From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Feb 2 07:40:31 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:40:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha for D&D In-Reply-To: <3C457544.6096EC87@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020201204031.74090.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> In a recent past someone mentioned that they were doing a convertion a D&D convertion to play in Glorantha. I have been recently doing the same thing and wanted to compare notes. Could what person, and anybody else who is interested, please email me directly (unless everybody wants to see this?). I am especially interested in some who could stress test some of my character classes at various levels. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com From jhkim at darkshire.org Tue Feb 5 08:57:29 2002 From: jhkim at darkshire.org (John Kim) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:57:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Basic RQ project, site update Message-ID: Hi, Peter Maranci wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone is interested in helping out with the Basic > RuneQuest project? It's my attempt to create a booklet with the basic > rules needed to play or GM RuneQuest. I'd made some progress on it, > but haven't had a chance to do much with it since my son was born. Actually, I would be glad to work with you on it, since I'm doing the exact same thing anyhow. However, what I am doing may be slightly different than your version. I'm using a simplified variant of _Runequest III_ for a Vikings campaign, set in 1392 of an alternate history where Icelanders settled in the Hudson river valley. I am writing up an independent rules summary for several reasons. The RQIII rules are too complicated for my tastes, but the original Basic Roleplaying booklet is insufficient. In any case, both of them are long out of print. Other versions of the BRP rules (earlier RQ, CoC, etc.) are too tied to a specific setting. However, I want to stay roughly compatible so I can use the Viking campaign pack, monster stat, etc. from RQ. Like many people, I have my own variants for character creation and advancement. The key thing is mainly to describe the stats and skills along with resolution and combat. Ideally, I'd like to share write-ups of basic things in an edittable format and replace modular section for my own version. cf. my campaign web-page is at http://www.darkshire.org/~jhkim/rpg/vinland/index.html my current stat and skill descriptions is at http://www.darkshire.org/~jhkim/rpg/vinland/chars/stats.html From peter at maranci.net Tue Feb 5 22:09:50 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 06:09:50 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? In-Reply-To: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> Message-ID: I haven't seen a new digest since the 24th. Did something happen? I ve been arguing with some guy on rec.games.frp.misc who says that RQ is totally dead. Was I wrong? BTW, something interesting: For the first time ever my RQ site is number one on the Die-Roller's Top 50 list. As far as I know, this is the first time that *any* RQ site has been on the top of that list. The funny thing is that due to a programming glitch, Pete's RQ was totally OFF the list for the last ten days or so! ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From peter at maranci.net Tue Feb 5 22:24:23 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 06:24:23 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops In-Reply-To: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> Message-ID: Whoops, I forgot to say: voting on the Die-Roller's list is slightly counter-intuitive. "1" is worst and "5" is best. Go figure. Here's a RQ question, while I'm at it: has anyone done any sorts of calculations about the weights of metals? I made a magic item that's a metal tube about ten feet long with a four foot diameter, of unknown metal and thickness. I estimated its weight at 3,000 lbs, but now am wondering...that sounds sort of low. ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From kruch7 at cox.net Tue Feb 5 23:25:02 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 07:25:02 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <000d01c1ae40$22f4e7e0$8cfbfea9@hr.cox.net> Well rumours of rq death have been reported before but it is still kicking Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comic Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil then you ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Maranci" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 6:09 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? I haven't seen a new digest since the 24th. Did something happen? I ve been arguing with some guy on rec.games.frp.misc who says that RQ is totally dead. Was I wrong? BTW, something interesting: For the first time ever my RQ site is number one on the Die-Roller's Top 50 list. As far as I know, this is the first time that *any* RQ site has been on the top of that list. The funny thing is that due to a programming glitch, Pete's RQ was totally OFF the list for the last ten days or so! ->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 vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Feb 6 02:10:34 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 23:10:34 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <000d01c1ae40$22f4e7e0$8cfbfea9@hr.cox.net> Message-ID: <3C5FF5EA.D953B338@libra.seed.net.tw> Now let that be a lesson to all the people who skip the punctuation. To me, I read the following, and wondered why RQ had it in for Ken... Jeremy ;-) Almost afraid to send this one. Well rumours of rq death have been reported before but it is still kicking Ken From rico at ricosweb.com Wed Feb 6 02:10:37 2002 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 08:10:37 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > I haven't seen a new digest since the 24th. Did something happen? I > ve been arguing with some guy on rec.games.frp.misc who says that RQ > is totally dead. Was I wrong? Depends on your definition of a dead game. A lot of people, myself included, consider a game dead if it isn't being published/supported anymore. Doesn't matter if thousands of people are still playing the game if the product has been killed by it's owner. Calling a game dead doesn't mean it's a game nobody plays anymore, in my opinion. Rich From slposey at concentric.net Wed Feb 6 04:31:53 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 10:31:53 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> Peter Maranci wrote: > > Whoops, I forgot to say: voting on the Die-Roller's list is slightly > counter-intuitive. "1" is worst and "5" is best. Go figure. > > Here's a RQ question, while I'm at it: has anyone done any sorts of > calculations about the weights of metals? I made a magic item that's a > metal tube about ten feet long with a four foot diameter, of unknown > metal and thickness. I estimated its weight at 3,000 lbs, but now am > wondering...that sounds sort of low. That rather depends on which metal it's made of. Here's how to figure that: 1) Your item has a radius of 2 feet 2) Your item has a length of 10 feet 3) The formula for the volume of a cylinder is pi * (radius * radius) * length Therefore your item has a volume of pi * 2 * 2 * 10 = pi * 40 ~= 3.14 * 40 = 125.6 cubic feet Now, for example aluminum weighs about 170 lbs per cubic foot, so assuming the cylinder is solid and of homogeneous construction it would weigh about 5,024 pounds. Aluminum is one of the lightest metals, so you're correct that 3,000 lbs is very light for this construction (given the assumptions above). Here's a few other common metals for comparison's sake: Material Weight of Weight of cylinder material (lbs) (lbs/cu ft) ============================================ Brass 525 65,940 Copper 550 69,080 Gold 1,204 151,222 Lead 711 89,301 Silver 655 82,268 Steel 500 62,800 Zinc 446 56,017 Now if you want to figure a "tube" as you imply, you'd determine the external volume and weight of the whole cylinder, then determine the volume and weight of the internal cavity, then subtract. So if the internal cavity is is one foot in radius its volume is pi * 1 * 1 * 10 = pi * 10 3.141 * 10 = 31.41 cubic feet Taking the steel weight above as a likely candidate for this, the resulting tube would weigh: (125.6 cubic feet * 500 lbs/cu ft) - (31.41 cubic feet * 500 lbs/cu ft) = 62800 - 15705 = 47095 lbs If the tube has "end pieces", these can be figured as short cylinders and added to the total. Enough math for today? ;-) HTH Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From andrew at crashbox.com Wed Feb 6 04:40:15 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 09:40:15 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops In-Reply-To: <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> Message-ID: > >That rather depends on which metal it's made of. Here's how to figure >that: > >1) Your item has a radius of 2 feet >2) Your item has a length of 10 feet >3) The formula for the volume of a cylinder is pi * (radius * radius) * >length > >Therefore your item has a volume of > pi * 2 * 2 * 10 > = pi * 40 > ~= 3.14 * 40 > = 125.6 cubic feet > >Now, for example aluminum weighs about 170 lbs per cubic foot, so >assuming the cylinder is solid and of homogeneous construction it would >weigh about 5,024 pounds. Uh, 125.5 * 1270 = 21,352. >Aluminum is one of the lightest metals, so you're correct that 3,000 lbs >is very light for this construction (given the assumptions above). So 3,000 is *very, very* light. BTW: I found an interesting page via google that has an interesing appearing calculator for this. However, it makes IE 5.1 on Mac OSX crash. Someone on windoze can give it a try. It is at http://www.mesteel.com -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From northerndm at hotmail.com Wed Feb 6 05:23:06 2002 From: northerndm at hotmail.com (Northern DM) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 11:23:06 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp Message-ID: I'm running a Runequest based game but we use D&D monsters. I have a question about the Bladesharp spell. One of the players was going to use this spell to hit a creature that could only be hit by a +1 weapon. My ruling was no because Bladesharp is temporary magic. However, I can see the player's view that Bladesharp is magic and should be allowed. Are there any thoughts about this? _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Feb 6 05:36:55 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 13:36:55 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp Message-ID: <9d.22a97c27.29918047@aol.com> In a message dated 2/5/02 12:23:27 PM Central Standard Time, northerndm at hotmail.com writes: > I'm running a Runequest based game but we use D&D monsters. I have a > question about the Bladesharp spell. One of the players was going to use > this spell to hit a creature that could only be hit by a +1 weapon. My > ruling was no because Bladesharp is temporary magic. However, I can see > the > player's view that Bladesharp is magic and should be allowed. > Why wouldn't the character be able to hit the monster effectively for the spell's temporary duration? While being hit, the monster _is_ being affected by magic; it doesn't know if the enchantment is of a limited duration or not, and I don't really see where it actually would matter in any case; whether sliced to ribbons within the Bladesharp's duration, or sliced to ribbons by something with a longer duration (like a Trueswird or whatnot) leaves the monster equally dead in either case. Of course, if the stipulation is that only magic does damage, then Bladesharp could easily be used to attack the monster, but it'll only be taking points of damage equal to the Bladesharp's damage bonus :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From slposey at concentric.net Wed Feb 6 05:37:24 2002 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 11:37:24 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> Message-ID: <3C602664.1BFB4CB4@concentric.net> "Andrew O. Mellinger" wrote: > >Now, for example aluminum weighs about 170 lbs per cubic foot, so > >assuming the cylinder is solid and of homogeneous construction it would > >weigh about 5,024 pounds. > > Uh, > > 125.5 * 1270 = 21,352. I assume you typoed for "125.6 * 170"? In any case, you're correct that the aluminum calculation is off; I must have missed a key on the calculator, thanks for pointing that out. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Feb 6 05:49:09 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 02:49:09 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp Message-ID: <20020205184909.9405.qmail@earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- From: MurfNMurf at aol.com Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 13:36:55 EST To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp > Of course, if the stipulation is that only magic does damage, then > Bladesharp could easily be used to attack the monster, but it'll only be > taking points of damage equal to the Bladesharp's damage bonus :) > -Ken- I go with what Ken said above - Spirit Magic does only the magical bonus in damage. If players what to do hellacious damage, they should pay for it with either major cash and/or favors to a sorceror or the same plus POW to a deity. Gotta keep play balance to keep the game interesting. David -- David Smart From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Feb 6 05:59:31 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:59:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp In-Reply-To: <20020205184909.9405.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020205185931.74877.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > > Of course, if the stipulation is that only > magic does damage, then > > Bladesharp could easily be used to attack the > monster, but it'll only be > > taking points of damage equal to the Bladesharp's > damage bonus :) > > -Ken- > > I go with what Ken said above - Spirit Magic does > only the magical bonus in damage. If players what to > do hellacious damage, they should pay for it with > either major cash and/or favors to a sorceror or the > same plus POW to a deity. I agree with the above. The interesting case comes up with Fireblade in the same situation. Since the spell states what 'the damage of the weapon is replaced with 3d6' it follows what all of the weapon damage is magical and should be able to damage the creature, but the additional damage from strength would still be ignored. Leon ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com From andrew at crashbox.com Wed Feb 6 06:03:37 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:03:37 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops In-Reply-To: <3C602664.1BFB4CB4@concentric.net> References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> <3C602664.1BFB4CB4@concentric.net> Message-ID: >"Andrew O. Mellinger" wrote: > > > >> >Now, for example aluminum weighs about 170 lbs per cubic foot, so >> >assuming the cylinder is solid and of homogeneous construction it would >> >weigh about 5,024 pounds. >> >> Uh, >> >> 125.5 * 1270 = 21,352. > >I assume you typoed for "125.6 * 170"? Yup! That's me, Mr typo! >In any case, you're correct that the aluminum calculation is off; I must >have missed a key on the calculator, thanks for pointing that out. S'okay. I just wanted to make clear that they 3,000 pd estimate was *way* off. I remember a great article out of a *really* old dragon magazine and reprinted in Best of the Dragon Volume 1 called "How Heavy Is My Mutant." Iron Golems are *really* heavy and if a person is clever easy to defeat by running onto reasonably soft ground or a swamp. Brides, ladders and stairs are also good ways to get away. It said that with lungs and whatnot humans are around 47 pds/cubic foot. (I think probably a little close to 64) but that would make me around 5 cubic feet. So a golem at 500 pds/cu-ft would be 2500 pds. Ouch. -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Feb 6 06:38:52 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38:52 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> <3C602664.1BFB4CB4@concentric.net> Message-ID: <00dd01c1ae7c$be8bdf60$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew O. Mellinger" Iron Golems are *really* heavy and if a person is clever easy to > defeat by running onto reasonably soft ground or a swamp. Brides, > ladders and stairs are also good ways to get away. > That's my favorite way of getting away from an iron golem. Stick a bride over a precipice and run across her to get away. Her screams when the golem walks on her are kinda gross, though. And the groom is likely to be upset. Steve Perrin, taking notes for Quest Rules From talmeta at optonline.net Wed Feb 6 06:54:42 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 14:54:42 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bladesharp References: Message-ID: <3C603882.879480C6@optonline.net> Northern DM wrote: > > I'm running a Runequest based game but we use D&D monsters. I have a > question about the Bladesharp spell. One of the players was going to use > this spell to hit a creature that could only be hit by a +1 weapon. My > ruling was no because Bladesharp is temporary magic. However, I can see the > player's view that Bladesharp is magic and should be allowed. > > Are there any thoughts about this? I'd certainly allow it; AD&D has the Enchanted Weapon spell that has a similar effect, and IIRC it allows you to hit such creatures. -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - Why do they lock gas station bathrooms? Are they worried someone will clean them? From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Feb 7 00:12:47 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 07:12:47 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> <3C601709.29EC4DB4@concentric.net> <3C602664.1BFB4CB4@concentric.net> <00dd01c1ae7c$be8bdf60$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: <3C612BCF.A9ABAF02@earthlink.net> Steve Perrin wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew O. Mellinger" > Iron Golems are *really* heavy and if a person is clever easy to > > defeat by running onto reasonably soft ground or a swamp. Brides, > > ladders and stairs are also good ways to get away. > > > > That's my favorite way of getting away from an iron golem. Stick a bride > over a precipice and run across her to get away. > > Her screams when the golem walks on her are kinda gross, though. > > And the groom is likely to be upset. > > Steve Perrin, taking notes for Quest Rules I was wondering how they would be used. David From shwright17sons at altavista.com Thu Feb 7 01:26:09 2002 From: shwright17sons at altavista.com (shwright17sons at altavista.com) Date: 6 Feb 2002 06:26:09 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Whoops Message-ID: <20020206142609.2400.cpmta@c016.snv.cp.net> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20020206/6c32a5ec/attachment.pl From DenT at scmb.co.za Wed Feb 6 23:19:33 2002 From: DenT at scmb.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:19:33 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #25 - 13 msgs Message-ID: <90C55DFA4C0AD611B4BE00D0B746FDBD0990F6@scmbjhbmsg02.scmb.co.za> rom: Peter Maranci To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 06:09:50 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Still there? Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com I haven't seen a new digest since the 24th. Did something happen? I ve been arguing with some guy on rec.games.frp.misc who says that RQ is totally dead. Was I wrong? I wouldn't say so. Have been on eBay a bit lately and from the amount of bidding that goes on for RQ products, reckon it still has some life in it. For some reason. Land of Ninja is highly desirable, I have been bid beyond my purse strings for this item on three separate auctions. - Tony (Hey, made it to the digest at last). Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note. Everything in this e-mail and attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Investment Corporation(Stanbic) is proprietary to the company. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Stanbic does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of Stanbic. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Stanbic can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. From northerndm at hotmail.com Thu Feb 7 11:35:07 2002 From: northerndm at hotmail.com (Northern DM) Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 17:35:07 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Runequest Advanced Message-ID: What is Runequest Advanced? I see ebay has a book called this. I own RQ III and RQ II. Is it worth it? Northern DM _________________________________________________________________ Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Thu Feb 7 12:46:48 2002 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:46:48 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Runequest Advanced Message-ID: Northern DM wrote: > What is Runequest Advanced? I see ebay has a book called this. I own RQ >III and RQ II. Is it worth it? No. GW's edition of RQ3 was actually what Avalon Hill released as 'Standard Edition' RQ, i.e. RQ3 minus a lot of the more complicated rules. 'Advanced RQ' was GW's companion volume consisting of everything else from RQ3 that wasn't in the Standard Edition. So, actually, if for whatever reason you've only had Standard RQ all these years I guess you would want this book, but not otherwise. Trent From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Feb 7 13:35:03 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 18:35:03 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Runequest Advanced References: Message-ID: <003701c1af80$0c4e0940$af8584ac@surfcity.net> Rune Quest Advanced is just a permutation of RuneQuest III. Nothing to see, move on. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Northern DM" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 4:35 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Runequest Advanced > What is Runequest Advanced? I see ebay has a book called this. I own RQ > III and RQ II. Is it worth it? > > Northern DM > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.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 leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Feb 9 15:38:37 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 20:38:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spell In-Reply-To: <173.189a293.296019ad@aol.com> Message-ID: <20020209043837.65275.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com> This spell is a must for all sneaky types. Leon Kirshtein Mask Touch, Passive, Medium This spell hides the target from being detected through the use of various sense skills including: Sense Law, Sense Chaos, Sense Assasin, etc. It gives no benifit vs detection spells nor does it effect vision or hearing. Each point of Mask subtracts 10% from the chance of being detected through such means. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com From shannonwright at hotmail.com Mon Feb 11 23:37:02 2002 From: shannonwright at hotmail.com (Shannon Wright) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 07:37:02 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Books Message-ID: Hi all, just a shameless plug here. I have my spare copy of Cults of Terror up for auction on Ebay. Just look under seller name - shwright17 . Good luck and Thanks. Sloth P.S.: I have a few other older items- Broo's & Scorpionmen, Militia & Mercenaries, etc. If you want a list just write me and make a offer I can not refuse. Thanks again.            S I Believe all we have done is awakened a Sleeping Giant...... ------------------------------------------ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at ------------------------------------------ http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------------------ . --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From northerndm at hotmail.com Tue Feb 12 10:42:32 2002 From: northerndm at hotmail.com (Northern DM) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:42:32 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] NPCs Message-ID: How do people on the list make up NPCs. I'm using D&D NPC generators as it is easy to convert skills over and the attack values but the problem I have is in parrying. What value should I use? The same as the attack or a lower modifier? For example, an attack of 75% with a sword. Should the parry also be 75% if a shield is used or 1/2 of attack value or what? Any suggestions. Northern DM _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Feb 12 11:17:29 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:17:29 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] NPCs References: Message-ID: <004301c1b35a$a8a68b40$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Depends on what you are doing. If you are just doing NPCs as sword fodder, just make everything the same value. If you are converting D&D characters to be played in RQ (or, ahem, in SPQR) I would look at the AC as it relates to level and Dexterity (assuming you are using 3rd edition) and base the defense/parry on that, as opposed to using level and combat value to figure out attack percentage. Did that make sense? Steve Perrin, who has played in one short 3rd edition campaign ----- Original Message ----- From: "Northern DM" To: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 3:42 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] NPCs > How do people on the list make up NPCs. I'm using D&D NPC generators as it > is easy to convert skills over and the attack values but the problem I have > is in parrying. What value should I use? The same as the attack or a lower > modifier? For example, an attack of 75% with a sword. Should the parry > also be 75% if a shield is used or 1/2 of attack value or what? Any > suggestions. > > Northern DM > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.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 epon0608 at freebel.net Thu Feb 14 20:21:54 2002 From: epon0608 at freebel.net (Emmanuel Ponette) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:21:54 +0100 (CET) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mostali and open hand In-Reply-To: <3C44E802.97D71C53@libra.seed.net.tw> References: <20020115170834.6231.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> <3C44E802.97D71C53@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <1013678514.3c6b81b297034@webmail.tiscali.be> Hi, I have 2 questions that came in my mind while I was preparing the next RQ session (saturday...) I planned to make my player meet some Mostali. Their first Mostali... They have to protect an Uz clan from a Mostali commando while the Uz are performing the KL High Holy Day. It will happen in a cave. But what should be in a typical Mostali war commando? I imagined 2 or 3 Iron Mostali, 1 Silver (for spells), 1 tin (for elementals) and 1 quicksilver (for some weird alchemical effects and the black powder). But it is a little cheap. I miss something fun, weird and/or exceptionnal to make this fight fun. Any idea? Also, what about using the hands and/or the feet in combat? Can a human hit with noth hands the same round (as bear can hit with both claws the same round)? At what SR? any rules about punching, kicking and headbut? Thanks Manu ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be) From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Feb 15 01:08:42 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 06:08:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mostali and open hand In-Reply-To: <1013678514.3c6b81b297034@webmail.tiscali.be> Message-ID: <20020214140842.7845.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> Well, it all depends on the power level of your group. Don't forget to give firearms and bombs to the Mostali and you may want to consider adding some sort of a jolanti (inteligent statue). If you really want to be nasty consider upgrading their weapons from flintlock to rifles and six shooters, and machine guns if you are really mean. Once the Mostali are defeated make sure they leave plenty of goodies behind, which will all explode as soon as any troll attempts to handle them. Sure a human can hit twice per round with his hand 3SR apart, but I would not let him parry or dodge in the same round as well. Leon Kirshtein --- Emmanuel Ponette wrote: > Hi, > > I have 2 questions that came in my mind while I was > preparing the next RQ > session (saturday...) > > I planned to make my player meet some Mostali. Their > first Mostali... They have > to protect an Uz clan from a Mostali commando while > the Uz are performing the KL > High Holy Day. It will happen in a cave. But what > should be in a typical Mostali > war commando? I imagined 2 or 3 Iron Mostali, 1 > Silver (for spells), 1 tin (for > elementals) and 1 quicksilver (for some weird > alchemical effects and the black > powder). But it is a little cheap. I miss something > fun, weird and/or > exceptionnal to make this fight fun. Any idea? > > Also, what about using the hands and/or the feet in > combat? Can a human hit with > noth hands the same round (as bear can hit with both > claws the same round)? At > what SR? any rules about punching, kicking and > headbut? > > Thanks > > Manu > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail > (http://webmail.tiscali.be) > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings! http://greetings.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Fri Feb 15 06:20:59 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 03:20:59 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mostali and open hand Message-ID: <20020214192059.6650.qmail@earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 06:08:42 -0800 (PST) To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Mostali and open hand > Well, it all depends on the power level of your group. > Don't forget to give firearms and bombs to the > Mostali and you may want to consider adding some sort > of a jolanti (inteligent statue). Gun cotton is easy (though dangerous) to make at the level of technology prevalent in RQ. > If you really want to be nasty consider upgrading > their weapons from flintlock to rifles and six > shooters, and machine guns if you are really mean. Or just make them rifled flintlocks rather than smoothbores. If sixshooters and MGs are too high-tech for you, search the Internet for info on primitive gunpowder weapons. Multiple flintlock pistols (even some with multiple barrels) would be available. I prefer the search engine at www.google.com myself. As an aside, for a real-world example of dwarf tech, check out the following: http://www.onagocag.com/piston.html If you don't like gunpowder weapons, then just add a bound air elemental to a dwarf rifle and you get the following: http://ns.connext.net/~daq/index.html http://www.beemans.net/400%20Years%20of%20Tradition.htm > Once the Mostali are defeated make sure they leave > plenty of goodies behind, which will all explode as > soon as any troll attempts to handle them. Molotov cocktails, anyone? > Sure a human can hit twice per round with his hand 3SR > apart, but I would not let him parry or dodge in the > same round as well. Yep. Look at the RQ3 rules on attacking w/o weapons. David -- David Smart From emmanuel.ponette at eurodb.be Fri Feb 15 19:41:11 2002 From: emmanuel.ponette at eurodb.be (emmanuel.ponette at eurodb.be) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 09:41:11 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sandy's Sorcery Message-ID: Hi, Sorry to ask it again... But where can I find the latest Sandy's Sorcery rules? Thanks Cheers Manu