolls? What would the effects of a Fumble be for either roll? Anyway, just some ideas. What do you think? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 16 05:16:58 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 12:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms In-Reply-To: <3492.216.118.190.11.1029433661.squirrel@140.186.45.27> Message-ID: <20020815191658.53214.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> --- Peter Maranci wrote: > Recently I had an idea for a new kind of magic item > for RQ; > something that seems so obvious that I can't believe > someone didn't > already create it. Charms. > I do not want to be the bearer of bad news, but what you are talking about are really just spell matricies of either sorcerous or spirit type. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com From Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz Fri Aug 16 06:38:23 2002 From: Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz (Williamson, Tony) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 08:38:23 +1200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms Message-ID: <02Aug16.083920nzst.119057@inetgate.akcity.govt.nz> We have used a system that seems to work well, with different types of charms, pendants, talismans, and amulets, or perhaps they are magic items depending on how you look at it I guess. Other objects like 1cm or 2cm figurines or family Heirlooms are another good one that enables some good character building hooks. Some work all the time while others will run out the more you use them (the magic diminishes over time), which makes them more interesting and not too powerful. Some examples we use: Pendant of life: The pendant of life will add "1" extra hit point to the wearer and will give the wearer immunity to all diseases. Creatures of Chaos attempting to wear this Item will lose 3 Hit points permanently. There are believed to have been two of these items made. The user must attune him/her self to the Pendant by sacrificing one point of permanent power. Value: 38,500 L The Amulet Fire A silver amulet flame shaped with engraved flames covering it and a large red ruby in the middle of it. This amulet will protect the user against all forms of natural or magical fire. . Value: 16,000 L Stone of Slicing A redstone with black specs in it. When a weapon is sharpened on this stone it will magically increase the damage of the weapon for the next fight by 1 damage point only. This stone will add +1 damage to any bladed weapon if sharpened before a battle. Maybe used as many times as the user has time to sharpen the weapon, an hour must be spent to sharpen it to the point were it will do plus one damage. The user must sacrifice "1" point of power to attune themselves to this item. The user must attune him/her self to the stone by sacrificing one point of permanent power. Value: 6,000 L The Talisman of Dexterity The Talisman is made out of a yellow stone in the shape of a figure-jumping trough the air and is on a leather thong. The Talisman of Dexterity will add half of the wearers Dexterity again up to the wearer's species maximum. This sort of thing can be used when a special roll is needed to jump clear of a trap, avoid a falling rock, climb a wall etc. These Talisman use up there magic every time they are used until they become useless. Each Talisman will have a 1D20 amount of charges before it runs out. . Value: 1,000 L per point We have made some of these types of items very rare, while others maybe common like a stone of sharpening. Tony -----Original Message----- From: Peter Maranci [mailto:peterm at maranci.net] Sent: Friday, 16 August 2002 05:48 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Charms Recently I had an idea for a new kind of magic item for RQ; something that seems so obvious that I can't believe someone didn't already create it. Charms. Lucky charms, that is (no cereal jokes, please), which increase the owner's chance with a specific skill. For example, a little bridle made of horsehair which increases the owner's chance to Ride by a certain small percentage. Or a tiny silver arrow that improves Bow Attack similarly. The thing is, there are a number of decisions to make about how charms would work. Some questions: 1. How much should a charm improve a skill? I'm thinking that the enchanter should be able to choose at the time of creation, either rolling 1d6 or taking a flat 3% (in other words, using the experience gain mechanic). This would allow more variation among charms. 2. How much POW should it cost to make a charm? Does 2 points for +1d6/3% sound reasonable? 3. Restrictions/Requirements? There are many of these. For example, I'd think that the enchanter who makes a charm should have to make a check against the applicable skill when they craft the charm. And perhaps the charm can only increase the skill of the owner up to the skill of the enchanter when it was crafted, so that if Bob the Enchanter has a Ride skill of 78% when he makes a +3% Ride charm and gives it to someone with a 76% Ride skill, it only increases their skill to 78%, not 79%. Also, I don't think that the charm should be factored in when making experience rolls. Should direct contact with the charm be required for it to be effective? Should there be a limit to the number of charms which can be used at one time by one person? Perhaps they need to be attuned, like powered crystals, in which case only one could be used at a time. Or perhaps the limit should be POW/3 or POW/2. 4. Bonuses? I think it should be easier to make a charm by using appropriate substances, or rather it should be harder to make a charm out of an *inappropriate* material (or materials). For example, making a Ride charm out of horsehair is appropriate - making it out of metal is not (unless it was a piece of metal taken from a bridle, perhaps). The GM should apply a negative modifier to the creator's Enchant roll for inappropriate substances (by how much?). Contrariswise, magical substances should make it *easier* to enchant, or possibly in the case of powerful magical materials reduce (but never completely eliminate) the required POW. This sort of logicshould probably apply to ALL sorts of magic items! 5. Stackable? I'm inclined to make the charm enchantment stackable, so that more powerful charms can be created. But this would be easy to abuse, so I'm thinking that the POW cost to stack charms should increase exponentially: 2 POW for the first 1d6, 4 for the second, 8 for the third, and so on. Sound reasonable? 6. What about charms for entire skill categories (i.e. Agility, for example)? Or for ALL skills (that would be incredibly powerful). Also, what about charms that improve Luck rolls, or resistance to disease? There should be charms which improve the chance to cast specific spells, and maybe some which work for all spells, too. Though again that would be very powerful. 7. Special success? What happens if the enchanter specials or criticals their Enchant roll for a charm? What if they special/crit the required skill roll for the skill? What if they special/crit both rolls? What would the effects of a Fumble be for either roll? Anyway, just some ideas. What do you think? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules This e-mail is confidential. If it is not intended for you please do not read, distribute or copy it or any attachments. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original message and any attachments. Any views expressed in this e-mail may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Auckland City Council. From peter at maranci.net Fri Aug 16 11:44:44 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 21:44:44 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Charms In-Reply-To: <20020815183617.BB73D4C014@thinbits.com> References: <20020815183617.BB73D4C014@thinbits.com> Message-ID: *J and/or Ellen wrote: >Seems to me that, in real life, people carry lucky charms all the time, but >when they REALLY need the luck, they stroke it in some way. In game terms, >maybe a charm works at a quarter or half strength (or not at all) unless the >owner uses one hand to touch the charm and maybe expend some magic points. That's an excellent point! Although the MP expenditure might be too time-consuming. Although I've always thought that MP sacrifice shouldn't be so mechanical, that there should be times when it would be almost involuntary. Since it's a product of the soul, you'd think some sort of emotion would pertain to its use. I envision children unwittingly making charms out of their favorite teddy bears, or something... :) * Leon Kirshtein wrote: >I do not want to be the bearer of bad news, but what >you are talking about are really just spell matricies >of either sorcerous or spirit type. Not really. There are two significant ways in which charms differ from matrices: they need not be invoked (although that could change), and they add to *skills*, rather than providing knowledge of a spell. I've never read of an RQ matrix that did that. Come to think of it, charms also don't require the use of magic points - unless we use J and/or Ellen's suggestion. But I'm thinking that there's room in the world of RQ for both options, "powered" charms and "always-on" ones. Magic is too standardized as it is. I'm also leaning toward some sort of system which reflects the materials used to make an enchantment - something reminiscent of the Chivalry & Sorcery rules, although obviously nowhere near as complex! Tony Williamson: *very* neat magic items. Is there a system of enchantment in your game for creating them? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! Adventures, art, an online game, NPCs, magic items, sheets, rules & much more: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Aug 16 18:58:52 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:58:52 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery References: Message-ID: <002b01c24503$25207de0$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello Roger > I've used a homegrown runic based sorcery system Might you post some details? Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From rog_benham at hotmail.com Fri Aug 16 19:37:38 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:37:38 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery Message-ID: I would love to, but as its still being written and developed, its not entirely finished (Although I doubt whether it actually will ever get finished!).  I will post it, but I need to rewrite a few bits and invent some others- there's no magical defences yet, for instance.  The whole thing is very specific to my campaign as well, which is non-Gloranthan.  Would you like the non-G references removed to make it more generic? >From: "Gianni" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery >Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:58:52 +0200 > >Hello Roger > > > I've used a homegrown runic based sorcery system > >Might you post some details? > >Gianni >webmaster of basicrps.com > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz Fri Aug 16 21:01:26 2002 From: Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz (Williamson, Tony) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:01:26 +1200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Charms Message-ID: <02Aug16.230221nzst.119057@inetgate.akcity.govt.nz> >Peter Maranci: >*very* neat magic items. Is there a system of >enchantment in your game for creating them? **Sorry everyone this is a bit long, but I don't really have a short answer to this. We have tried to keep things simple as these sort of things can become too complicated and you can get bogged down with so many rules its just not fun to play. Now not everyone is going to probably like this but this is what we use: We have three types of Items, lesser magical items, (created by village, tribal shaman, (greater items created by Wizards - one of the benefits to the sorcery path, and also high priests of a cult if they have taken weapon, armour or item enchantment). The last is godling created items (extremely very rare, created by a gods & gifted to great heroes normally through a hero quest) these items are always magically returned (usually in a puff of smoke)to the appropriate god on the death of a character that owns this sort of item. So very powerful items don't continue being handed around and this makes sense that this sort of item would be recalled to be given to another brave champion of ...... (Rune level characters only - for advanced games). Only lesser and greater items can be created. Making / creating items always require a task to be performed ( this maybe related to the item or not, e.g. related: a magic sword needs a magical flower from the hills of ...were ever, unrelated: the wizard wants the group of Orcs in the neighboring valley removed). This also will depend on if the charter is making the item or someone else is. Finding someone to make it: There is only a 2% chance, unless the seeker is a member of a cult. As a member of a cult the player has access to all sorts of contacts and resources that the cult maybe able to supply. With this advantage the player only has to roll half his luck roll (rounded up) to find a wizard who can enchant what they are looking for (Luck roll is the players power on D100 dice, in this case it is half their luck roll, so power halved on a D100) instead of the standard 2%. Players may try once every 6 months (finding/contacting the right people can take time). Enchantment's cost a lot of permanent power to create, and large enchantments may require a lot of acolytes to aid in the number of power points sacrificed into the enchantment. We have developed over a long period of time a rough chart to gauge the amount it would take to create an item, which always requires an amount of temporary and permanent power. The loss of permanent power stops items becoming to powerful. Weapon enchantments and Item enchantments are quiet different and can only be used on their respective weapons / items, for example a plus 3 damage enchantment can not be cast on a bracelet, and a +2 IQ bonus or a plus +15% to lock Pick Skill can not be cast onto a broadsword . Examples of magical Items would be, rings, bracelets, broaches, wands, staffs of magic, necklaces, boxes e.g. a wooden box of some sort, boots, capes, cloaks, belts, hats, lanterns, quills, tools, bottles etc A staff of magic is one of the few items that can also have weapon enchantments on it as well. Now the items have a rule of creation that can only be broken by Godling items. This is the rule of 5x3. Most magical items are subject to the rule of a maximum of 5 enchantments. These are 5 different types of enchantments, for example, a Bastard sword has been enchanted with, 1)a matrix of bladesharp 4, 2)an enchantment to +10% to hit, 3)an enchantment to +10% to parry, 4) a immunity to cold attacks, and 5) 35 hit points for the sword and only takes damage on a criticals. Normally a weapon / armour or item will not have even close to 5 enchantments, and it is exceptionally rare to find one with 3 to 4 enchantments, the only exception maybe ones with all matrixes on them. The x3 rule means no type of enchantment can be used more than three times, eg, a 5% hit chance enchantment can be x3 to gain a +15% enchantment to hit in the end. The same rule applies to parry chances and damage, with a maximum of +15% parry or a +3 damage bonus. The only exception is variable spell matrix's, which can be up to whatever the user wants, but it costs in power and money. That's the basics of it, time is the only other thing. This is a world of magic but things still take time to make, and an average item will probably take a good three to six months to make depending on the item perhaps a year or more. Of course acquiring an item should be the big part of it and enjoying the adventure, the item is the reward at the end. Tony This e-mail is confidential. If it is not intended for you please do not read, distribute or copy it or any attachments. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original message and any attachments. Any views expressed in this e-mail may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Auckland City Council. From Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz Fri Aug 16 21:28:51 2002 From: Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz (Williamson, Tony) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:28:51 +1200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Charms Message-ID: <02Aug16.233003nzst.119057@inetgate.akcity.govt.nz> Magical Enchantments: Whoops, One important thing I forgot to add about enchanting items is that each extra enchantment that is added to the first has a %chance of accidentally destroying the first enchantment or second or third etc. This chance is a percentage of the users ability. These can be added again but this costs again in time and money to have them reapplied to the magic item. This can make items very expensive and makes them a little rare to find items with lots of enchantments on them. Tony This e-mail is confidential. If it is not intended for you please do not read, distribute or copy it or any attachments. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original message and any attachments. Any views expressed in this e-mail may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Auckland City Council. From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Aug 16 22:10:19 2002 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:10:19 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Weapon Armour Points Message-ID: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> I am working from memory here: As I recall, a weapons armour points are an idincation of how strong it is. To diminish a weapons AP, the weapon has to be hit, such as if it is used to parry and the damage done must be above the weapons AP value? So if a sword has AP of 10 and it is used to parry an axe, which does 12 points of damage, te sword will loose 2 AP. Or is it the damage must be doble the weapon being hit's AP? So then the axe would have to do above 20 points damage to diminish the swords AP? What I am getting at here is were there rules in previous versions of RQ for normal armour to damage a weapon. If you use a broken bottle to stab a person wearing plate, the bottle is going to fall to bits. Much the same for the rusty orc swoord which works perfectly well when slaying party members but falls to bits when it is salvaged by the bleeding victors. So if you have an inferior quality sword, made of bronze say, it would be logical for it to have a reduced AP. You attack someone wearing serious armour, surley your weapon will take some strain. I am thinking oif making an optional rule for this sort of thing on my site, but wonder if there is/was already a rule handling this.Ciao Tony http://www.runequest.za.org/ Carthage must be destroyed. Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) From gianni at basicrps.com Sat Aug 17 00:33:38 2002 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 16:33:38 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery References: Message-ID: <000901c24531$e9a6ec20$0102600a@otvfrap043> Hello Roger > I would love to, but as its still being written and developed, its not entirely finished (Although I doubt whether it actually will ever get finished!).  I will post it, but I need to rewrite a few bits and invent some others- there's no magical defences yet, for instance.  The whole thing is very specific to my campaign as well, which is non-Gloranthan.  Would you like the non-G references removed to make it more generic? Whichever is simpler for you is OK. See you round, Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From tiberius at runequest.za.org Wed Aug 21 23:22:25 2002 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 15:22:25 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery Message-ID: <37367.196.8.112.21.1029936145.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Here is a poser: Some time back, whilst I was GM'ing an adventure, a character picked up a cursed item and failed to resist its MP. The curse was for her to gradually become a vampire, over the course of a few (3) years). Now that was pretty easy to play but in terms of rules, I would guess that the item would have had to be juiced with some sort of hybrid stacked mix of: Create Vampire, Shapechange Human to Vampire (can you do that - is a vampire considered a species?) and Spell matrix/Magic Points Matrix enchantment, to power the cursed item and give the passive person a figure to resist against. Okay, now how would one remove this curse. Neutralise Magic is too simple and as the cursed person was an adept sorceress, I doubt she would slope to a Priest for a dismiss magic. I am thinking of having her research some variant of Neutralise Magic which needs a Roosters Egg as an active ingrediant, kinda like reversing the create vampire spell and neutralising the Shapechange. Any suggestions? Carthage must be destroyed. Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) Roman statesman From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Aug 21 23:36:34 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 08:36:34 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery References: <37367.196.8.112.21.1029936145.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <001501c24917$c4431000$f35d2a41@frkt5> Other than as sheer literary device, I can't imagine why a character--PC or NPC--would invest the huge amounts of resources necessary to create such a device. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Den" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 8:22 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery Here is a poser: Some time back, whilst I was GM'ing an adventure, a character picked up a cursed item and failed to resist its MP. The curse was for her to gradually become a vampire, over the course of a few (3) years). Now that was pretty easy to play but in terms of rules, I would guess that the item would have had to be juiced with some sort of hybrid stacked mix of: Create Vampire, Shapechange Human to Vampire (can you do that - is a vampire considered a species?) and Spell matrix/Magic Points Matrix enchantment, to power the cursed item and give the passive person a figure to resist against. Okay, now how would one remove this curse. Neutralise Magic is too simple and as the cursed person was an adept sorceress, I doubt she would slope to a Priest for a dismiss magic. I am thinking of having her research some variant of Neutralise Magic which needs a Roosters Egg as an active ingrediant, kinda like reversing the create vampire spell and neutralising the Shapechange. Any suggestions? Carthage must be destroyed. Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) Roman statesman _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 22 00:38:06 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 07:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery In-Reply-To: <001501c24917$c4431000$f35d2a41@frkt5> Message-ID: <20020821143806.70908.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com> > Some time back, a character picked up a > cursed item and failed to resist its MP. The curse > was for her to > gradually become a vampire, over the course of a few > (3) years). Now that > was pretty easy to play but in terms of rules, I > would guess that the item > would have had to be juiced with some sort of hybrid > stacked mix of: > Create Vampire, Shapechange Human to Vampire (can > you do that - is a > vampire considered a species?) and Spell > matrix/Magic Points Matrix > enchantment, to power the cursed item and give the > passive person a figure to resist against. This item is obviously not one created by sorcery, as some else pointed out the power needed to create such a device is way too much. In addition a the combination of spells you are suggesting should not make this change permanent and should be dispellable by a Neutralize Magic. This item should have been created by either a 'godlearner' type person who is able to tap into a divine source of power by some means or by a deity itself. Please note what this device may not be thought of as cursed by some, but rather as a blessing if one wishes to become a vampire. As to the means to reverse some thing like this: it will obviously take a quest (or HeroQuest) and the item must be destroyed in the process! Can anyone says "a trip to Mordor"? :) Leon ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com From slposey at concentric.net Thu Aug 22 00:51:22 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 08:51:22 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery References: <37367.196.8.112.21.1029936145.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <3D63A8EA.4F9DDFEC@concentric.net> Tony Den wrote: > > Here is a poser: > > Some time back, whilst I was GM'ing an adventure, a character picked up a > cursed item and failed to resist its MP. The curse was for her to > gradually become a vampire, over the course of a few (3) years). Now that > was pretty easy to play but in terms of rules, I would guess that the item > would have had to be juiced with some sort of hybrid stacked mix of: > Create Vampire, Shapechange Human to Vampire (can you do that - is a > vampire considered a species?) and Spell matrix/Magic Points Matrix > enchantment, to power the cursed item and give the passive person a figure > to resist against. > Okay, now how would one remove this curse. Neutralise Magic is too simple > and as the cursed person was an adept sorceress, I doubt she would slope > to a Priest for a dismiss magic. I am thinking of having her research some > variant of Neutralise Magic which needs a Roosters Egg as an active > ingrediant, kinda like reversing the create vampire spell and neutralising > the Shapechange. Any suggestions? Really the sword sounds to me more like a Vivamort (or similar) cult ritual item. Just as a matter of magic "theory", I'd say actively CURSED items would typically be based in Divine (or perhaps Shamanic) magics rather than Sorcery; and their nature as curses (per se) should be interpreted in relation to the goals of the originating cult. Sorcerous "curses" would tend to be more immediately defensive/retributional (to discourage/punish someone who steals the sorcerer's accoutrements) rather than a long term progressive life change like you describe. In that light I'd say some sort of blessing from a rival cult would be needed to halt/reverse the effects. My .02L Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Aug 22 01:20:34 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 08:20:34 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Weapon Armour Points In-Reply-To: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> References: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: >I am working from memory here: As I recall, a weapons armour points are an >idincation of how strong it is. To diminish a weapons AP, the weapon has >to be hit, such as if it is used to parry and the damage done must be >above the weapons AP value? So if a sword has AP of 10 and it is used to >parry an axe, which does 12 points of damage, te sword will loose 2 AP. Or >is it the damage must be doble the weapon being hit's AP? It depends upon the weapon material and crasftsmanship. For normal RQ weapons (which were based on Gloranthan Bronze) it is every point over the AP. If I recall correctly, iron weapons were every oe damage of 1.5 times AP, and steel were every damage point over 2 times AP. I also remember "quality" rules where higher quality weapons didn't have higher AP, but used the same sort of multipliers when determining damage to a weapon. >If you use a broken bottle to stab a >person wearing plate, the bottle is going to fall to bits. Much the same >for the rusty orc swoord which works perfectly well when slaying party >members but falls to bits when it is salvaged by the bleeding victors. >So if you have an inferior quality sword, made of bronze say, it would be >logical for it to have a reduced AP. You attack someone wearing serious >armour, surley your weapon will take some strain. I am thinking oif making >an optional rule for this sort of thing on my site, but wonder if there >is/was already a rule handling this. See the above paragraph for using "bronze" based weapons. You pose some very good examples. Each one has reasons why I don't think it is appropriate (e.g. broken bottles were never designed to take the stresses of combat) but I agree with your argument. In most cases, most (not all) normal weapons are going to take most of the normal stresses of combat. So a sword is designed to hit edge-on. The weapon damage during parry is often assumed to occur because the it wasn't used as effectively and maybe have been used to parry flat on. Thus the attacking weapon usually doesn't take damage against a defending weapon (which is incorrect IMHO.) Let's look at a better combat example that doesn't require end-cases like broken bottles or rusty swords. Why doesn't a quarterstaff take damage when the defender used a broadsword to parry? The answer to your questions is: I haven't seen any rules for dealing with any of the circumstances. -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From rog_benham at hotmail.com Thu Aug 22 08:10:58 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 23:10:58 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery Message-ID: I'm slightly confused as to why you need the shapechange human to vampire... surely a vampire is just a human passed into a particular state of unlife? If you start having to change the form of something, it cuts down on the fun if you need to have shapechange troll to vampire, elf to vampire, and so on. All you would have needed is the Create Vampire. Why couldn't it have been a crystal holding a spirit with the requisite magics? The spirit could be driven from the priestess by normal spirit combat, but would always return (Hence the curse), but to be permanently driven off, the device needs to be destroyed..? Just an idea... >From: "J and/or Ellen" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery >Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 08:36:34 -0500 > >Other than as sheer literary device, I can't imagine why a character--PC or >NPC--would invest the huge amounts of resources necessary to create such a >device. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tony Den" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 8:22 AM >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery > > >Here is a poser: > >Some time back, whilst I was GM'ing an adventure, a character picked up a >cursed item and failed to resist its MP. The curse was for her to >gradually become a vampire, over the course of a few (3) years). Now that >was pretty easy to play but in terms of rules, I would guess that the item >would have had to be juiced with some sort of hybrid stacked mix of: >Create Vampire, Shapechange Human to Vampire (can you do that - is a >vampire considered a species?) and Spell matrix/Magic Points Matrix >enchantment, to power the cursed item and give the passive person a figure >to resist against. >Okay, now how would one remove this curse. Neutralise Magic is too simple >and as the cursed person was an adept sorceress, I doubt she would slope >to a Priest for a dismiss magic. I am thinking of having her research some >variant of Neutralise Magic which needs a Roosters Egg as an active >ingrediant, kinda like reversing the create vampire spell and neutralising >the Shapechange. Any suggestions? > >Carthage must be destroyed. > >Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) Roman statesman > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From bick10 at attbi.com Mon Aug 26 05:23:59 2002 From: bick10 at attbi.com (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 12:23:59 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Weapon Armour Points References: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <003f01c24c6c$fa2fa2c0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> tiberius at runequest.za.org > So if a sword has AP of 10 and it is used to > parry an axe, which does 12 points of damage, te sword will loose 2 AP. As I recall, when a weapon or shield is used to parry and the damage overcomes the AP the weapon or shield loses one (1) AP. What you may be thinking of is; when a attack is missed and a parry is made with a weapon, damage can be done to the attacking weapon. The parrier roles damage as if a normal attack and applies that to the missed attack weapon. For every point of damage over the weapon AP the AP is reduced by that much. > Or > is it the damage must be doble the weapon being hit's AP? So then the axe > would have to do above 20 points damage to diminish the swords AP? Hafted weapons have to make a special success parry to cause damage to missed attack weapons. Otherwise the hafted weapon is caught on the haft. Jim From jurrubin at earthlink.net Mon Aug 26 23:32:11 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:32:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Weapon Armour Points References: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> <003f01c24c6c$fa2fa2c0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> Message-ID: <3D6A2DDB.64492D31@earthlink.net> Jim Bickmeyer wrote: > > As I recall, when a weapon or shield is used to parry and the damage > overcomes the AP the weapon or shield loses one (1) AP. What you may be > thinking of is; when a attack is missed and a parry is made with a weapon, > damage can be done to the attacking weapon. The parrier roles damage as if > a normal attack and applies that to the missed attack weapon. For every > point of damage over the weapon AP the AP is reduced by that much. I use this same rule for armor except for making the armor lose 1/4 of an AP; it tends to keep players busy with maintaining their gear. It also makes those crafting skills much more important to have. I had one player even pack around as small an anvil as he could make; he became very popular in the hamlets the group visited. The PCs rarely went hungry and ended up with a well-developed spy network among the common folk. Really brought home medieval economics to the players with him, not to mention acting as a great lead-in for a number of adventures. David Smart From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Aug 27 00:08:44 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:08:44 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells Message-ID: Hey gang, still working on my previously-mentioned Sorcery document (essentially Sandy's Sorcery as modified by me), I've cadgeed quite a number of spells from all sorts of sources..including Doctor Strange comics. Following are a pair of spells inspired by the aesthetic Doctor's adventures. If the Intensity requirements seem a little high with regards to the skill/10 limit of manipulation provided for in Sandy's rules; please note that I use skill/10 + the Sorcerer's Free INT to determine the max level of manipulation possible :) -Ken- Who is currently gnawing his way through ICE's Spell Law for suitable stuff to add... Pincers of Power Touch, Active This spell requires a total Intensity equal to the HP in each of the recipient's limbs to be affected. For the spell's duration, the Sorcerer's hands are surrounded by spheres of energy, from which a pair of pincers projects; the pincers being manipulated to clamp shut on either an opponent's limb or another pincer's energy field with a successful concentration (INT x3) roll. Each excess Intensity increases the user's STR by +1 for purposes of initiating or maintaining a hold on an adversary; adds +1 to the damage inflicted by a successful Crush; and increases the distance an opponent is thrown by +1m. Vapors of Silence Ranged This spell allows the Sorcerer to silence a target. When cast, a cloud of swirling vapor momentarily envelops the target. If overcome, a heavy mask of an unspecified metal appears firmly clamped across the victim's mouth. The target is rendered incapable of producing even the smallest of sounds; let alone speak or cast any magic for the spell's duration Unless viewed with sufficiently sensitive Senses, the proper spells, or in a mirror, the mask appears completely invisible. Should the victim attempt to pull the gag free, it has STR 20; +1 STR per Intensity. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Aug 27 01:43:48 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:43:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020826154348.24586.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com> --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Following are a pair of spells inspired by the > aesthetic Doctor's adventures. > -Ken- Ken, I loced your ideas for the spells, but decided to change them somewhat. Take a look and see what you think. Pincers of Power Ranged, Active For the spell's duration, the Sorcerer's hands are surrounded by spheres of energy, from which a pair of pincers projects; the pincers being manipulated to clamp shut on either an opponent, an object, or another pincer's energy field. An opponent held by the pincers must match his STR vs. the sorcerer?s in order to be able to move. Spell casting would not be possible for spells requiring gestures. Each point of intensity, increases the user's STR by +1 for purposes of holding on or maintaining a hold on an adversary. Mask of Silence Ranged, Active This spell allows the Sorcerer to silence a target. If overcome, a heavy mask of an unspecified material appears firmly clamped across the victim's mouth. The target is rendered incapable of producing even the smallest of sounds, let alone speak or cast magic, for the spell's duration. Unless viewed with sufficiently sensitive Senses, the proper spells, or in a mirror, the mask appears completely invisible. Should the victim attempt to pull the gag free he must overcome the intensity of the spell + STR of the sorcerer. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Aug 27 04:22:55 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:22:55 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells Message-ID: In a message dated 8/26/2002 10:45:11 AM Central Standard Time, Leon decides to give my spells a bit of a makeover: > Ken, I loced your ideas for the spells, but decided to > change them somewhat. Take a look and see what you > think. For the most part I liked the rewrites. The descriptions certainly came across smoother than I'd written them :) I noticed you'd eliminated both the minimum Intensity requirements and the additional effects from the Pincer spell---season to taste, I guess :) I liked the clarification you'd added about not being able to be cast other spells while grappling with the Pincers--pretty obvious *really*.lol! As for the Silence spell, You cut the extraneous descriptive bits right out of the spell's decscription. While the descriptive stuff is in fact, unneccessary, I'd included it because those were the effects in the comic from which I swiped the stuff. I'd arbitrarily chosen a STR 20 (+1 per Intensity), but, after seeing where yuo gave it a STR equal to the Sorcerer's, I think maybe it should have a STR that is tied to the Sorcerer's MP or POW; which seems somehow more *magical* to me, really.. Best :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Aug 27 05:06:18 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 12:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020826190618.42936.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > For the most part I liked the rewrites. The > descriptions certainly came > across smoother than I'd written them :) Thanks, it is always chancy to modify someone else's work. You never know how they will react. > I noticed you'd eliminated both the minimum > Intensity requirements and the > additional effects from the Pincer spell---season to > taste, I guess :) I gave the target the ability to resist the spell every round by matching his strength vs the spell and am adding the intensity to the sorcerer STR, therefore the minimum requirement does not make sense anymore. > I liked the clarification you'd added about not > being able to be cast > other spells while grappling with the > Pincers--pretty obvious *really*.lol! I figure that would be the major use of this spell in any game. I am just getting tingly about a sorcerer Multispelling these two spells at another spell caster. > As for the Silence spell, You cut the extraneous > descriptive bits right out of the spell's description. While the > descriptive stuff is in fact, unnecessary, I'd included it because those were the > effects in the comic from which I swiped the stuff. The reason I did so was because I felt that you had two different visual effects going on. The first was the mist cloud and the second was the mask/gag. I just did not see a connection between the two. That is why I choose just one and changed the name of the spell as well. More importantly I made this spell active as well since I consider it on par with the first one. The target also gets the opportunity to shake the effects of the spell every round. I really do not want ether one of these spells to have a long duration and the sorcerer to be able to do other stuff while maintaining these. > I'd arbitrarily > chosen a STR 20 (+1 per > Intensity), but, after seeing where you gave it a > STR equal to the > Sorcerer's, I think maybe it should have a STR that > is tied to the Sorcerer's > MP or POW; which seems somehow more *magical* to me, > really.. I can see that, but POW is high for sorcerer's and the number is being augmented by the intensity of the spell. By basing the resistance roll on a smaller number (STR) it gives the sorcerer more of an incentive to increase the intensity, while giving the target a better change to resist each round. I also considered using CON as the base stat and can probably make a case for that.:) ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From jellen at ameritech.net Tue Aug 27 11:22:20 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:22:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells References: Message-ID: <000e01c24d68$30a74000$42ac4942@frkt5> By the Seventh Sphere of Skippy, I LOVE the Doctor Strange flavor! I've always wished that RQ spell descriptions had portrayed a more vivid picture of what the effects of the spells LOOK like. Okay, now some nit-picking: Pincers of Power: It seems counterintuitive to me for a spell to rely on a sorcerer's STR. "Traditionally," wizards are physically decrepit, probably from having spent a lifetime (or two) hitting the books, inhaling carcinogenic brazier smoke. Makes more sense to me to match the sorcerer's INT or POW vs. the target's STR. Vapors of Silence: ripping off a STR-20 gag might cause a wee bit of damage to oneself (and one's APP), no? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 9:08 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] A few Sorcery spells Hey gang, still working on my previously-mentioned Sorcery document (essentially Sandy's Sorcery as modified by me), I've cadgeed quite a number of spells from all sorts of sources..including Doctor Strange comics. Following are a pair of spells inspired by the aesthetic Doctor's adventures. If the Intensity requirements seem a little high with regards to the skill/10 limit of manipulation provided for in Sandy's rules; please note that I use skill/10 + the Sorcerer's Free INT to determine the max level of manipulation possible :) -Ken- Who is currently gnawing his way through ICE's Spell Law for suitable stuff to add... Pincers of Power Touch, Active This spell requires a total Intensity equal to the HP in each of the recipient's limbs to be affected. For the spell's duration, the Sorcerer's hands are surrounded by spheres of energy, from which a pair of pincers projects; the pincers being manipulated to clamp shut on either an opponent's limb or another pincer's energy field with a successful concentration (INT x3) roll. Each excess Intensity increases the user's STR by +1 for purposes of initiating or maintaining a hold on an adversary; adds +1 to the damage inflicted by a successful Crush; and increases the distance an opponent is thrown by +1m. Vapors of Silence Ranged This spell allows the Sorcerer to silence a target. When cast, a cloud of swirling vapor momentarily envelops the target. If overcome, a heavy mask of an unspecified metal appears firmly clamped across the victim's mouth. The target is rendered incapable of producing even the smallest of sounds; let alone speak or cast any magic for the spell's duration Unless viewed with sufficiently sensitive Senses, the proper spells, or in a mirror, the mask appears completely invisible. Should the victim attempt to pull the gag free, it has STR 20; +1 STR per Intensity. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jellen at ameritech.net Tue Aug 27 12:27:22 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 21:27:22 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating Weapons (was Weapon Armour Points) References: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> <003f01c24c6c$fa2fa2c0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> <3D6A2DDB.64492D31@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <004401c24d71$470ef140$42ac4942@frkt5> Which brings up the matter of skills--how can a character estimate the condition of a weapon in terms of AP? If with an Evaluate skill, how specific would the skill have to be--Evaluate Weapon, or Evaluate Sword, or Evaluate Brass Shortsword...? I've also acquired the EverQuest idea of equipping NPCs of little economic means with rusty or otherwise low-quality (read: damaged) weapons. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Smart" To: Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Weapon Armour Points Jim Bickmeyer wrote: > > As I recall, when a weapon or shield is used to parry and the damage > overcomes the AP the weapon or shield loses one (1) AP. What you may be > thinking of is; when a attack is missed and a parry is made with a weapon, > damage can be done to the attacking weapon. The parrier roles damage as if > a normal attack and applies that to the missed attack weapon. For every > point of damage over the weapon AP the AP is reduced by that much. I use this same rule for armor except for making the armor lose 1/4 of an AP; it tends to keep players busy with maintaining their gear. It also makes those crafting skills much more important to have. I had one player even pack around as small an anvil as he could make; he became very popular in the hamlets the group visited. The PCs rarely went hungry and ended up with a well-developed spy network among the common folk. Really brought home medieval economics to the players with him, not to mention acting as a great lead-in for a number of adventures. David Smart _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Aug 27 17:31:22 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 03:31:22 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Message-ID: <81.20951584.2a9c84ca@aol.com> Hi gang, This time I'm including a variation of the old fave Create Zombie spell. It is essentially several different Dead Wranglin' type spells pinned together under the title "Create Wight". I choose *wight* mainly because I didn't care for all of the baggage associated with the term "zombie", and wights, while being some flavor of undead horror, seemed to be pretty loosely defined. I've seen "revenant" used in several places, and may change over to that instead :) Note that I haven't included any *stats* for the thing, as I'm figuring stats for the good ol' baggage-loaded book-standard "zombie" are going to be used. Here ya go: Create Wight Ritual Enchantment To effectively use this ritual, a corpse which retains sufficient flesh to allow mobility after activation must be located. 1 POW, as well as MP equal to the MP of the spirit being returned to its body must be expended. If the Enchantment roll succeeds, the spirit of the dead creature is made to re-inhabit, and thus reanimate its corpse. The resulting thing is slow and clumsy, but it *does* remember its past life. It may answer questions concerning its past, or about the Otherworld, but such answers are never direct. They are often riddles, prophecies or even new questions. It is advised to be wary when dealing with the Dead, as the thing's spirit may not be pleased with its return to the World. In addition, misdirection, half truths and outright lying are all certainly very real possibilities. A Wight may be created with Conditions to guard specific locations or items, or to obey people other than its creator Another use of this spell is to return a semblance of life to an individual, so he may be able to tell an important fact, cast an important spell, travel to a Temple unaided for Resurrection, etc. The Sorcerer may give the corpse simple commands which it will carry out to the best of its ability (as tinged by its motivation). Should the Sorcerer die, the Wight becomes inactive, and shortly thereafter, rots away. Other than the Sorcerer's POW, the number of Wights which can be created is unlimited. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From tiberius at runequest.za.org Tue Aug 27 19:41:05 2002 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 11:41:05 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Neutralise Magic - Sorcery Message-ID: <64347.196.8.112.21.1030441265.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Thanks for all the feedback and ideas re this subject. Yes, I was trying to look at it from a purley sorcery perspective, which I stand corrected, was a bit silly. If I think of the histiory of the artifact, it would have been created by a powerful being. The item in question is a decoy and deterrant from finding the real thing. Soo, I think the best solution, from the feedback I got, would be to send her on a kind of hero quest (can we say that here:)) to find said powerful being and have curse removed. Point taken re shapechange, I was just loking at what spells could apply. check the new site @ http://www.runequest.za.org/ Carthage must be destroyed. Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) Roman statesman From epon0608 at tiscali.be Wed Aug 28 00:47:41 2002 From: epon0608 at tiscali.be (epon0608 at tiscali.be) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:47:41 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour damage and repair Message-ID: <3D53B3B7000077D1@ocpmta1.be.tiscali.com> Hi, with the acid, it is written that the armour takes the damage first. How do play it? What is the armour is magical? And when a magical armour takes damage, how can you repair it without breaking the magic? Thanks Cheers Manu From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Aug 28 01:21:32 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:21:32 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell References: <81.20951584.2a9c84ca@aol.com> Message-ID: <00d501c24ddd$6cca3ea0$42ac4942@frkt5> I like the concept of a semi-intelligent undead servant. Sounds too easy to make, though; a necromancer could easily raise an army. Going with the zombie flavor, maybe they require certain...feedings...each day or week in order to remain submissive, which would severely limit the number of wights you'd want hanging around. Maybe the CON of the wight determines the quantity of POW that the wight requires from its victims. Starving a wight would result in an agonizing loss of its CON, perhaps 1 point a day, until fed. A starving wight will seek to murder its host in order to attain its final rest. Whoops--looks like I've just transmogrified your wight into a ghoul. Never mind--I take it all back. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:31 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Hi gang, This time I'm including a variation of the old fave Create Zombie spell. It is essentially several different Dead Wranglin' type spells pinned together under the title "Create Wight". I choose *wight* mainly because I didn't care for all of the baggage associated with the term "zombie", and wights, while being some flavor of undead horror, seemed to be pretty loosely defined. I've seen "revenant" used in several places, and may change over to that instead :) Note that I haven't included any *stats* for the thing, as I'm figuring stats for the good ol' baggage-loaded book-standard "zombie" are going to be used. Here ya go: Create Wight Ritual Enchantment To effectively use this ritual, a corpse which retains sufficient flesh to allow mobility after activation must be located. 1 POW, as well as MP equal to the MP of the spirit being returned to its body must be expended. If the Enchantment roll succeeds, the spirit of the dead creature is made to re-inhabit, and thus reanimate its corpse. The resulting thing is slow and clumsy, but it *does* remember its past life. It may answer questions concerning its past, or about the Otherworld, but such answers are never direct. They are often riddles, prophecies or even new questions. It is advised to be wary when dealing with the Dead, as the thing's spirit may not be pleased with its return to the World. In addition, misdirection, half truths and outright lying are all certainly very real possibilities. A Wight may be created with Conditions to guard specific locations or items, or to obey people other than its creator Another use of this spell is to return a semblance of life to an individual, so he may be able to tell an important fact, cast an important spell, travel to a Temple unaided for Resurrection, etc. The Sorcerer may give the corpse simple commands which it will carry out to the best of its ability (as tinged by its motivation). Should the Sorcerer die, the Wight becomes inactive, and shortly thereafter, rots away. Other than the Sorcerer's POW, the number of Wights which can be created is unlimited. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From rog_benham at hotmail.com Wed Aug 28 01:30:29 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:30:29 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Message-ID: Or maybe the number of wights is determined by the POW and/or CON of the necromancer, much like number of captured spirits you can use too. Perhaps the link is to the necromancer's CON, and he gets weaker and weaker as he's spread thinner and thinner between his personal horde? >From: "J and/or Ellen" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell >Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:21:32 -0500 > >I like the concept of a semi-intelligent undead servant. Sounds too easy to >make, though; a necromancer could easily raise an army. Going with the >zombie flavor, maybe they require certain...feedings...each day or week in >order to remain submissive, which would severely limit the number of wights >you'd want hanging around. Maybe the CON of the wight determines the >quantity of POW that the wight requires from its victims. Starving a wight >would result in an agonizing loss of its CON, perhaps 1 point a day, until >fed. A starving wight will seek to murder its host in order to attain its >final rest. > >Whoops--looks like I've just transmogrified your wight into a ghoul. Never >mind--I take it all back. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:31 AM >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell > > > Hi gang, > This time I'm including a variation of the old fave Create Zombie spell. > It is essentially several different Dead Wranglin' type spells pinned >together under the title "Create Wight". > I choose *wight* mainly because I didn't care for all of the baggage >associated with the term "zombie", and wights, while being some flavor of >undead horror, seemed to be pretty loosely defined. I've seen "revenant" >used >in several places, and may change over to that instead :) > Note that I haven't included any *stats* for the thing, as I'm figuring >stats for the good ol' baggage-loaded book-standard "zombie" are going to be >used. > Here ya go: > > Create Wight >Ritual Enchantment >To effectively use this ritual, a corpse which retains sufficient flesh to >allow mobility after activation must be located. >1 POW, as well as MP equal to the MP of the spirit being returned to its >body >must be expended. If the Enchantment roll succeeds, the spirit of the dead >creature is made to re-inhabit, and thus reanimate its corpse. > The resulting thing is slow and clumsy, but it *does* remember its past >life. It may answer questions concerning its past, or about the Otherworld, >but such answers are never direct. They are often riddles, prophecies or >even > new questions. It is advised to be wary when dealing with the Dead, as the >thing's spirit may not be pleased with its return to the World. In addition, >misdirection, half truths and outright lying are all certainly very real >possibilities. > A Wight may be created with Conditions to guard specific locations or >items, or to obey people other than its creator > Another use of this spell is to return a semblance of life to an >individual, so he may be able to tell an important fact, cast an >important spell, travel to a Temple unaided for Resurrection, etc. > The Sorcerer may give the corpse simple commands which it will carry >out to the best of its ability (as tinged by its motivation). Should the >Sorcerer die, the Wight becomes inactive, and shortly thereafter, rots away. > Other than the Sorcerer's POW, the number of Wights which can be >created >is unlimited. > > > > > >--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- >multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html >--- >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From slposey at concentric.net Wed Aug 28 01:32:08 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:32:08 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating Weapons (was Weapon Armour Points) References: <37897.196.8.112.21.1029499819.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> <003f01c24c6c$fa2fa2c0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> <3D6A2DDB.64492D31@earthlink.net> <004401c24d71$470ef140$42ac4942@frkt5> Message-ID: <3D6B9B78.59A19C34@concentric.net> J and/or Ellen wrote: > > Which brings up the matter of skills--how can a character estimate the > condition of a weapon in terms of AP? If with an Evaluate skill, how > specific would the skill have to be--Evaluate Weapon, or Evaluate Sword, or > Evaluate Brass Shortsword...? > > I've also acquired the EverQuest idea of equipping NPCs of little economic > means with rusty or otherwise low-quality (read: damaged) weapons. Interesting, I've put some thought into a system for distinguishing among weapons and armor constructed of different materials, e.g. should a copper sword actually do less damage than a steel one of similar size, or does it just get dull faster and break (bend/dent) more easily? Has anyone come up with something like that? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From rog_benham at hotmail.com Wed Aug 28 01:39:29 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:39:29 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour damage and repair Message-ID: We play that the armour takes damage permanent;y until repaired; magical armour would get a resistance roll vs the potency of the acid.  If its damaged, its reduced in strength, and to repair it you'd need practically to re-enchant the whole thing again! >From: epon0608 at tiscali.be >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour damage and repair >Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:47:41 +0200 > >Hi, > >with the acid, it is written that the armour takes the damage first. How >do play it? > >What is the armour is magical? And when a magical armour takes damage, how >can you repair it without breaking the magic? > >Thanks > >Cheers > >Manu > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Aug 28 02:24:13 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:24:13 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell References: Message-ID: <007e01c24de6$4fda0420$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> It sounds to me like this is a form of captive spirit, so using the captive spirit rules would seem appropriate. Must the sorcerer use his own POW, or can he Tap the POW of others to create the zombie/revenants? I think that makes the difference between a sorcerer with some undead attendants and an all-conquering Zombie Master. Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Benham" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 8:30 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell > > Or maybe the number of wights is determined by the POW and/or CON of the necromancer, much like number of captured spirits you can use too. Perhaps the link is to the necromancer's CON, and he gets weaker and weaker as he's spread thinner and thinner between his personal horde? [------------------ From: "J and/or Ellen" I like the concept of a semi-intelligent undead servant. Sounds too easy to make, though; a necromancer could easily raise an army. Going with the zombie flavor, maybe they require certain...feedings...each day or week in order to remain submissive, which would severely limit the number of wights you'd want hanging around. Maybe the CON of the wight determines the quantity of POW that the wight requires from its victims. Starving a wight would result in an agonizing loss of its CON, perhaps 1 point a day, until fed. A starving wight will seek to murder its host in order to attain its final rest. Whoops--looks like I've just transmogrified your wight into a ghoul. Never ;mind--I take it all back. ;----- Original Message ----- Hi gang, This time I'm including a variation of the old fave Create Zombie spell. It is essentially several different Dead Wranglin' type spells pinned ;together under the title "Create Wight". I choose *wight* mainly because I didn't care for all of the baggage associated with the term "zombie", and wights, while being some flavor of undead horror, seemed to be pretty loosely defined. I've seen "revenant" used ;in several places, and may change over to that instead :) Note that I haven't included any *stats* for the thing, as I'm figuring stats for the good ol' baggage-loaded book-standard "zombie" are going to be used. Here ya go: Create Wight Ritual Enchantment To effectively use this ritual, a corpse which retains sufficient flesh to allow mobility after activation must be located. 1 POW, as well as MP equal to the MP of the spirit being returned to its body must be expended. If the Enchantment roll succeeds, the spirit of the dead creature is made to re-inhabit, and thus reanimate its corpse. The resulting thing is slow and clumsy, but it *does* remember its past life. It may answer questions concerning its past, or about the Otherworld, but such answers are never direct. They are often riddles, prophecies or even new questions. It is advised to be wary when dealing with the Dead, as the thing's spirit may not be pleased with its return to the World. In addition, ;misdirection, half truths and outright lying are all certainly very real possibilities. A Wight may be created with Conditions to guard specific locations or items, or to obey people other than its creator Another use of this spell is to return a semblance of life to an individual, so he may be able to tell an important fact, cast an important spell, travel to a Temple unaided for Resurrection, etc. The Sorcerer may give the corpse simple commands which it will carry out to the best of its ability (as tinged by its motivation). Should the Sorcerer die, the Wight becomes inactive, and shortly thereafter, rots away. Other than the Sorcerer's POW, the number of Wights which can be created is unlimited. From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Aug 28 02:37:16 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:37:16 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating Weapons (was Weapon Armour Points) Message-ID: On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 21:27:22 -0500 J and/or Ellen wrote: > Which brings up the matter of skills--how can a > character estimate the > condition of a weapon in terms of AP? If with > an Evaluate skill...? I'm big on using one skill to "enable" a bonus to be added to a more generic skill. It helps keep down the proliferation of skills in my RQ campaigns. I've always use the weapon skill for the weapon as the "enabler" for the character's Evaluate skill in terms of evaluating a specimen from a particular weapon _type_ (i.e. all axes, swords, bows, crossbows, etc.). Those who have a great deal of experience with a particular weapon will have a better chance of figuring out that weapon's condition than someone who's never really used it. Each time they want to Evaluate a weapon, they roll their weapon attack skill. A regular success doubles their Evaluate skill percentage when trying to evaluate that particular kind of weapon while a special success on the weapon attack roll triples the Evaluate percentage. Ex. Boric the swordsman (Broadsword A% of 80) is looking over the goods at a swordsmith's stall. Looking at a shortsword with an Eval skill of 35, he rolls first a 58 against his A% of 80. This allow him a Eval roll vs. (35x2) or 70. Rolling a second time, he gets 67 and realizes the temper has been ruined. His buddy, Hanse the hopeless, with a Shortsword A% of 32 and Eval of 27 first rolls a 87 vs. his A% of 32, forcing him to roll against his straight Eval of 27. He rolls a 2 and buys the shortsword gleefully at an inflated price while Boric shakes his head in disgust. > I've also acquired the EverQuest idea of > equipping NPCs of little economic > means with rusty or otherwise low-quality > (read: damaged) weapons. Me, too. ;-) David Smart From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Aug 28 02:45:51 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:45:51 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating Weapons (was Weapon Armour Points) Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:32:08 -0600 Stephen Posey wrote: > > Interesting, I've put some thought into a > system for distinguishing > among weapons and armor constructed of > different materials, e.g. should > a copper sword actually do less damage than a > steel one of similar size, > or does it just get dull faster and break > (bend/dent) more easily? > > Has anyone come up with something like that? For copper and stone weapons, I've just reduce damage done by one point for each melee the weapon is used in, in addition to any damage it takes according to the normal rules. The weapon can be resharpened, gaining the damage point back. Stone weapons lose an AP per lost damage point when they are resharpened. It may not be accurate but it works. David Smart From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Aug 28 08:21:27 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 18:21:27 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Message-ID: <113.166ff219.2a9d5567@aol.com> In a message dated 8/27/2002 11:33:18 AM Central Standard Time, Steve wonders: > Must the sorcerer use his own POW, or can he Tap the POW of others to create > the zombie/revenants? I think that makes the difference between a sorcerer > with some undead attendants and an all-conquering Zombie Master. Well, I hadn't really thought at length about it, but *sure*, why not? If the Sorcerer is using Tap in the first place, the POW he's absorbed is *already* his, now isn't it?:) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Aug 28 09:14:34 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:14:34 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell References: <113.166ff219.2a9d5567@aol.com> Message-ID: <004401c24e1f$95a0eee0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Good point. I suppose I was thinking more along the Pan Tangian line of sacrificing slaves to get their power to do whatever with. Thus, the death of a victim would be part of the spell and would provide the POW for several zombies/revenants. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:21 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell > In a message dated 8/27/2002 11:33:18 AM Central Standard Time, Steve > wonders: > > > Must the sorcerer use his own POW, or can he Tap the POW of others to create > > the zombie/revenants? I think that makes the difference between a sorcerer > > with some undead attendants and an all-conquering Zombie Master. > > Well, I hadn't really thought at length about it, but *sure*, why not? If > the Sorcerer is using Tap in the first place, the POW he's absorbed is > *already* his, now isn't it?:) > -Ken- > > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Aug 28 11:52:09 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:52:09 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Message-ID: <1ac.77c72f1.2a9d86c9@aol.com> In a message dated 8/27/2002 6:32:48 PM Central Standard Time, Steve writes: > I suppose I was thinking more along the Pan Tangian line of sacrificing > slaves to get their power to do whatever with. Thus, the death of a victim > would be part of the spell and would provide the POW for several > zombies/revenants. > Hell, that sounds more efficient,as well as just pretty darned cool :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From nikk at cyber-rights.net Wed Aug 28 19:19:41 2002 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 02:19:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acid Damage Message-ID: <200208280919.g7S9Jfu65490@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >with the acid, it is written that the armour takes the damage first. How >do play it? I play that acid damage goes straight to the individual location hit. So a piece of chainmail hit by POT 5 acid is permanently reduced to 2 ap's. It can be Repaired, or a new location bought, but until then you're stuffed. >What is the armour is magical? And when a magical armour takes damage, how >can you repair it without breaking the magic? Because I found acid so effective at high levels of play, and magic so readily available, I ruled that it burnt away magical armour aswell, such as Protection, Shield etc... but not resist damage (or, indeed, resist acid). My players complained that that didn't make any sense, and I pointed out that magic didn't make any sense and it could act however I wished it to. There's no way to repair magical armour damage, other than by recasting the spell. With enchanted metals I rule that there is no difference, except for the higher ap's such an armour would have. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.1 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com wl0EARECAB0FAj1slagWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzSND AKCAXGT7OIsRCPtPtGs4CvWp/WF7LQCgsCIkNE2bHuBYqtyLpBVSav9EmP4= =UJIZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Aug 29 05:33:12 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 12:33:12 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell Message-ID: On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:52:09 EDT MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > with. Thus, the death of a victim > > would be part of the spell and would provide > the POW for several > > zombies/revenants. > > > > Hell, that sounds more efficient,as well as > just pretty darned cool :) Not if you're the victim... David S. From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Aug 29 05:41:50 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:41:50 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell References: Message-ID: <024201c24eca$f48f7d80$42ac4942@frkt5> Yes, some have indeed accused Pan Tang of occasionally violating the civil liberties of its immigrant populace. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Smart" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:52:09 EDT MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > with. Thus, the death of a victim > > would be part of the spell and would provide > the POW for several > > zombies/revenants. > > > > Hell, that sounds more efficient,as well as > just pretty darned cool :) Not if you're the victim... David S. _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 29 05:52:20 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 12:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another Sorcery spell In-Reply-To: <024201c24eca$f48f7d80$42ac4942@frkt5> Message-ID: <20020828195220.89700.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> On the other hand those who were violated, rarely complained in a proper maner since no documents have been filed with Theocrats office of Imigrant Relocation and Reeducation. --- J and/or Ellen wrote: > Yes, some have indeed accused Pan Tang of > occasionally violating the civil > liberties of its immigrant populace. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From bakerdcraig at hotmail.com Fri Aug 30 01:08:46 2002 From: bakerdcraig at hotmail.com (Donald Baker) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:08:46 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cult Conversions between II and III Message-ID: Hi.. I just got Cult Compendium and it's GREAT. Most of the cult write ups are for RQ II excepting Yelm and a couple of others. While most cults were rewritten for RQ III the are a number that weren't, Vivamort, Yelorna etc. Does anyone know of a conversion procedure that was used? Specifically in the way that spirit magic availability was decided on???? Keith _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 02:44:02 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:44:02 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] More Sorcery Message-ID: <166.12fd7d40.2a9fa952@aol.com> Hi gang, Found a few spells I liked on the WWWeb, and did a few changes, and/or rammed several different spell effects together under a single spell description :) [Group] Antipathy Ranged For the spell's duration, the object or area affected will be onerous and unpleasant to members of the specified group. This group can be as widely or narrowly defined as the Sorcerer desires. Any members of the indicated group must overcome the spell's Intensity with MP to remain within the area, or approach the center of the spell. Movement around, or to the side of the area of effect, is permitted with no penalty. Should any members of the group succeed in entering the spell's area of effect, they will sleep poorly, and be unable to regain either Fatigue or MP. In addition, any Healing magic or Natural Healing are reduced to ? effectiveness. [Group] Rapport Ranged For the spell's duration, the object or area affected will be pleasant and restful place of goodwill to members of the specified group. This group can be as widely or narrowly defined as the Sorcerer desires. While within the spell's area of effect, any possible misinterpretation of body language; a miss, or even a Fumble with a Communication skill, will be negated. The spell only conveys existing goodwill. Any hostile act or intent entering or occurring within the area of effect ends the spell. Any member of the indicated group must overcome the spell's Intensity with MP to depart the region or place, or to abandon any project undertaken while within the area. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 02:53:46 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:53:46 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 Message-ID: <62.24f5594e.2a9fab9a@aol.com> Hi, me again! Awhile back I was looking for the specifics of a spell I thought I'd seen someplace on the WWWeb. I asked the list about the mystery spell (as well as the CoC list), but got *no* response. Eventually convinced I must've *dreamed* the darned thing, while looking for my old copy of Traveller's Digest 9 (the one with the trip to Capitol) this morning, I ran across the CoC/Delta Green book *The Fate*. Picking it up and looking through it, I ran across *just* the spell I'd been searching for. A few changes and viola! Cool new Sorcery spell: Covenant Ritual Summons This spell allows a Sorcerer to food-train a specific Otherworld entity to perform his bidding without the necessity of the Dominate spell. The Sorcerer must know the Summon spell for the creature in question, as well as the Covenant ritual. To form a Covenant with the thing, the Sorcerer repeatedly summons it; offering the creature a live token each time the ritual is performed, as a means of assuaging its urges to consume the Sorcerer, as well as winning its favor. Each time a victim is offered and the Covenant ritual enacted, the Sorcerer expends 1 POW, as well as MP equal to ? the victim's POW. Once the token is consumed, the Sorcerer gains a 15% chance of successfully calling the creature later by a simple mental summons, without having to rely on Summons or Dominate spells. This chance can never exceed 90%. Once called, the creature appears 1D4 minutes later. The Sorcerer then indicates a token for the creature to take; which usually happens to be an opponent. If no token is provided, or the target indicated is too difficult to kill, the creature will attack the Sorcerer instead. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 03:00:37 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:00:37 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #2 Message-ID: <9b.2cbfd8d1.2a9fad35@aol.com> I'd wondered about a Mysterious Sorcery spell concerning magically making old/tainted food edible again. One of the features of which was the food acquiring a definite heavily seasoned flavor. I'd seen it, I was *sure* of that, then *poof*couldn't find it again. Well, not to be derailed, I decided to just sit down and try to write the spell up from (my rather faulty) memory. Here you go! -Ken- Season Touch This spell allows the Sorcerer to render old or tainted (though not Poisoned) foodstuffs edible again. Each Intensity allows a single ENC or liter of substance to be affected. Each week past its prime requires an additional Intensity. Each Intensity in excess of those used for the foodstuffs' volume and age improves both the food's general appearance as well as its taste. Very perceptive individuals; meaning those with Taste Analysis skill, or who succeed with a Special Smell task, or a POW x1 roll, will be able to recognize the subtle spicing which foodstuffs affected by this spell seem to take on. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 30 04:21:33 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 In-Reply-To: <62.24f5594e.2a9fab9a@aol.com> Message-ID: <20020829182133.29857.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> I redid it a bit, see what you think: Covenent Ritual Summon This spell allows a Sorcerer to food-train a specific Otherworld entity to perform his bidding without the necessity of the Dominate spell. The Sorcerer must first summon or contact the creature in question and contain it untill it is fed. To form a Covenant the Sorcerer must offer the creature some source of power (be it his own or anothers) each time the ritual is performed, as a means of assuaging its urges to consume the Sorcerer, as well as winning its favor. Each time the creature is fed it becomes less likely to attack the sorcerer: chance of attack = 100% - 10% (per each time it is fed) - 1% (per point of power fed). This chance never drops below 1%. There is always a possibility that the creature will turn against the caster. Once the token is consumed, the Sorcerer gains a 1% chance, per 1pt of power fed, of successfully calling the creature later by a simple mental summons, without having to rely on Summons or Dominate spells. This chance can never exceed 90%. Once called, the creature appears 1D4 minutes later. At this point the sorcerer must sacrifice a point of his own power to the creature. The creature will then perform one task that it deems to be within its means. The creature may refuse to perform the task if it deams it too dangerous, but should be inclined to continue the relationship which keeps it fed. --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Hi, me again! > Awhile back I was looking for the specifics of a > spell I thought I'd seen > someplace on the WWWeb. I asked the list about the > mystery spell (as well as > the CoC list), but got *no* response. Eventually > convinced I must've > *dreamed* the darned thing, while looking for my old > copy of Traveller's > Digest 9 (the one with the trip to Capitol) this > morning, I ran across the > CoC/Delta Green book *The Fate*. > Picking it up and looking through it, I ran > across *just* the spell I'd > been searching for. A few changes and viola! Cool > new Sorcery spell: > > Covenant > Ritual Summons ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 30 04:44:26 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cult Conversions between II and III In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020829184426.15782.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> --- Donald Baker wrote: > Vivamort, Yelorna etc. > Does anyone know of a conversion procedure that was > used? Specifically in > the way that spirit magic availability was decided > on???? No specific system was used. Vivamort was totally turned into a sorcery based cult (No "official" write up). For spirit magic just give them the same spells, but remove the point restriction. We just give cult members 50% discount on cult magic. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Aug 30 03:17:30 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 12:17:30 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 References: <62.24f5594e.2a9fab9a@aol.com> Message-ID: <00cb01c24f7f$f4b8fc40$cca94942@frkt5> Well, aren't you just the man o' mana! Yet another great spell you got there, but of course I gotta tinker: I'm not sure what you mean by "Otherworld entity," but the term seems most applicable to an "evil" being, such as the typical demon. I'm not quite sure that the spell fits, however, when summoning an elemental or a supernatural "good" entity, such as a...well, uh...okay, none come to mind right now, but I'm sure there must be some, like an angel or something. Anyway, my point being that different entities will desire different forms of sacrifice--earth elementals might like (in addition to the sorcerer's POW sacrifice) precious gems or gold, an "angeloid" might appreciate being the witness to something positive, like...uh...viewing an art collection....or...geez, I dunno. Help me out here, people. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 11:53 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 Hi, me again! Awhile back I was looking for the specifics of a spell I thought I'd seen someplace on the WWWeb. I asked the list about the mystery spell (as well as the CoC list), but got *no* response. Eventually convinced I must've *dreamed* the darned thing, while looking for my old copy of Traveller's Digest 9 (the one with the trip to Capitol) this morning, I ran across the CoC/Delta Green book *The Fate*. Picking it up and looking through it, I ran across *just* the spell I'd been searching for. A few changes and viola! Cool new Sorcery spell: Covenant Ritual Summons This spell allows a Sorcerer to food-train a specific Otherworld entity to perform his bidding without the necessity of the Dominate spell. The Sorcerer must know the Summon spell for the creature in question, as well as the Covenant ritual. To form a Covenant with the thing, the Sorcerer repeatedly summons it; offering the creature a live token each time the ritual is performed, as a means of assuaging its urges to consume the Sorcerer, as well as winning its favor. Each time a victim is offered and the Covenant ritual enacted, the Sorcerer expends 1 POW, as well as MP equal to ? the victim's POW. Once the token is consumed, the Sorcerer gains a 15% chance of successfully calling the creature later by a simple mental summons, without having to rely on Summons or Dominate spells. This chance can never exceed 90%. Once called, the creature appears 1D4 minutes later. The Sorcerer then indicates a token for the creature to take; which usually happens to be an opponent. If no token is provided, or the target indicated is too difficult to kill, the creature will attack the Sorcerer instead. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 11:20:51 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:20:51 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 Message-ID: <117.168f4d96.2aa02273@aol.com> Hmm, Well, I like Leon's rewrite. Made me go back and rewrite the spell all over again; incorporating several of his suggestions :) Here you go: Covenant [strike 2] Ritual Summons This spell allows a Sorcerer to food-train a specific Otherworld entity to do his bidding at a later time without the necessity of using the Dominate spell. The Sorcerer must know the Summon spell for the creature in question, as well as the Covenant ritual. To form a Covenant with a particular creature, the Sorcerer must offer the creature some source of POW (either 1pt of the Sorcerer's own, or another's entire POW in the form of a token sacrifice), as well as expend MP equal to ? the creature's POW each time the ritual is performed, as a means of assuaging its urges to consume the Sorcerer, as well as winning its favor. Once the ritual has been completed, and the token consumed, the Sorcerer gains a 15% chance of successfully calling the creature by a simple mental summons, without having to rely on the casting of Summoning or Dominate spells. This chance can never exceed 90%, as there is always a possibility that the creature will turn against the Sorcerer. Once mentally called, the creature appears 1D4 minutes later; ready to perform a single, usually previously-discussed task for the Sorcerer. If no sacrificial token is provided, the target indicated is too difficult to kill, or the creature deems a task too dangerous, it may refuse to perform the task, and instead attempt to eat the Sorcerer. -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Aug 30 13:39:53 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:39:53 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing Message-ID: <00ec01c24fd6$e6fe0d00$225f2a41@frkt5> I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student gets. On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that Alchemy should be a lore skill. This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Aug 30 13:42:53 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:42:53 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing References: <00ec01c24fd6$e6fe0d00$225f2a41@frkt5> Message-ID: <00f101c24fd7$527111e0$225f2a41@frkt5> That should say, 'once the check for the student's tuition has cleared..." ----- Original Message ----- From: "J and/or Ellen" To: Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:39 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student gets. On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that Alchemy should be a lore skill. This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 14:48:05 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 00:48:05 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #1 Message-ID: <2f.2c5c54c2.2aa05305@aol.com> In a message dated 8/29/2002 6:30:32 PM Central Standard Time, Jellen writes: > Well, aren't you just the man o' mana! Yet another great spell you got > there, but of course I gotta tinker: Man o' mana? Gee, thanks :) > > I'm not sure what you mean by "Otherworld entity," but the term seems most > applicable to an "evil" being, such as the typical demon. I decided on using the fairly vague "Otherworld entity" because, like the "Z" word mentioned in a previous post (i.e: zombie), I wanted to avoid a term which *I* think comes with entirely too much baggage attached; which'd be "Demon". I'm not quite sure > that the spell fits, however, when summoning an elemental or a supernatural > "good" entity Right. The spell as written doesn't *really* lend itself to interaction with "friendly/good" type of creatures. I know *I* sure can't think of any really good entities that require food-training to help encourage their aid. But what if there *were*, huh? lol! , such as a...well, uh...okay, none come to mind right now, but > I'm sure there must be some, like an angel or something. Anyway, my point > being that different entities will desire different forms of > sacrifice--earth elementals might like (in addition to the sorcerer's POW > sacrifice) precious gems or gold, an "angeloid" might appreciate being the > witness to something positive, like...uh...viewing an art > collection....or...geez, I dunno. Help me out here, people. > Hmmm, I like the above. Very interesting ideas there :) Best. -Ken- [smiling at the image of an angel eating a painting like an oversized hershey bar] --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From bakerdcraig at hotmail.com Fri Aug 30 16:25:07 2002 From: bakerdcraig at hotmail.com (Donald Baker) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:25:07 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing Message-ID: >From: "J and/or Ellen" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing >Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:42:53 -0500 > >That should say, 'once the check for the student's tuition has cleared..." > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "J and/or Ellen" >To: >Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:39 PM >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing > > >I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 >explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of >concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student >gets. >On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's >tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that >Alchemy should be a lore skill. > >This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has >existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? > > Tradetalk #^ has extensive RQ III rules for alchemy Keith _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx From bakerdcraig at hotmail.com Fri Aug 30 16:25:17 2002 From: bakerdcraig at hotmail.com (Donald Baker) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:25:17 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing Message-ID: >From: "J and/or Ellen" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing >Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:42:53 -0500 > >That should say, 'once the check for the student's tuition has cleared..." > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "J and/or Ellen" >To: >Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:39 PM >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing > > >I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 >explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of >concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student >gets. >On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's >tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that >Alchemy should be a lore skill. > >This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has >existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? > > Tradetalk #6 has extensive RQ III rules for alchemy Keith _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Aug 30 17:53:59 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 03:53:59 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing Message-ID: <3a.2bd47d19.2aa07e97@aol.com> Alchemy, huh? :) I rode forth in the name of that quest about 2yrs ago in an effort to cadge what I liked and knock-out a set of Alchemy Rukles I liked... Anyhow, there are several places on the WWWeb to find stuff. Just Google for "Runequest Alchemy". Delecti's Tower of Magics has an Alchemy Lab with several different authors' takes on the subject handily centralized for your convenince. Christopher Johnson's rules on that site are lacking a couple of tables which dilligent searching will turn up on either the old Glorantha or RQ mailing list archives (I can't remember which now). Other rules included on the same site are by Pascal Legrand, Alain Rameau, and Hartley Patterson. Simon Phipp's page Alchemy In RuneQuest has some Alchemy Rules, too! The RQ mailing list archives also has Alchemy Rules by Wilen, as well as by Murphy (no relation to *me*), and Peter Keel's page in German (but translatable by Google) has Alchemy stuff as well. The Chaosium list archives also has some Alchemy stuff sprinkled thoughout--mainly for Elric/Stormbringer, but certainly usable for RQ. Good hunting! -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Aug 30 18:14:12 2002 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:14:12 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating weapons Message-ID: <50463.196.8.112.21.1030695252.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> David Smart wrote: {Stone weapons lose an AP per lost damage point when they are resharpened. It may not be accurate but it works.} I like that idea, simple but effective. Talking Stone weapons, what is a Stone Bow? I see stats for it in the RQ Rules, but there is no description.Ciao Tony http://www.runequest.za.org/ Carthage must be destroyed. Cato the Elder (Marcius Porcius C.; 234-149 BC) Roman statesman From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 30 23:12:52 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating weapons In-Reply-To: <50463.196.8.112.21.1030695252.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <20020830131252.198.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com> --- Tony Den wrote: > I like that idea, simple but effective. Talking > Stone weapons, what is a > Stone Bow? I see stats for it in the RQ Rules, but > there is no > description.Ciao Basically it looks like a crossbow, but instead of bolts it fires stones or bullets. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 30 23:44:12 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:44:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB In-Reply-To: <117.168f4d96.2aa02273@aol.com> Message-ID: <20020830134412.99174.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> I know a number of you folks outwhere have been collecting spells for your campaings and it is a pain in the ass job to do. I therefore createde this small Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and such. I have also put in some some basic spells from Sandy's rules and some other spells I had at the moment. This is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you to add stuff to it. I will be expanding this to include spirit and divine magic as well as other things, as I have time. Please let me know what else you guys want. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 30 23:51:57 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB In-Reply-To: <20020830134412.99174.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020830135157.719.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I know a number of you folks outthere have been > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a > pain > in the ass job to do. I therefore created this > small > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and such. > > I have also put in some some basic spells from > Sandy's > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. > This > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you to > add stuff to it. > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > divine > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > Please > let me know what else you guys want. > > > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/mixed text/plain (text body -- kept) application/x-zip-compressed --- From bakerdcraig at hotmail.com Fri Aug 30 23:55:25 2002 From: bakerdcraig at hotmail.com (Donald Baker) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 13:55:25 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating weapons Message-ID: >From: "Tony Den" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Evaluating weapons >Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 10:14:12 +0200 (SAST) > >David Smart wrote: > >{Stone weapons lose an AP per lost damage point when they are >resharpened. It may not be accurate but it works.} > >I like that idea, simple but effective. Talking Stone weapons, what is a >Stone Bow? I see stats for it in the RQ Rules, but there is no >description.Ciao >Tony >http://www.runequest.za.org/ > > Hi a stonebow is a crossbow-like weapon that shot round sling stones or lead plugs. Keith _________________________________________________________________ Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 31 00:18:11 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 07:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB In-Reply-To: <20020830135157.719.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020830141811.53780.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Well apparantly the server strips the attachments. If you would like a copy email me. > > I know a number of you folks outthere have been > > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a > > pain > > in the ass job to do. I therefore created this > > small > > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and > such. > > > > I have also put in some some basic spells from > > Sandy's > > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. > > This > > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you > to > > add stuff to it. > > > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > > divine > > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > > Please > > let me know what else you guys want. > > > > > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > > http://finance.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/mixed > text/plain (text body -- kept) > application/x-zip-compressed > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com From jellen at ameritech.net Sat Aug 31 00:24:28 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:24:28 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB References: <20020830141811.53780.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <013d01c25030$f2f83400$225f2a41@frkt5> Yes, please! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 9:18 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB Well apparantly the server strips the attachments. If you would like a copy email me. > > I know a number of you folks outthere have been > > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a > > pain > > in the ass job to do. I therefore created this > > small > > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and > such. > > > > I have also put in some some basic spells from > > Sandy's > > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. > > This > > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you > to > > add stuff to it. > > > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > > divine > > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > > Please > > let me know what else you guys want. > > > > > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > > http://finance.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/mixed > text/plain (text body -- kept) > application/x-zip-compressed > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jellen at ameritech.net Sat Aug 31 00:34:25 2002 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:34:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB References: <20020830141811.53780.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> <013d01c25030$f2f83400$225f2a41@frkt5> Message-ID: <014e01c25032$56ef37a0$225f2a41@frkt5> I hate people like me, who email the entire group when they should really just be emailing one person. Let's hope that I'm the only one who does this. ----- Original Message ----- From: "J and/or Ellen" To: Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 9:24 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB Yes, please! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 9:18 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB Well apparantly the server strips the attachments. If you would like a copy email me. > > I know a number of you folks outthere have been > > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a > > pain > > in the ass job to do. I therefore created this > > small > > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and > such. > > > > I have also put in some some basic spells from > > Sandy's > > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. > > This > > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you > to > > add stuff to it. > > > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > > divine > > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > > Please > > let me know what else you guys want. > > > > > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > > http://finance.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/mixed > text/plain (text body -- kept) > application/x-zip-compressed > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From rog_benham at hotmail.com Sat Aug 31 00:43:46 2002 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 15:43:46 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Stone weapons Message-ID: Stone weapons were just as efficient as metal weapons in cutting etc, and the Aztec club sword (Who'se name escapes me) would be more typical of the type, I would've thought.  The Aztecs replaced the stone teeth of the weapon rather than the whole thing.  Since stone tools were so easy to make, I would've thought that the difference would be in parrying with one- they would damage very easily since they're brittle stone not metal. The Neanderthals could make stone cutting edges as good as a modern surgeon's scalpel, but I bet they made dozens rather than one or two, and just threw em away as they needed.  Bigger bits of flint may need resharpening, but given the skill of the average stone age flint knapper, I think they'd have needed considerable sharpening before they actually started doing less damage. ------------------------------------------ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: ------------------------------------------ Click Here ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From bakerdcraig at hotmail.com Sat Aug 31 00:46:47 2002 From: bakerdcraig at hotmail.com (Donald Baker) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 14:46:47 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB Message-ID: Yes please!!! >From: Leon Kirshtein >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB >Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 07:18:11 -0700 (PDT) > >Well apparantly the server strips the attachments. If >you would like a copy email me. > > > > > I know a number of you folks outthere have been > > > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a > > > pain > > > in the ass job to do. I therefore created this > > > small > > > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and > > such. > > > > > > I have also put in some some basic spells from > > > Sandy's > > > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. > > > This > > > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you > > to > > > add stuff to it. > > > > > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > > > divine > > > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > > > Please > > > let me know what else you guys want. > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > > > http://finance.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > > http://finance.yahoo.com > > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > > multipart/mixed > > text/plain (text body -- kept) > > application/x-zip-compressed > > --- > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > >===== >"No good deed shall go unpunished." > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes >http://finance.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com From alanchambers at attbi.com Sat Aug 31 01:55:23 2002 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:55:23 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB References: <20020830141811.53780.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011e01c2503d$a6b4f760$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 10:18 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB > Well apparantly the server strips the attachments. If > you would like a copy email me. > It looks very good. Thank You. Alan From talmeta at optonline.net Sat Aug 31 02:24:28 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 12:24:28 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB References: <20020830134412.99174.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3D6F9C3C.6000400@optonline.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I will be expanding this to include spirit and divine > magic as well as other things, as I have time. Please > let me know what else you guys want. Can you read Lotus WordPro documents, or should I trust in my software's ability to convert to Word? I have nearly every spell under the sun already in electronic format.... -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - i take you where you want to go From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Aug 31 04:07:31 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 11:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB In-Reply-To: <3D6F9C3C.6000400@optonline.net> Message-ID: <20020830180731.38971.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> Tal, I have your stuff. You sent it to me as a .PDF file. It is just a matter of time before I add it all to the database. I whiped this thing up in a matter of 1/2 an hour, so it is going to take me a bit of time to get it "production" quality, but you can look at what I have for now. I will keep you guys posted as I up date it. --- Tal Meta wrote: > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and > divine > > magic as well as other things, as I have time. > Please > > let me know what else you guys want. > > > Can you read Lotus WordPro documents, or should I > trust in my software's > ability to convert to Word? I have nearly every > spell under the sun > already in electronic format.... > > -- > talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & > God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > i take you where you want to go > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/mixed text/plain (text body -- kept) application/x-zip-compressed --- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Aug 31 06:45:50 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 15:45:50 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spells DB References: <20020830134412.99174.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3D6FD97E.A13BAA70@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > I know a number of you folks outwhere have been > collecting spells for your campaings and it is a pain > in the ass job to do. I therefore createde this small > Access 97 database to store sorcery spells and such. > I have also put in some some basic spells from Sandy's > rules and some other spells I had at the moment. This > is nowhere near a complete list. It is up to you to > add stuff to it. > > I will be expanding this to include spirit and divine > magic as well as other things, as I have time. Please > let me know what else you guys want. *sigh* How about a copy of Access97? :( I've been trying to find a CD I can buy and they all long gone. If anyone knows of a website I can order it from, I'd greatly appreciate being pointed in the right direction. David Smart From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Aug 31 07:09:36 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 16:09:36 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing References: <00ec01c24fd6$e6fe0d00$225f2a41@frkt5> Message-ID: <3D6FDF10.5085D116@earthlink.net> J and/or Ellen wrote: > > I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student gets. On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that Alchemy should be a lore skill. > > This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? I used info found in Harnmaster. They've been greatly expanded upon by the following website. http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sablefox/IoH/ David Smart From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Aug 31 21:09:58 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 19:09:58 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Return of the Mystery spell #2 References: <9b.2cbfd8d1.2a9fad35@aol.com> Message-ID: <3D70A406.BD2C6B8E@libra.seed.net.tw> Would it be too powerful if you used the Duration chart for 'how long past its prime'? I read the post and immediately thought of a sorceror trapped in an old ruins coming across 200 year old food... Just a thought. Jeremy MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > I'd wondered about a Mysterious Sorcery spell concerning magically making > old/tainted food edible again. One of the features of which was the food > acquiring a definite heavily seasoned flavor. > I'd seen it, I was *sure* of that, then *poof*couldn't find it again. > Well, not to be derailed, I decided to just sit down and try to write the > spell up from (my rather faulty) memory. Here you go! > -Ken- > > Season > Touch > This spell allows the Sorcerer to render old or tainted (though not Poisoned) > foodstuffs edible again. Each Intensity allows a single ENC or liter of > substance to be affected. > Each week past its prime requires an additional Intensity. > Each Intensity in excess of those used for the foodstuffs' volume and age > improves both the food's general appearance as well as its taste. > Very perceptive individuals; meaning those with Taste Analysis skill, or > who succeed with a Special Smell task, or a POW x1 roll, will be able to > recognize the subtle spicing which foodstuffs affected by this spell seem to > take on. > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Aug 31 21:18:20 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 19:18:20 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homebrewing References: <00ec01c24fd6$e6fe0d00$225f2a41@frkt5> Message-ID: <3D70A5FC.B5F4755D@libra.seed.net.tw> J and/or Ellen wrote: > I can't find any mention in RQ3 about how to brew poisons or potions. RQ2 explains that the Alchemists' Guild teaches how to brew both kinds of concoctions, but it doesn't say how many skill percentiles the student gets. On the contrary, it sounds as though, once the check for the student's tuition, he can brew the specified beverage flawlessly. Seems to me that Alchemy should be a lore skill. > > This topic must have come up over the years that the RQ Rules group has existed. How have the rest of you handled homebrewing? Like this: Alchemy (S) - This is the skill of making potions and such. The general skill will let you know if a liquid is potable or not. If the liquid is in one of your specialties, you may identify it exactly. Antidotes - (Requires Poisons) This allows you to brew antidotes to counteract poisons. They must be ready ahead of time, made for a specific poison and applied before the poison acts. Subtract the POT from the poison's POT. Brewing - (Must be taken first) You learn how to make mixtures. This skill is necessary for Craft: Brewing and allows the character knowledge of mixtures. Also, your Molotov Cocktails do 3D6 instead of 2D6 Poisons - (Requires Brewing) This allows you to brew poisons. See the chapter on Poison for more details. Potions - (Requires Antidotes) This skill lets you brew generic 'Love Potions', etc. It also lets you store a Spirit Spell that you know in a Potion form. To do this, you must spend 1 day, 1 MP and 5 Silver per point of the spell. These can be sold for 10 SP per point. The potion must be applied to the target to be affected, so you drink a Heal or Protection, rub Fireblade on your spear and get your target to drink a Befuddle Otherwise, the spell works normally, so record your current MP for Befuddle Potions, etc. To keep down the number of skills, I use General and Specialty Lores. For a Specialty Lore (like this), the student gains a specialty at 30%, 55%, 80%, 105%, etc. So an Alchemist who can make Potions must have a 105% Alchemy Lore skill. This keeps it out of the hands of most adventurers, and makes it a rare specialty. Hopefully this gives you some ideas for your campaign. Jeremy From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Fri Aug 23 12:06:17 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:06:17 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Fascination References: <4f.23092f6a.2aaa729f@aol.com> Message-ID: <3D659899.1340A4E7@libra.seed.net.tw> Can't vampires Fascinate with their gaze? Jeremy MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Hi, > While trying to hunt down a spell description last week, I ran across > something attributing an ability of a particular undead creature to fascinate > normal folks into inaction just by their natural gawkable creepiness. > It was either for RQ or CoC. Does this sound familiar to anyone? > Help :) > -Ken- > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Fri Aug 23 12:17:01 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:17:01 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broken Spell? Message-ID: <3D659B1D.7C0665BA@libra.seed.net.tw> For all those playing with Sandy Petersen's Sorcery system: Your High Vow gives presense equal to your Magic Bonus, right? (INT + DEX - 20) Maintaining a spell takes Presence equal to the intensity of the spell, right? So wouldn't you be able to cast an Enhance DEX of any intensity (you could handle), and it's Presence cost would be offset by an equal increase in Presence, effectively a free spell? Has anyone seen this or thought of a way around it? Does this spell still exist? I don't find it in Leon's spell database, but definitely pulled it from somewhere... Thanks, Jeremy From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Aug 24 01:58:31 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 23:58:31 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broken Spell? References: <20020909143344.6871.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3D665BA7.668BAE6@libra.seed.net.tw> Which were also missing, in my copy at least... I only found the Enchant [char] spell when I went looking, and that's completely different. Although a probably more balanced approach to the whole situation. As to the effects of Enhance (Boost, whatever) [char], the only reason you'd use it is to increase Attack skills, HP, Fatigue, etc. Since DEX helps calculate your Magic bonus, I'd have to change that. Which, in turn, would alter your Presence. If you say it's a temporary effect, at what time have you had it long enough to get Presence? Can you tell I get called Rules Lawyer some times? ;-/ Thanks, Jeremy Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > spell names so bare with me please, but thanks for > > pointing out that the Enhance spells are missing. I > > will add them ASAP. > > > > Actually these are coverd by the Boost > [characteristic] spells. > > Leon > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes > http://finance.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Aug 24 09:51:26 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 07:51:26 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Missiles and Charging Targets References: Message-ID: <3D66CA7E.5E0F9C50@libra.seed.net.tw> I wouldn't think so. Charging bonuses usually only apply to things set and for good reason. Remember, the arrow is already moving at (I don't know, at least) 100 mph just from being shot at you - an increase of 10 - 20% won't be that much more. Maybe +1 damage... Think of the physics: the damage you're taking is really from the fact that your body is stopping this thing that wants to keep moving. With something as light as an arrow, it can go from coming towards you fast to going away from you (stuck in you while riding a horse) with a very small change in momentum. Now in the case of a set spear (or a lance), you'll probably change direction before it will, so that's a huge change in momentum... For the physics- minded, we're really talking the force it hits with, so F=ma (mass * acceleration). Acceleration here is stopping the extra speed, so both lance and arrow should be around 20 mph. However, the mass (assuming a set spear means your mass is being used) will be somewhere on the order of 1000 (you in armor) to 1 (arrow = 0.1 kg?). Probably not that drastic, since the spear will most likely shatter and you might stay on your horse, but it's a huge difference. I've actually thought that using the mount's damage bonus isn't enough. My knight gets +3 damage, while his horse gets +6. Is +3 damage worth the charge and exposure? Why not just Bladesharp 3 and be done with it? Other thoughts? Jeremy Roger Benham wrote: > Just watched a documentary on the effectiveness of the long bow at Agincourt. What struck me was in game terms, if a mounted attacker gets his mount's damage bonus when hiting or hit, does the same apply if the attacker is charging someone who fires a missile at them? > The attacker has the momentum of the mount to add to their damage and the same for being hit, so does a missile hit give a similar return? I mean, charging into a stationary sharp pointy object at 20 MPH is less than healthy, so imagine if that same sharp pointy object is fired at you at great speed as you're charging, the resultant damage should surely be considerably higher...? > Thoughts?  > > ------------------------------------------ > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: > ------------------------------------------ > Click Here > ------------------------------------------ > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > text/html (html body -- converted) > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules