From jpw at gtemail.net Wed Jan 1 04:55:59 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:55:59 -0500 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No=EBl_!?= Message-ID: <20021231175559.27758.qmail@verizonmail.com> And a Happy New Year! J. Whitehead ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Smart" Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 06:29:58 -0600 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No?l_! > Merry Christmas, everyone, from Dallas, Texas! > > May you and your friends and family have the most wonderful of days. > > 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 > -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 1 05:21:45 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:21:45 -0800 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No=EBl_!?= Message-ID: On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:55:59 -0500 John Whitehead wrote: > And a Happy New Year! > > J. Whitehead Oh, it is! I picked up Elric! 5th edition for Christmas and have already read it twice. Definitely set the wheels turning in my head. David From jpw at gtemail.net Wed Jan 1 08:41:24 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:41:24 -0500 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re: Re: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No=EBl_!?= Message-ID: <20021231214124.27142.qmail@verizonmail.com> And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: RQD20 With both Elric/Stormbringer and Call Of Cthulhu in D20, and considering that Has-Borg owns the Runequest trademark, and so will not have to pay out $$ for it's use, RQD20 is the next logical step. Some house rule modifications are already surfacing in games up around Albany, NY. Spread the meme. J. Whitehead ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Smart" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:21:45 -0800 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: Re: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No?l_! On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:55:59 -0500 John Whitehead wrote: > And a Happy New Year! > > J. Whitehead Oh, it is! I picked up Elric! 5th edition for Christmas and have already read it twice. Definitely set the wheels turning in my head. David _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 1 11:50:24 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:50:24 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No=EBl_!?= References: <20021231214124.27142.qmail@verizonmail.com> Message-ID: <3E123B50.7010402@earthlink.net> Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. David Smart John Whitehead wrote: > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > RQD20 > > With both Elric/Stormbringer and Call Of Cthulhu in D20, and considering that Has-Borg owns the Runequest trademark, and so will not have to pay out $$ for it's use, RQD20 is the next logical step. > > Some house rule modifications are already surfacing in games up around Albany, NY. > > Spread the meme. > > J. Whitehead From rog_benham at hotmail.com Thu Jan 2 07:00:23 2003 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 20:00:23 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Réf. : Where does everyone live? Message-ID: Wigan, Lancashire, UK ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ get 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From gerall at chromebob.com Sun Jan 5 02:04:35 2003 From: gerall at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 09:04:35 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] anyone have a writeup for Arroin? -- Message-ID: <3E16F803.20207@chromebob.com> Greetings to all -- Does anyone have a write-up for the cult of Arroin? 2nd or 3rd edtion, it doesn't matter... Yes, I know that Arroin isn't altogether the most popular religion in Prax, but I'm not running my game there. Any written record is appreciated! Thanks for your time and attention -- -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From jpw at gtemail.net Mon Jan 6 10:00:21 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 18:00:21 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <20030105230022.17186.qmail@verizonmail.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: David Smart Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:50:24 -0600 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Joyeux No?l_! Understood. But we've got to make some more converts. And D20 players will be easier than Heroclickers. > Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. > > David Smart > > John Whitehead wrote: > > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > > RQD20 -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From vhaag at rim.net Tue Jan 7 03:35:00 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:35:00 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <20030105230022.17186.qmail@verizonmail.com> References: <20030105230022.17186.qmail@verizonmail.com> Message-ID: <15897.45108.193649.963052@suldrun.rim.net> John Whitehead writes: > > Understood. But we've got to make some more converts. > And D20 players will be easier than Heroclickers. > > David Smart wrote: > > Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. > > > > David Smart > > > > John Whitehead wrote: > > > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > > > RQD20 While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For reference, look at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't really like about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, and oddly enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a "heroic fantasy" setting as well. M&M at least demonstrated that a game that was built on the OGL could use some of the good bits of D20, without necessarily using the bits that were excessively D&Dish. Of course, one could also argue that a game that was so variant (as even M&M is) shouldn't need to sign on to any license at all, and thus buy into WotC's vastly expanded IP contract. But that's another argument... -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "This is not an affair, it's a one-night stand, except it happened twice." From aescleal at btinternet.com Tue Jan 7 23:27:33 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 12:27:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of Runequest." What would this beast be? How can you implement a game system using another system? Tal M uses RQ for Greyhawk adventures; I (and several others) have mucked about with D20 Glorantha so I can see the idea of using different game systems for the same game world, but rules systems? Nope, can't see it, unless someone can enlighten me. Cheers, Ash > from: Viktor Haag > date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 16:35:00 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > John Whitehead writes: > > > > Understood. But we've got to make some more converts. > > And D20 players will be easier than Heroclickers. > > > > David Smart wrote: > > > Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. > > > > > > David Smart > > > > > > John Whitehead wrote: > > > > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > > > > RQD20 > > While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ > rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For reference, > look at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't > really like about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, > and oddly enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a > "heroic fantasy" setting as well. > > M&M at least demonstrated that a game that was built on the OGL > could use some of the good bits of D20, without necessarily using > the bits that were excessively D&Dish. > > Of course, one could also argue that a game that was so variant > (as even M&M is) shouldn't need to sign on to any license at all, > and thus buy into WotC's vastly expanded IP contract. But that's > another argument... > > > -- > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > -- > "This is not an affair, it's a one-night stand, except it > happened twice." > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Tue Jan 7 23:55:27 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 06:55:27 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745D354@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> Hello there, Ash, I agree with you. For me the only thing that "could" be worth to migrate to D20 would be the skills. With two options : The simplier would be to replace %iles by there equivalents in D20 or, transforming the % into ranks (more like D&D3). Other than that IMHO, I would not want to change anything else. Magic system ? Will you want to replace the RQ system by the D&D system ? For me Forget it. No Way! Fatigue ? Well most of us have already change that one way or another. Hit Points ? Take two caracters with the exact same characteristics. Wy the fact that one is a fighter and the other a wizard should have an impact on their respective HP? The fact is that the two rule systems have so many differences in their concept that I can hardly see any benefit to the change. Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : aescleal at btinternet.com [mailto:aescleal at btinternet.com] Envoy? : mardi 7 janvier 2003 13:28 ? : rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet : Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of Runequest." What would this beast be? How can you implement a game system using another system? Tal M uses RQ for Greyhawk adventures; I (and several others) have mucked about with D20 Glorantha so I can see the idea of using different game systems for the same game world, but rules systems? Nope, can't see it, unless someone can enlighten me. Cheers, Ash > from: Viktor Haag > date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 16:35:00 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > John Whitehead writes: > > > > Understood. But we've got to make some more converts. > > And D20 players will be easier than Heroclickers. > > > > David Smart wrote: > > > Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. > > > > > > David Smart > > > > > > John Whitehead wrote: > > > > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > > > > RQD20 > > While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ > rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For reference, look > at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't really like > about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, and oddly > enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a "heroic > fantasy" setting as well. > > M&M at least demonstrated that a game that was built on the OGL could > use some of the good bits of D20, without necessarily using the bits > that were excessively D&Dish. > > Of course, one could also argue that a game that was so variant (as > even M&M is) shouldn't need to sign on to any license at all, and thus > buy into WotC's vastly expanded IP contract. But that's another > argument... > > > -- > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > -- > "This is not an affair, it's a one-night stand, except it > happened twice." > > _______________________________________________ > 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 phil.hibbs at cgey.com Wed Jan 8 03:21:32 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 16:21:32 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E979FC@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Ash: >I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of Runequest." >What would this beast be? How can you implement a game system using another system? I interpreted this as "D20 Glorantha game". "D20 version of RuneQuest" is a non-sequitur, unless you treat "RuneQuest" as purely the (lapsed) trademark, rather than the game system. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Jan 8 04:26:32 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 17:26:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <893131.1041960392614.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> ~LOL~ Remind me to cite it as evidence for the "RuneQuest == Glorantha" association in most roleplayers minds. As for D20 in Glorantha - it didn't work when I tried it - 'twas easier to slap HW magic onto traditional (ok, 3rd Ed) Runequest than tart about with DnD. Cheers, Ash > from: "Hibbs, Phil" > date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 16:21:32 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > Ash: > >I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of Runequest." > >What would this beast be? How can you implement a game system using another > system? > > I interpreted this as "D20 Glorantha game". "D20 version of RuneQuest" is a > non-sequitur, unless you treat "RuneQuest" as purely the (lapsed) trademark, > rather than the game system. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Wed Jan 8 04:50:41 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 10:50:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <001b01c2b675$4b664e60$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> I just don't understand the animosity some people have towards D&D. I personally like to play RPGs, whether it be D&D, RuneQuest 3rd Ed., Rifts, Gurps or whatever. It's just a game guys! To possibly help shed some light on this subject, I think there's a misconception about D20... D20 is NOT D&D. D20 is the equivalent of BRP, it's a very small subset of the 3rd Edition of Dungeons and Dragons, and is the basis for other role playing games that have little if any resemblance to D&D; D20 Star Wars, D20 Traveller, D20 Modern, Everquest RPG, and Wheel of Time RPG for examples. D20 is very close in concept to BRP; it would take very little editing to make the two compatible. D20 already borrows quite a bit from RuneQuest, and in my opinion adds some mechanics that were sorely lacking in RQ3. You can dump the class system (other D20 games have), you can change the HP system (other D20 games have), and on and on. The appeal to doing this is that the D20 label has an instantaneous meaning to thousands of RPGers who are playing D20 games right now. Like it or not, RuneQuest is no longer being supported, published, or played all that much. Rich Allen > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com > [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of > aescleal at btinternet.com > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:28 AM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of Runequest." > > What would this beast be? How can you implement a game system > using another system? Tal M uses RQ for Greyhawk adventures; > I (and several others) have mucked about with D20 Glorantha > so I can see the idea of using different game systems for the > same game world, but rules systems? Nope, can't see it, > unless someone can enlighten me. > > Cheers, > > Ash > > > from: Viktor Haag > > date: Mon, 06 Jan 2003 16:35:00 > > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > > > John Whitehead writes: > > > > > > Understood. But we've got to make some more converts. > > > And D20 players will be easier than Heroclickers. > > > > > > David Smart wrote: > > > > Sorry, no way. D20 makes my stomach churn. > > > > > > > > David Smart > > > > > > > > John Whitehead wrote: > > > > > And to grease the wheels a bit more, how's this idea: > > > > > RQD20 > > > > While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ > > rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For > reference, look > > at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't really like > > about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, and oddly > > enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a "heroic > > fantasy" setting as well. > > > > M&M at least demonstrated that a game that was built on the > OGL could > > use some of the good bits of D20, without necessarily using > the bits > > that were excessively D&Dish. > > > > Of course, one could also argue that a game that was so variant (as > > even M&M is) shouldn't need to sign on to any license at > all, and thus > > buy into WotC's vastly expanded IP contract. But that's another > > argument... > > > > > > -- > > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > > -- > > "This is not an affair, it's a one-night stand, except it > > happened twice." > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 phil.hibbs at cgey.com Wed Jan 8 05:07:43 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:07:43 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acid damage Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E979FD@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Are there any published RQ3 acid damage rules? What are the alternatives? My character got hit with 8 points of acid, and the GM ruled that 8 AP of his iron chainmail dissolved. I thought this was a little harsh, but I took it on the chin. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se Wed Jan 8 05:26:49 2003 From: peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 19:26:49 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acid damage References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E979FD@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <3E1B1BE9.8020303@padrigu.gu.se> We have always played that an acid attack, for instance a Gorp attack, does dissolving damage to armour the way your GM ruled. The same goes for acid spitting Dragon Snails etc. That is why we always want our cheap wooden shields to be hit and not our iron weapon or armour. We also rule that a hitting a Gorp with a weapon makes the weapon take full acid damage to its hit points. This is RQ2 though... One of my most surprising RQ experiences as a player came when my Orlanthi Rune Lord jumped across a stream in Snake Pipe Hollow but didn't quite make it and landed in the water exactly where a Gorp happened to wait for unsuspcting waders (or bad jumpers). No more iron chainmail on the legs. Terrible at the time but a pretty funny story today. /Peter J Hibbs, Phil wrote: >Are there any published RQ3 acid damage rules? What are the alternatives? > >My character got hit with 8 points of acid, and the GM ruled that 8 AP of >his iron chainmail dissolved. I thought this was a little harsh, but I took >it on the chin. > >Phil Hibbs. > From vhaag at rim.net Wed Jan 8 09:42:58 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 17:42:58 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> References: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <15899.22514.269231.189236@suldrun.rim.net> aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of > Runequest." Yes. More properly, a set of OGL rules to play games set in Glorantha is more like it. What would be interesting is to tweak the rules enough so that they lean more toward the RQ presentation of major systems (i.e. more lethal combat system, the spirit/priestly/sorcery magic notions, etc). -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "An operating system is just a name you give the features you left out of your editor." From kruch7 at cox.net Wed Jan 8 10:35:00 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 18:35:00 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 References: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <15899.22514.269231.189236@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <001901c2b6a5$6595f260$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Well that is possible as Necromancer games bent the rules to do their EQ game 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: "Viktor Haag" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of > > Runequest." > > Yes. More properly, a set of OGL rules to play games set in > Glorantha is more like it. > > What would be interesting is to tweak the rules enough so that > they lean more toward the RQ presentation of major systems > (i.e. more lethal combat system, the spirit/priestly/sorcery > magic notions, etc). > > > -- > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > +--+ > "An operating system is just a name you give the features you > left out of your editor." > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From Rjmeints at aol.com Wed Jan 8 12:36:18 2003 From: Rjmeints at aol.com (Rjmeints at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:36:18 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: All, Having spoken with Issaries Inc. about this, I'll share their response here: D20 Glorantha and/or Runequest (whatever you want to call it) has 0.00% chance of getting published as things are now. The only way Issaries would permit it would be if it was a deal that paid Issaries hundreds of thousands of dollars, which is not something Hasbro/WOTC is likely to do. Not only do they think most D20 product is basically, well, crap, they do not think it would allow them to maintain their control over the world of Glorantha. So a D20 based rules system set in Glorantha won't happen. As for Hasbro publishing a D20 "Runequest" game, this is also an impossibility. Hasbro/WOTC/Avalon Hill does not own/control/retain the trademark to Runequest any more. Issaries regained control of the Runequest trademark earlier this year. Oddly enough, the trademark had lapsed in 1996 when Avalon Hill didn't renew it. Anyone could have snapped it up once Runequest went out of print for a suitable period of time. The rights to the Runequest 2/3 edition rules have reverted to the authors, plus Chaosium has an interest in retaining control of its BRP "percentile" based system. While I cannot say so for certain, I found it interesting that they brought back into print the BRP rules, possessively entitled "a Chaosium system" with the possible intent of helping reassert/retain their ownership of the system. Rick Meints --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From DevinC at aol.com Wed Jan 8 12:52:10 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 20:52:10 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <3B42992F.7816DCED.00047AF1@aol.com> Issaries' response is sad in a way because like it or not, OGL and D20 are going to pretty much knock everyone else out of the arena. They are the Microsoft of the RPG industry. Devin From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 8 13:03:45 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 18:03:45 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:36:18 EST Rjmeints at aol.com wrote: As for Hasbro > publishing a D20 "Runequest" > game, this is also an impossibility. > Hasbro/WOTC/Avalon Hill > does not own/control/retain the trademark to > Runequest any more. > Issaries regained control of the Runequest > trademark earlier > this year. Oddly enough, the trademark had > lapsed in 1996 when > Avalon Hill didn't renew it. Anyone could have > snapped it up once > Runequest went out of print for a suitable > period of time. > > The rights to the Runequest 2/3 edition rules > have reverted to the > authors, plus Chaosium has an interest in > retaining control of its > BRP "percentile" based system. While I cannot > say so for certain, > I found it interesting that they brought back > into print the BRP rules, > possessively entitled "a Chaosium system" with > the possible intent > of helping reassert/retain their ownership of > the system. > I thought I had all of this straight, but now I'm confused again. So Hasbro/WOTC "no longer own/control/retain the trademark" to RQ, and Issaries does. What then, if anything, DOES Hasbro/WOTC still own/control/retain -- only the specific texts of the RQ3 rules and supplements? If Chaosium wanted to release a fantasy BRP game and call it RuneQuest could they do that or would Hasbro/WOTC still have some grounds to prevent them? Trent From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Jan 8 14:53:00 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 21:53:00 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha References: <3B42992F.7816DCED.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <002501c2b6c9$704e8130$3410fea9@frkt5> Maybe I'm missing something, but who cares if the D20 system is much more popular than RQ? Mariah Carey is more popular than Lustmord, but the former (in each case) won't be played by me or my friends. Popularity and quality only coincidentally (and apparently seldom) overlap. J ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 7:52 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Issaries' response is sad in a way because like it or not, OGL and D20 are going to pretty much knock everyone else out of the arena. They are the Microsoft of the RPG industry. Devin _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From DevinC at aol.com Wed Jan 8 16:38:27 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:38:27 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <2C46EE99.14DAEA46.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/7/2003 10:53:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > Maybe I'm missing something, but who cares if the D20 system is much more > popular than RQ? Mariah Carey is more popular than Lustmord, but the former > (in each case) won't be played by me or my friends. > Popularity and quality > only coincidentally (and apparently seldom) overlap. > > J Because as the few, the proud, and the aging RQers get older and die, no one will pick up the mantle of Glorantha and Runequest. Sorry, I tend to take a long term view of things. It is just sad to me that new generations of gamers will likely never experience the richness of Glorantha. I happen to think a D20 version of Glorantha would be a great seller and would turn out to be a wonderful addition to the D20 lineup. Devin From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Jan 8 18:11:14 2003 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:11:14 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 References: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <15899.22514.269231.189236@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <3E1BCF12.48567A27@libra.seed.net.tw> That would be pretty easy to do in almost all respects. I'm playing both and to take RQ skill lists into D20 style is easy and, in some ways, more clear. Then everything would be 'roll higher is better', not some high (damage) and some low (skill checks). The first problem I see is advancement. Without the much-reviled class and level systems, it's harder to control the skill levels. There would have to be an experience point system (maybe one where you get to try increase rolls on X number of skills you used) or else skills would get too high, too fast. Remember, we're talking 5% jumps with a D20... The next big problem someone pointed out is that, with successes, you are working on fractions of your skills. D20, as it is set up, is linear so all jumps are as dramatic as the base one. Look at the crit chance for someone with 80% skill (4%) as compared to someone with 40% (2%) - crits are still twice as likely, but only 2% more likely to happen. I used to allow characters with over 100% skill to apply a penalty to their skill to get a similar penalty for their opponent's parry. Then a character got hold of Berserk when he was around 90% - nobody ever parried him again... Unless I throw in opponents twice as skilled as the rest of the party or took him out with Befuddles or Demoralizes every time. Then, of course, there are the copyright problems with using Glorantha... If anyone has any ideas, let me know. I'd be glad to help on the project! Jeremy Viktor Haag wrote: > aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of > > Runequest." > > Yes. More properly, a set of OGL rules to play games set in > Glorantha is more like it. > > What would be interesting is to tweak the rules enough so that > they lean more toward the RQ presentation of major systems > (i.e. more lethal combat system, the spirit/priestly/sorcery > magic notions, etc). > > -- > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > +--+ > "An operating system is just a name you give the features you > left out of your editor." > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Jan 8 18:19:36 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 23:19:36 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha References: Message-ID: <006401c2b6e6$70b13470$9865fea9@wizard> As I understand the copyright situation, the only thing that Hasbro can control at this point is people putting out the RuneQuest rules in essentially the same form as they were published before. Copyright mostly concerns word-for-word re-presentation. Terms like Strike Ranks and Resistance Table might have to be changed (particularly the former) because they are pretty much unique to RuneQuest. Though if Call of Cthulhu and BRP use the Resistance Table with that title, then Issaries would have no problem there. Strike Ranks are fairly unique to RuneQuest (though their use in Elfquest might allow Chaosium/Issaries to use them, too). I suppose I could reach over to my bookshelf and check to see if Call of Cthulhu uses the term Resistance Table, but I'm sure many people on this list know this without having to dredge up ancient memories. So if Issaries snatched back the trademark, then they must be about to issue a RuneQuest. A trademark is no good unless there is a product to put it on. They can sit on it for seven years (or so, I forget exactly) but if they haven't put out a RuneQuest in that time, they don't have claim to the trademark. Since they are (or have been) changing Hero Wars to HeroQuest, maybe they are going to put out a special god book or something called RuneQuest? Steve Perrin, long since out of the loop at Chaosium/Issaries ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 6:03 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha > On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:36:18 EST Rjmeints at aol.com wrote: > > As for Hasbro > > publishing a D20 "Runequest" > > game, this is also an impossibility. > > Hasbro/WOTC/Avalon Hill > > does not own/control/retain the trademark to > > Runequest any more. > > Issaries regained control of the Runequest > > trademark earlier > > this year. Oddly enough, the trademark had > > lapsed in 1996 when > > Avalon Hill didn't renew it. Anyone could have > > snapped it up once > > Runequest went out of print for a suitable > > period of time. > > > > The rights to the Runequest 2/3 edition rules > > have reverted to the > > authors, plus Chaosium has an interest in > > retaining control of its > > BRP "percentile" based system. While I cannot > > say so for certain, > > I found it interesting that they brought back > > into print the BRP rules, > > possessively entitled "a Chaosium system" with > > the possible intent > > of helping reassert/retain their ownership of > > the system. > > > I thought I had all of this straight, but now I'm confused again. So > Hasbro/WOTC "no longer own/control/retain the trademark" to RQ, and Issaries > does. What then, if anything, DOES Hasbro/WOTC still own/control/retain -- > only the specific texts of the RQ3 rules and supplements? If Chaosium wanted > to release a fantasy BRP game and call it RuneQuest could they do that or > would Hasbro/WOTC still have some grounds to prevent them? > > Trent > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 8 18:51:39 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 07:51:39 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] d20 and Acid Message-ID: There are several d20 systems out there; Fading Suns have one system, and friends of mine in Norway are developing an unike system based on the d20. To me, a game system and the setting is two completely different things alltogether, so when I don't convert RQ rules to D20 system, it is because I think the current RQ rules are brilliant. The experience ensures that every single character out there is an unike one, whereas with d20, everybody have the same skill levels (-it's logical that you get a better spread when you have 100 lvls than 20. ------------------------------------------ Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and ------------------------------------------ get 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Jan 8 20:27:02 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:27:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <3902009.1042018022924.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> To be honest after tweaking the DnD rules to get them where I wanted I had a 20 page document and needed most of the RQ and HW supplements I own for reference so I ended up thinking what the hell's the point? If I want a d20 opposed resolution game I've got Hero Wars (or whatever stray TM the Staffordenfuhrer has picked up recently). I'm also dubious of anything that's "Open" and requires someone to shell out 20 quid for the PHB... Cheers, Ash > from: Viktor Haag > date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 22:42:58 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of > > Runequest." > > Yes. More properly, a set of OGL rules to play games set in > Glorantha is more like it. > > What would be interesting is to tweak the rules enough so that > they lean more toward the RQ presentation of major systems > (i.e. more lethal combat system, the spirit/priestly/sorcery > magic notions, etc). > > > -- > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > -- > "An operating system is just a name you give the features you > left out of your editor." > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 8 20:56:09 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 09:56:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <2632690.1042019769677.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Couple of points from my own experience... 1. RQII used 5% experience increments with no real problems. In DnD you can use BRP style experience checks and rolls with D20 easy enough - To increase a skill a character has to fail a DC 21 skill check. Same goes for increasing BAP. 2. Magic is a bugger - Either RQ or HW style magic needs to be transplanted. One example is use HW style feats and affinities as skills and allow players to allow augments at the rate of +1/5 DC they attempt, with improvised feats costing and extra 5 DC. Another way is translate POW and use RQ style things. (You can also make initiate and Runemaster prestige classes, but I never tried that one in anger...) 3. To get rid of Hit points you can give everyone a Base Defense Bonus along the lines of BAP and allow them to progress in it at the same rate. CON with a size multiplier (small x 1/2, medium x 1, large x 2 etc) becomes the new measure of hitpoints. Trouble I did all this I found I had something a bit weird - something that looked more like a BRP version of Hero Wars, or, even worse for someone that is really uneasy about Hero Wars I had a version of Hero Wars with BRP experience. After 30 odd sessions I admitted defeat, bit the bullet and started using HW instead. Cheers, Ash > from: Jeremy Martin > date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 07:11:14 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > That would be pretty easy to do in almost all respects. I'm playing > both and to take RQ skill lists into D20 style is easy and, in some > ways, more clear. Then everything would be 'roll higher is better', not > some high (damage) and some low (skill checks). > > The first problem I see is advancement. Without the much-reviled class > and level systems, it's harder to control the skill levels. There would > have to be an experience point system (maybe one where you get to try > increase rolls on X number of skills you used) or else skills would get > too high, too fast. Remember, we're talking 5% jumps with a D20... > > The next big problem someone pointed out is that, with successes, you > are working on fractions of your skills. D20, as it is set up, is > linear so all jumps are as dramatic as the base one. Look at the crit > chance for someone with 80% skill (4%) as compared to someone with 40% > (2%) - crits are still twice as likely, but only 2% more likely to > happen. I used to allow characters with over 100% skill to apply a > penalty to their skill to get a similar penalty for their opponent's > parry. Then a character got hold of Berserk when he was around 90% - > nobody ever parried him again... Unless I throw in opponents twice as > skilled as the rest of the party or took him out with Befuddles or > Demoralizes every time. > > Then, of course, there are the copyright problems with using > Glorantha... > > If anyone has any ideas, let me know. I'd be glad to help on the > project! > > Jeremy > > > Viktor Haag wrote: > > > aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > > I'm a bit confused by the concept of a "D20 verion of > > > Runequest." > > > > Yes. More properly, a set of OGL rules to play games set in > > Glorantha is more like it. > > > > What would be interesting is to tweak the rules enough so that > > they lean more toward the RQ presentation of major systems > > (i.e. more lethal combat system, the spirit/priestly/sorcery > > magic notions, etc). > > > > -- > > Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > > +--+ > > "An operating system is just a name you give the features you > > left out of your editor." > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Jan 8 21:00:04 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:00:04 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <5686772.1042020004805.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> The Perrinfurhrer he say: "So if Issaries snatched back the trademark, then they must be about to issue a RuneQuest." Might not be - they might just be trying to prevent someone else coming up with a game of the same name. Like it or not, Runequest and Glorantha are well wedged together in old fart gamers race memories so they might be trying to stop dilution of their other trademarks. Cheers, Ash From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Wed Jan 8 21:27:44 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 11:27:44 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 in Glorantha Message-ID: For your information I have written some adaptation basis for using D20 system in Glorantha for some time now. It is unfortunately in French, and I do not intend to translate it into English in a near future, unless there are good reasons for doing so. For those who understand bits of French or more, you can have a look at at this drfat work at the following link : http://karamo.nexenservices.com/dnd/gd20.htm Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 8 23:55:24 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 12:55:24 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? Message-ID: Am I the only one who happens to like the rules as they are (in RQ3)? The combat rules are to my knowledge of melee combat very acurate and good. The only argument for changing them that would work with me, is those aiming at altering the game speed; slower or faster. I have decided not to alter the speed. I think it is a bit complex and a bit slow, but it works for setteling small conflicts between up to -say 10 persons. Anything bigger, not directly affecting the PC's is resolved taking short cuts in the rules. Epic battles. I solve with a slightly modified "Warhammer fantasy battles" rules. -Yes, I have problems with some bits and parts or the RQ rules, and -yes, there is probably 100.000 possible ways to make rules, but to me, the Glorantha setting and to some extent the RQ rules represent somthing I've been playing for ...12 years, and can't be separated without loss of feel and mood. Spending hundreds of hours on converting rules in a game with rules that I allready love seems meaningless to me. I converted the rules in Mechwarrior, but that was an extreme case, where i loved the setting, but the RPG rules were utter crap. When it comes to the discussion conserning the d20 system, I have problems with the statement that the d20 system will take over everything, that it is particulary bad or good. Several games have been using d20 systems before, why should it suddenly explode and take over everything now? Then it is the argument that the 100% system is extremely logical. RPgamers have allways; and allways will experiment with rules (this very site is proof enough). So say the d20 takes over everything, some nerd will in some decades "invent" new systems. It's a bit like fassion. In the 90's, the White wolf and Shadowrun system with rolling loads of d10's was in. It still didn't take over. I don't think there's only old gamers that likes 100% systems. Taste and preferences are just as diverse among the younger generations than in ours. If all other RPG's convert to d20 system and RQ don't -wouldn't decide wether the RQ game survives or not; it is wether somthing new is published regularely and with quality and low prices. I think Issaries inc. have realised this, and have taken the consequenses of theese facts. ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it ------------------------------------------ free* for 2 months ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 9 01:18:14 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 14:18:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acid damage In-Reply-To: <20030108100503.549604C267@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030108141814.70682.qmail@web9607.mail.yahoo.com> Peter Johansson: > We have always played that an acid attack, for instance a > Gorp attack, > does dissolving damage to armour the way your GM ruled. > The same goes > for acid spitting Dragon Snails etc. That is why we > always want our > cheap wooden shields to be hit and not our iron weapon or > armour. We > also rule that a hitting a Gorp with a weapon makes the > weapon take full > acid damage to its hit points. This is RQ2 though... We also used the old RQ2 acid rules. If we had Protection or Shield cast, we always played that those spells subtracted from the acid damage, so someone with Shield 4 could go gorp-bathing. Acid is the best thing when attacking Rune Lords as they absolutely hate it when their rune metals melt. We always preferred a critical because that missed the expensive armour and just damaged cheap and healable flesh and bone. > One of my most surprising RQ experiences as a player came > when my > Orlanthi Rune Lord jumped across a stream in Snake Pipe > Hollow but > didn't quite make it and landed in the water exactly > where a Gorp > happened to wait for unsuspcting waders (or bad jumpers). > No more iron > chainmail on the legs. Terrible at the time but a pretty > funny story today. One of our characters ran away from Bigclub and jumped into a pile of ashes to hide. This was a gorp with "Appears Harmless (Pile of Ashes)" as a chaos feature. The GM allowed him to leap out again minus all his armour and with a 1 point acid burn all over his body. Phil Hibbs: > >Are there any published RQ3 acid damage rules? What are > the alternatives? > > > >My character got hit with 8 points of acid, and the GM > ruled that 8 AP of > >his iron chainmail dissolved. I thought this was a > little harsh, but I took > >it on the chin. As a player, I sympathise. As a GM I laugh, and laugh a lot. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From talmeta at talmeta.net Thu Jan 9 01:18:18 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 09:18:18 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 References: <2632690.1042019769677.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <3E1C332A.2020009@talmeta.net> aescleal at btinternet.com wrote: > 3. To get rid of Hit points you can give everyone a Base Defense Bonus along the lines of BAP and allow them to progress in it at the same rate. CON with a size multiplier (small x 1/2, medium x 1, large x 2 etc) becomes the new measure of hitpoints. Actually, the Vitality/Wound point system that both Star Wars d20 & Spycraft d20 use would workpretty well for this concept. -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - Tuesday After Lunch is the cosmic time of the week. From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Jan 8 20:34:17 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:34:17 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 References: <3902009.1042018022924.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <000101c2b724$f060b310$9002600a@otvfrap043> > I'm also dubious of anything that's "Open" and requires someone to shell out 20 quid for the PHB... Agreed... See http://basicrps.com/ogf/rgfd.txt Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Jan 9 01:58:59 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 14:58:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? Message-ID: <7281316.1042037939013.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Bjorn, he say: "Am I the only one who happens to like the rules as they are (in RQ3)?" Nope, I like most of them. Which I why I tend to lurk on the RQ rules list... :-) Cheers, Ash From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Jan 9 02:02:47 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:02:47 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <3568883.1042038167099.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> I never liked the vitality/wound thing - just appologist DnD hit points 'cause they weren't willing to let hit dice go. Cheers, Ash > from: Tal Meta > date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 14:18:18 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > aescleal at btinternet.com wrote: > > 3. To get rid of Hit points you can give everyone a Base Defense Bonus along the lines of BAP and allow them to progress in it at the same rate. CON with a size multiplier (small x 1/2, medium x 1, large x 2 etc) becomes the new measure of hitpoints. > > Actually, the Vitality/Wound point system that both Star Wars d20 & > Spycraft d20 use would workpretty well for this concept. > > -- > talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > Tuesday After Lunch is the cosmic time of the week. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 01:29:34 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 08:29:34 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E1C35CE.7070906@dyasdesigns.com> Ummm the mailing list is named rq - rules did you expect discussion about Glorantha... I just joined this is what I expected. Lance From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 01:37:13 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 08:37:13 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <3E1BCF12.48567A27@libra.seed.net.tw> References: <825816.1041942453806.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <15899.22514.269231.189236@suldrun.rim.net> <3E1BCF12.48567A27@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3E1C3799.9070506@dyasdesigns.com> Jeremy Martin wrote: >That would be pretty easy to do in almost all respects. I'm playing >both and to take RQ skill lists into D20 style is easy and, in some >ways, more clear. Then everything would be 'roll higher is better', not >some high (damage) and some low (skill checks). > > One of the few coolnesses.... Higher is better was the only rule in the second RPG I played... Mostly improv with a pure die roll of any size with higher as better... >The first problem I see is advancement. Without the much-reviled class >and level systems, it's harder to control the skill levels. There would >have to be an experience point system (maybe one where you get to try >increase rolls on X number of skills you used) or else skills would get >too high, too fast. Remember, we're talking 5% jumps with a D20... > > Allow fewer progression checks, and if you control them primarily based on "game time" making a years experience give say 12 checks(one per month anyone?).... this will correspond roughly I believe to old RQIII profession and time based progression rate. I calculated that fast on the fly... so probably forgot something. Lance Dyas "newbie to RQ-Rules discussion list." From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 01:51:16 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 08:51:16 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha In-Reply-To: <2C46EE99.14DAEA46.00047AF1@aol.com> References: <2C46EE99.14DAEA46.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <3E1C3AE4.3010700@dyasdesigns.com> DevinC at aol.com wrote: >Because as the few, the proud, and the aging RQers get older and die, no one will pick up the mantle of Glorantha and Runequest. Sorry, I tend to take a long term view of things. It is just sad to me that new generations of gamers will likely never experience the richness of Glorantha. > >I happen to think a D20 version of Glorantha would be a great seller and would turn out to be a wonderful addition to the D20 lineup. > >Devin > > If it was written bravely... It could be cool. and bring some of the RQ rule style and paradigm into the D20 environment. D20 has several things that could exploited to this end. Opposed Skill Check Rules (could be brought into combat) Degree of Success Rules (Elaborated on could replace advancing hitpoints) Lance Dyas From vhaag at rim.net Thu Jan 9 02:05:37 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:05:37 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <000101c2b724$f060b310$9002600a@otvfrap043> References: <000101c2b724$f060b310$9002600a@otvfrap043> Message-ID: <15900.15937.451658.835835@suldrun.rim.net> Gianni writes: > > I'm also dubious of anything that's "Open" and requires > > someone to shell out 20 quid for the PHB... > > Agreed... See http://basicrps.com/ogf/rgfd.txt That is not my interpretation of the situation. There needs to be a distinction drawn between those products that agree to the D20 and OG license, and those that agree only to the OG license. My understanding is this: If you produce a 'D20' product (an example of a D20 'game' is the Farscape book from AEG or the Traveller book from QuickLink), then essentially what you are doing is entering into a marketing partnership with WotC. They allow you to leverage the marketing efforts of the 'D20' logo and trade dress. In return, you (a) agree to abide by their very restrictive definition of intellectual property and not infringe on that definition, and (b) agree not to produce a "standalone" game -- that is, you can't put rules in your "game" for character creation or development, only material that would allow someone with a "core rulebook" to use your additional classes, templates, etc, etc to create different kinds of characters. However, if you produce an OGL-only product (an example would be Mutants and Masterminds or the Everquest game), then you may *not* use any of that juicy D20 marketing muscle, but you're also much less restricted about what you can include in your product. So OGL products can be real stand-alone games, as opposed to merely campaign sourcebooks. So my suggestion was for OGL Glorantha, and not D20 Glorantha. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "Look at me! Mr. Balance!" From vhaag at rim.net Thu Jan 9 02:10:14 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:10:14 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <3568883.1042038167099.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> References: <3568883.1042038167099.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <15900.16214.435559.673888@suldrun.rim.net> aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > I never liked the vitality/wound thing - just appologist DnD > hit points 'cause they weren't willing to let hit dice go. Mutants and Masterminds does away with hit points. The sidebar on page 10 gives a capsule summary of the bits in M&M that differ from that "other game" (i.e. D20 games): "No hit points: Characters in [M&M] do not have hit points based on their level and [CON] bonus, and damage is not rolled using other dice. Instead, each attack has a damage modifier used to calculate a Difficulty Class. The character makes a Damage saving throw against that Difficulty Class and the result of the saving throw determines the effect or damage the character suffers." Rather elegant, really. No hit points, and no dice needed other than a D20. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "OSs and GUIs come and go, only Emacs has lasting power" From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Jan 9 02:21:54 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 10:21:54 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? References: <7281316.1042037939013.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <002901c2b729$ad5c3a80$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Not sure, I still love runequest 2 I am still confused on how sorcery works in r3 :0 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: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? > Bjorn, he say: > > "Am I the only one who happens to like the rules as they are (in RQ3)?" > > Nope, I like most of them. Which I why I tend to lurk on the RQ rules list... :-) > > Cheers, > > Ash > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From gerall at chromebob.com Thu Jan 9 09:05:31 2003 From: gerall at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 16:05:31 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing the rules? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E1CA0AB.2030405@chromebob.com> Bjorn Stolen wrote: > Am I the only one who happens to like the rules as they > are (in RQ3)? Nope - I like RQ2 and I'm beginning to like RQ3. [snip] > Anything bigger, not directly affecting the PC's is > resolved taking short cuts in the rules. Epic battles. I > solve with a slightly modified "Warhammer fantasy battles" > rules. This is nicely done. There have been many systems used to determine the outcome of large-scale battles by the referees that I have played with, but most of them will boil down to what you have mentioned. > -Yes, I have problems with some bits and parts or the RQ > rules, and -yes, there is probably 100.000 possible ways > to make rules, but to me, the Glorantha setting and to > some extent the RQ rules represent somthing I've been > playing for ...12 years, and can't be separated without > loss of feel and mood. Spending hundreds of hours on > converting rules in a game with rules that I allready love > seems meaningless to me. I converted the rules in > Mechwarrior, but that was an extreme case, where i loved > the setting, but the RPG rules were utter crap. I've taken to using other settings than Glorantha under the RQ rules. Once the players adjust to the system, they tend to enjoy the games. > When it comes to the discussion conserning the d20 system, > I have problems with the statement that the d20 system > will take over everything, that it is particulary bad or > good. Several games have been using d20 systems before, > why should it suddenly explode and take over everything now? Because there is a company out there that has mutated the Open Source / Free Software development ideology to roleplaying, with the serious caveat that they get to sell books while looking like they inspire creativity for non-profitable reasons. I dislike the Open Gaming License because they're trying to pass it off like they won't make money by people using it. That one huge hook at the end where you have to buy the PHB really chaps my hide! I'd have a lot more respect for WotC if they relented a bit. As for the original discussion, this is not the list to discuss a d20 version of Glorantha. That belongs (by definition) on a Glorantha list... > Then it is the argument that the 100% system is extremely > logical. RPgamers have allways; and allways will > experiment with rules (this very site is proof enough). So > say the d20 takes over everything, some nerd will in some > decades "invent" new systems. It's a bit like fassion. In > the 90's, the White wolf and Shadowrun system with rolling > loads of d10's was in. It still didn't take over. > I don't think there's only old gamers that likes 100% > systems. Taste and preferences are just as diverse among > the younger generations than in ours. Good point. > If all other RPG's convert to d20 system and RQ don't > -wouldn't decide wether the RQ game survives or not; it is > wether somthing new is published regularely and with > quality and low prices. I think Issaries inc. have > realised this, and have taken the consequenses of theese > facts. Like I typed before, there is a substantial difference in the system one plays and the worlds one plays in. I prefer the BRP/RuneQuest derivative systems. Hands down. I will play in any world that's sufficiently interesting. -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From vhaag at rim.net Thu Jan 9 09:26:51 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:26:51 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? In-Reply-To: <3E1CA0AB.2030405@chromebob.com> References: <3E1CA0AB.2030405@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <15900.42411.695040.146538@suldrun.rim.net> Gerall Kahla writes: > Because there is a company out there that has mutated the Open > Source / Free Software development ideology to roleplaying, > with the serious caveat that they get to sell books while > looking like they inspire creativity for non-profitable > reasons. I dislike the Open Gaming License because they're > trying to pass it off like they won't make money by people > using it. > > That one huge hook at the end where you have to buy the PHB > really chaps my hide! I hate to sound like a Hasbro apologist, because I'd really rather not find myself in that position. However, it should be pointed out, again, that OGL products do *not* necessarily require that customers spend any money at all on WotC material. That's the D20 license, and it's a separate kettle of fish entirely from the OGL. > Like I typed before, there is a substantial difference in > the system one plays and the worlds one plays in. I prefer > the BRP/RuneQuest derivative systems. Hands down. I will > play in any world that's sufficiently interesting. Personally, Gerall, I agree wholeheartedly with you. I prefer the BRp/RQ rules-set even to the d20 rules-set. But I don't necessarily have anything against the d20 rules (by by "little d" d20, I mean the rules, *not* the brand), especially when implemented using the OGL and not the D20L. Anyhow; the horse now looks well pounded from my point of view. Perhaps if there's any more discussion on this topic it should take place off-list. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "Ten pages of Flamel are worth a thousand pages of Newton!" From paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk Thu Jan 9 09:56:38 2003 From: paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk (paul Sommer) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 23:56:38 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Hi guys jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? Ciao Paul sommer ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 9 10:28:18 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 15:28:18 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? Message-ID: While I've done plenty of fiddling/customizing of my own and have gathered even more off various websites, I'm also perfectly satisfied with the RQ3 rules as published and suspect that any 'revised' edition (RQ:AiG, for instance) would have made more changes that I'd have found for the worse than for the better. In general, I've never really understood why RPGs can't be more like wargames or boardgames where the game is released once and then kept in print indefinitely as a catalog item (with occasional new printings to fix errors, spruce up the typeface, and other 'cosmetic' changes). Why must every RPG have its rules completely re-written and re-designed once every 5 years or so? Just so game companies and designers can stay in business? From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Jan 9 10:30:33 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:30:33 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <017701c2b76d$f0c31430$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> well I run one, but no where near glorantha ken RQ2 is a good thing 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: "paul Sommer" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:56 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > Hi guys > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > > Ciao > Paul sommer > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" > > > > > --- 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 DevinC at aol.com Thu Jan 9 10:53:22 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 18:53:22 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <5A0EFD73.1DE2A5E1.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/8/2003 6:30:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kruch7 at cox.net writes: > > Hi guys > > > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the > present and if so in what area/geographical location of > glorantha?? > > > > Ciao > > Paul sommer Not me. I play 3rd edition D&D currently. Devin From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Thu Jan 9 10:10:46 2003 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael Christian) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:10:46 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active current Runequest campaign's Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC97F0@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> I would probably call mine semi-active as life frequently gets in the way and are often a month+ between sessions. I don't run a Gloranthan game though. Fantasy Europe: Roman Empire at its height but with lots of historical/fantasy anomalies (trolls, dwarves, Tolkien elves, immortal godlike Caesar, etc.). Fun when it happens which is not as often as I'd like. -----Original Message----- From: paul Sommer [mailto:paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk] Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 2:57 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Hi guys jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? Ciao Paul sommer ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" --- 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 rico at ricosweb.com Thu Jan 9 11:03:13 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:03:13 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000a01c2b772$81b5b840$0a01a8c0@MAIN> > Why must every RPG have its rules completely re-written and > re-designed once every 5 years or so? > Just so game companies and designers can stay in business? In a word, yes. Wargame publishers make their money off the miniatures, not the rules. RPG publishers make their money off the rules. If it can't be shown that companies aren't making profits with RPGs, nobody will publish new ones, and existing publishers will stop publishing existing ones. It really is that simple. The longer answer, of course, is that rules are never perfect (and yes, I'm including RQ2 and RQ3). If there are 50 pages of errata, rules clarifications and new rules floating around in different places, it just makes sence to publish a new edition that includes all of these in one book. Rich Allen From DevinC at aol.com Thu Jan 9 11:15:41 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:15:41 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? Message-ID: <5A9B9B82.570DDF7B.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/8/2003 7:03:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, rico at ricosweb.com writes: > In a word, yes. Wargame publishers make their money off the miniatures, > not the rules. RPG publishers make their money off the rules. If it > can't be shown that companies aren't making profits with RPGs, nobody > will publish new ones, and existing publishers will stop publishing > existing ones. It really is that simple. > > The longer answer, of course, is that rules are never perfect (and yes, > I'm including RQ2 and RQ3). If there are 50 pages of errata, rules > clarifications and new rules floating around in different places, it > just makes sence to publish a new edition that includes all > of these in > one book. > > Rich Allen In addition, wargame producers with long-lived wargames are just as notorious as RPG designers. World in Flames is in the 7th version of its "Final Edition". After Squad Leader came Advanced Squad Leader. Europa is in God only knows what version. Star Fleet Battles became so bewildering difficult to follow version-wise that I simply gave up the game. Devin From gerall at chromebob.com Thu Jan 9 11:19:14 2003 From: gerall at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 18:19:14 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's In-Reply-To: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <3E1CC002.7010501@chromebob.com> paul Sommer wrote: > Hi guys > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list > are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 > campaign at the present and if so in what > area/geographical location of glorantha?? I'm currently trying out the RQ3 rules in a world that's part of Glorantha, but not on any map. (Read: I'm winging it!) Players are from a nomadic culture and are facing an invasion by an organized, moon-worshipping empire. Basically, I'm using Prax and the Lunars, but not calling things by those names. The group is a relative new one, where only myself and one other player has any experience with RQ. I'm interested in seeing how they pull the tribes together to resist the Bad Guys... (Apologies to any Lunar-sympathizers in earshot!) -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Jan 9 11:28:19 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:28:19 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <5A0EFD73.1DE2A5E1.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <01bf01c2b776$02c564f0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Well I also run a game of that too, and EQ rpg and a brown box D&D game on occasion too. 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: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 6:53 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > In a message dated 1/8/2003 6:30:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kruch7 at cox.net writes: > > > > Hi guys > > > > > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the > > present and if so in what area/geographical location of > > glorantha?? > > > > > > Ciao > > > Paul sommer > > Not me. I play 3rd edition D&D currently. > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 9 11:31:26 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 16:31:26 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? References: Message-ID: <005001c2b776$730a1620$9865fea9@wizard> Actually, that's about it. Keeping a game in print means very low sales after awhile unless it's a perennial, and RQ never quite hit that category. Most boardgames (aside from stuff like Monopoly) are catalog items for years because the first print run didn't sell through. RPGs go for new editions to (1) try to hop on the bandwagon of whatever is new in gaming this year (2) try to bring in people who have never played the game before by giving them the chance to start on the ground floor with everyone else (3) Let the original authors, or the fanboys who have taken over the game, fix everything they found wrong with the previous edition. And every RPG has things that someone wants to fix. (4) Be a new game so distributors will make a bigger order. That's how it works. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:28 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? > While I've done plenty of fiddling/customizing of my own and have gathered > even more off various websites, I'm also perfectly satisfied with the RQ3 > rules as published and suspect that any 'revised' edition (RQ:AiG, for > instance) would have made more changes that I'd have found for the worse than > for the better. > > In general, I've never really understood why RPGs can't be more like wargames > or boardgames where the game is released once and then kept in print > indefinitely as a catalog item (with occasional new printings to fix errors, > spruce up the typeface, and other 'cosmetic' changes). Why must every RPG have > its rules completely re-written and re-designed once every 5 years or so? > Just so game companies and designers can stay in business? > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jan 9 11:32:14 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:32:14 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] AAAARGH! -why does everybody insist on changing th e rules? References: <5A9B9B82.570DDF7B.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <01e501c2b776$8eb892c0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> or my 6th edition Warhammer? but alas I keep playing and painting :) 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: > In addition, wargame producers with long-lived wargames are just as notorious as RPG designers. World in Flames is in the 7th version of its "Final Edition". After Squad Leader came Advanced Squad Leader. Europa is in God only knows what version. Star Fleet Battles became so bewildering difficult to follow version-wise that I simply gave up the game. > > Devin > ___________________ From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 9 11:32:28 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 16:32:28 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <5A0EFD73.1DE2A5E1.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <005a01c2b776$9703d570$9865fea9@wizard> I last ran my version of RQ (SPQR for the obligatory plug) about three years ago. My players still ask when I am going to start it up again, though. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > In a message dated 1/8/2003 6:30:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kruch7 at cox.net writes: > > > > Hi guys > > > > > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the > > present and if so in what area/geographical location of > > glorantha?? > > > > > > Ciao > > > Paul sommer > > Not me. I play 3rd edition D&D currently. > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jan 9 11:35:29 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:35:29 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <5A0EFD73.1DE2A5E1.00047AF1@aol.com> <005a01c2b776$9703d570$9865fea9@wizard> Message-ID: <000f01c2b777$036f1d00$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> well If I lived closer I'd be more then happy to provide you with a group, you would have to find the time your self though LOL Ken 2 more years then real life might once more interfere with my gaming 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: "Steve Perrin" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > I last ran my version of RQ (SPQR for the obligatory plug) about three years > ago. My players still ask when I am going to start it up again, though. > > Steve Perrin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:53 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > > > > In a message dated 1/8/2003 6:30:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, > kruch7 at cox.net writes: > > > > > > Hi guys > > > > > > > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > > > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the > > > present and if so in what area/geographical location of > > > glorantha?? > > > > > > > > Ciao > > > > Paul sommer > > > > Not me. I play 3rd edition D&D currently. > > > > Devin > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 jpw at gtemail.net Thu Jan 9 11:36:10 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:36:10 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 Message-ID: <20030109003610.13192.qmail@verizonmail.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Viktor Haag Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:35:00 -0500 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 >> > While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ > rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For reference, > look at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't > really like about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, > and oddly enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a > "heroic fantasy" setting as well. Thanx for the heads up on M&M. -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From alanchambers at attbi.com Thu Jan 9 11:43:58 2003 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:43:58 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <01bc01c2b778$326da440$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul Sommer" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:56 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > Hi guys > > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > > Ciao > Paul sommer I'm currently running a RQ2/3 hybrid game, but it's in my own world. I've never been fond of Glorantha. One of my group just opened his own RQ game. I'm a happy camper right now. Alan From jpw at gtemail.net Thu Jan 9 11:50:44 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:50:44 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <20030109005044.469.qmail@verizonmail.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Rjmeints at aol.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 20:36:18 EST To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha > As for Hasbro publishing a D20 "Runequest" > game, this is also an impossibility. Hasbro/WOTC/Avalon Hill > does not own/control/retain the trademark to Runequest any more. > Issaries regained control of the Runequest trademark earlier > this year. Oddly enough, the trademark had lapsed in 1996 when > Avalon Hill didn't renew it. Anyone could have snapped it up once > Runequest went out of print for a suitable period of time. Now you tell me!!! > > The rights to the Runequest 2/3 edition rules have > > Rick Meints > Thanx for the news. Now to wait for the reissue!!! -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From jpw at gtemail.net Thu Jan 9 11:58:38 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 19:58:38 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <20030109005838.8434.qmail@verizonmail.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: DevinC at aol.com Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:38:27 -0500 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha > In a message dated 1/7/2003 10:53:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > > > Maybe I'm missing something, but who cares if the D20 system is much more > > popular than RQ? Mariah Carey is more popular than Lustmord, but the former > > (in each case) won't be played by me or my friends. > > Popularity and quality > > only coincidentally (and apparently seldom) overlap. > > > > J > > Because as the few, the proud, and the aging RQers get older and die, no one will pick up the mantle of Glorantha and Runequest. Amen Sorry, I tend to take a long term view of things. It is just sad to me that new generations of gamers will likely never experience the richness of Glorantha. > > I happen to think a D20 version of Glorantha would be a great seller and would turn out to be a wonderful addition to the D20 lineup. Yes. It may be piggy backing, but I say "Jump on that piggy." > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From bick10 at attbi.com Thu Jan 9 15:01:18 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:01:18 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <007901c2b793$c4a4b7c0$6401a8c0@attbi.com> From: "paul Sommer" > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > > Ciao > Paul sommer Until this last year I had been running RQ3 (modified) in four areas. 1 Gloranthaian Griffin Island. 2 Dragon Pass. 3 Sun County/Pavis. 4 The West and Sog City. I have since tried RQ Slayers and now my players won't let me run anything else. We have either gotten tired of RQ or Glorantha. But in their minds the two are tied together. Maybe after a couple of years I will create a non-Glorantha world for RQ... Jim From andrew at dev.spis.co.nz Thu Jan 9 12:41:50 2003 From: andrew at dev.spis.co.nz (Andrew Vallance) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:41:50 +1300 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #85 - 16 msgs In-Reply-To: <20030109004403.6C30F4C270@thinbits.com> Message-ID: > From: paul Sommer > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Hi guys > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at > the present and if so in what area/geographical location of > glorantha?? RuneQuest 2 campaign currently based in and around Pavis County at the moment, but about to shift down to the Defender's Shore. ============================================ Andrew Vallance, SPIS Ltd & WebCentre Ltd , Christchurch, New Zealand * http://BusinessDailyReview.com - daily analysis, strategy, ideas * http://TurboNote.com - sticky notes and instant messaging * Web automation for online periodicals: http://TurboPress.com From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 13:44:44 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 20:44:44 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q In-Reply-To: <20030109003610.13192.qmail@verizonmail.com> References: <20030109003610.13192.qmail@verizonmail.com> Message-ID: <3E1CE21C.1060309@dyasdesigns.com> John Whitehead wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: Viktor Haag >Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 11:35:00 -0500 >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 > > > >>While 'D20' may be a little too close to D&D for comfort, an RQ >>rules-set based on the 'OGL' doesn't need to be. For reference, >>look at 'Mutants and Masterminds'; much of what people don't >>really like about D20 was filed off to build this superhero game, >>and oddly enough, many of its innovations would work nicely for a >>"heroic fantasy" setting as well. >> >> > >Thanx for the heads up on M&M. > > Darn someone mentioned it first... if i wasnt in limbo land regarding whether im on the list or not I would have been faster.... One of the interesting parts filed off is Tadah HITPOINTS!!!, and funny dice . Just that one the ubiquitous D20 (I know RQ has all the funny dice too). I think M&M has an opposed skill roll for defense. IMHO Glorantha in OGL with enough RuneQuest Mechanical Flavors pulled in.. and we got a very interesting possibility. You can end up with an entirely different game once you start hacking obviously but If one starts with M&M we have a D20 basic that wont make me sick (D&D does) ;-) and already has a couple RQish elements. I do like the RQIII mechanics certainly and my younger brother thinks Stormbringer First Ed. is hot stuff.... But d20 doesnt suck when done right.. D&D is bad because of the writing style even more so than anomolies in the mechanics. Abandoning the D&D Magic System Outright seems the order of the day though. Feah. Ptewy... gack **Lance Dyas www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 13:58:11 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 20:58:11 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneQuest Kung Fu - advancement system Message-ID: <3E1CE543.4050000@dyasdesigns.com> I made up a RuneQuestian Advancment system based on the idea of Kung Fu, pts.. It was an attempt to merge the profession based and the roll based advancement systems and to fix what I saw as a couple of annomolies. The annomolies i tried to fix as follows. 1. The skill gain based on time with years as the basis used in advancement by profession, is disconnected from the experience roll method and is completely linear because of it. 2. Experience during an adventure in its present form... once is all it takes to get an experience roll and all rules I've seen which track the repeated use of a skill during the adventure result in way too much bookkeeping, It really does take more than one lucky shot to learn something substantial. Leaps of intuition may be possible but they shouldn't be the standard. 3. If skills are not practiced for a long time, they really should atrophy at least to some degree (The lack of this plus number 2 encourages generalist characters way too much) 4. All characters effectively have the same potential and learn at the same rate because any advantage you had due to talent in Dexterity or Intelligence or whatever is statistically washed away by the skill gain rolls. 5. Mechanically all skills in RQIII are effectively the same difficulty to learn and advance in, in fact since a skill with lower chance of success can be attempted multiple times within a developmental period but the experience roll is only made once... a skill with a lower initial rating advances faster in game than one which starts with a higher rating. Essentially the idea of "difficult" skills which are harder advance in simply isn't there. Here is the url for my overly complex attempt at a solution on my site... stop by and review or just let me know how worthless it is. ;-) . Or just debunk what I said above. That might be fun too. http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/runequest/kungfu.html Lance http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Jan 9 15:00:59 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 22:00:59 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <018201c2b793$b80e5de0$3410fea9@frkt5> My PBEM is set in the Young Kingdoms. The campaign is on hiatus at the moment, however, as I overhaul my house rules. Once I'm done, I'll restart the YK campaign and launch Glorantha, probably at Apple Lane. I also want to convert D&D's "Return to the Tomb of Horrors" to RQ, and maybe launch a campaign set in Minaria, the world in which Divine Right (anyone remember that game? I love it and am beta-testing a reissue) is set. ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul Sommer" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:56 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Hi guys jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? Ciao Paul sommer ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From rico at ricosweb.com Thu Jan 9 15:16:17 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 21:16:17 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q In-Reply-To: <3E1CE21C.1060309@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <000e01c2b795$dc8be140$0a01a8c0@MAIN> > Abandoning the D&D Magic System Outright seems the order of the day > though. Feah. Ptewy... gack For me, the RQ magic system would be the first to go. I can't stand it! Takes all kinds, eh? Rich Allen From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 9 15:35:04 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 22:35:04 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q In-Reply-To: <000e01c2b795$dc8be140$0a01a8c0@MAIN> References: <000e01c2b795$dc8be140$0a01a8c0@MAIN> Message-ID: <3E1CFBF8.2050904@dyasdesigns.com> Rich Allen wrote: >>Abandoning the D&D Magic System Outright seems the order of the day >>though. Feah. Ptewy... gack >> >> > > For me, the RQ magic system would be the first to go. I can't >stand it! Takes all kinds, eh? > Yup tho it seems glorantha and rq magics style... are close knit. From tiberius at runequest.za.org Thu Jan 9 17:56:06 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:56:06 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <13248.196.8.104.31.1042095366.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Paul Sommer asked who all was involved in an active RQ campaign. I am, my group only p;lays RQ3 at the moment. We don't use Glorantha (although we have most of the material) as we have our own world which we are flkeshing out - and which was created befor I started obtaining Glorantha material to complete my RQ3 collection. We do pinch bits and pieces where necissary though, monsters, cult specific spells etc. Bits and pieces of our world are at www.runequest.za.org BTW - Stenking cigar - isn't that Sam Slade Robot hunter's robotic stogie? Tony -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! From DevinC at aol.com Thu Jan 9 17:58:22 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 01:58:22 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <14CB4629.25291F5F.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/8/2003 11:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > Minaria, the world in which Divine Right (anyone remember > that game? I love it and am beta-testing a reissue) is set. I loved that game! I also loved the Minarian Legends articles in old Dragon Magazines. I am glad to hear about a reissue. Hey, if you need any old time DR players to help playtest, give me a hollar. Devin From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 9 18:15:39 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 23:15:39 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Relationship of RuneQuest magic with Glorantha References: <000e01c2b795$dc8be140$0a01a8c0@MAIN> <3E1CFBF8.2050904@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <005501c2b7ae$ea714700$9865fea9@wizard> Actually, if you look at the original Chaosium games of White Bear Red Moon and Nomad Gods, there is not a whole lot of relation to the RuneQuest system there. The system was one that Ray Turney and I (with some help from Steve Henderson and Warren James) put together that was pretty much what we wanted to play, and we shoehorned Glorantha into it. I've never looked at Hero Wars, but I hope Robin Laws got closer to what Greg wanted than I did. A lot of the ambiguities of Gloranthan magic is Greg trying to fit his original concepts into the RuneQuest straightjacket. Not that RuneQuest magic doesn't describe some of what goes on in Glorantha, but it is very specialized. The Sorcery rules for 3rd edition were an attempt to broaden it, but I think they became way too complex and limited (I had very little to do with them). That's why SPQR (again with the obligatory plug) is a lot more like Magic World, the BRP sorcery system I designed. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q > Rich Allen wrote: > > >>Abandoning the D&D Magic System Outright seems the order of the day > >>though. Feah. Ptewy... gack > > For me, the RQ magic system would be the first to go. I can't > >stand it! Takes all kinds, eh? > > > Yup tho it seems glorantha and rq magics style... are close knit. > From peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se Thu Jan 9 19:10:33 2003 From: peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:10:33 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <3E1D2E79.9080409@padrigu.gu.se> Although I'm currently having a break in my RQ/Glorantha campaign to play Pendragon, it is still very much alive in my head and I will pick it up again during the spring. It is situated in Sartar at a Humakti fort/temple called Marsh End (next to Upland Marsh). We use a RQ3 modified version of RQ2, but it is still mostly RQ2. The last scenario we played before the break, was a Hero Quest where the players were sent into Upland Marsh to retrieve an artefact for the cult of Engizi the Sky River Titan. In the Hero Plane part of the scenario I used a mix of the RQ2/3, Pendragon and Hero Wars rules... and it worked! :-) /Peter J paul Sommer wrote: >Hi guys > >jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > From gianni at basicrps.com Thu Jan 9 20:20:45 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:20:45 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <006301c2b7c0$6481fec0$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello Paul > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? I have been a player in a RQ2 campaign for slightly more than 1 year. We play at least once a month. The party is basically a group of Sartarites who got in trouble with the Lunars and were sentenced to enslavement. We were deported from Sartar to Raus Fort through Prax. Now we are playing in and around the Great Bog, doing missions for Duke Raus, our master, as far north as Sun County, and as far south as Corflu. The GM is a veteran RQ2 GM and player. None of the players ever played RuneQuest (I did play/master CoC and other BRPS-based rolegames, the other players did not). Everybody loves the rules and the setting. Ciao Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Jan 9 20:43:43 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:43:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <5119087.1042105423681.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> "Sorry, I tend to take a long term view of things. It is just sad to me that new generations of gamers will likely never experience the richness of Glorantha." Funny how people are equating death of RQ with death of Glorantha. As far as I can tell there's about 3 times the number of people playing games in Glorantha now Hero Wars is out as was this time two years back. Providing the powers that be can maintain interest long enough to keep turning out new stuff I can't see it going the way of the dodo for a long while yet. Cheers, Ash > from: John Whitehead > date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 00:58:38 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: DevinC at aol.com > Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:38:27 -0500 > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha > > > In a message dated 1/7/2003 10:53:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > > > > > Maybe I'm missing something, but who cares if the D20 system is much more > > > popular than RQ? Mariah Carey is more popular than Lustmord, but the former > > > (in each case) won't be played by me or my friends. > > > Popularity and quality > > > only coincidentally (and apparently seldom) overlap. > > > > > > J > > > > Because as the few, the proud, and the aging RQers get older and die, no one will pick up the mantle of Glorantha and Runequest. > > Amen > > Sorry, I tend to take a long term view of things. It is just sad to me that new generations of gamers will likely never experience the richness of Glorantha. > > > > I happen to think a D20 version of Glorantha would be a great seller and would turn out to be a wonderful addition to the D20 lineup. > > Yes. It may be piggy backing, but I say "Jump on that piggy." > > > > Devin > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! > http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jan 9 20:52:40 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:52:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q Message-ID: <6575947.1042105960468.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> "Yup tho it seems glorantha and rq magics style... are close knit." Not particularly, but the DnD one is fairly far from the current Gloranthan "truth" (whatever that happens to be this week...) as well. Cheers, Ash > from: Lance Dyas > date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 04:35:04 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q > > Rich Allen wrote: > > >>Abandoning the D&D Magic System Outright seems the order of the day > >>though. Feah. Ptewy... gack > >> > >> > > > > For me, the RQ magic system would be the first to go. I can't > >stand it! Takes all kinds, eh? > > > Yup tho it seems glorantha and rq magics style... are close knit. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Thu Jan 9 21:34:52 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 10:34:52 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A04@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Paul Sommer: >jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list >are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or >3 campaign at the present and if so in what >area/geographical location of glorantha?? RQ3, Dorastor (Riskland), Rune level characters Phil Hibbs ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From tom at zunder.org.uk Thu Jan 9 22:33:10 2003 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder (Work-Moz)) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 11:33:10 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneQuest In-Reply-To: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3E1D5DF6.3030003@zunder.org.uk> RuneQuest as a Gloranthan game just might be too much of a conflict with Hero Wars for Issaries to run with. On the other hand, as a true open engine, it could seize the high ground again. Compared to D&D it's still a much better 2nd generation simulationist game system. -- Tom Zunder tom at zunder.org.uk www.elric.org.uk From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Jan 9 23:19:51 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 07:19:51 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <14CB4629.25291F5F.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <009501c2b7d9$690bc340$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Wow haven't heard DR mentioned in a long time keep us posted on the test 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: To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:58 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > In a message dated 1/8/2003 11:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > > > Minaria, the world in which Divine Right (anyone remember > > that game? I love it and am beta-testing a reissue) is set. > > I loved that game! I also loved the Minarian Legends articles in old Dragon Magazines. I am glad to hear about a reissue. Hey, if you need any old time DR players to help playtest, give me a hollar. > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From GameMaster1978 at cs.com Fri Jan 10 00:14:31 2003 From: GameMaster1978 at cs.com (GameMaster1978 at cs.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:14:31 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <8a.224c59b6.2b4ecfb7@cs.com> I have an RQ campaign running in the old "Powers & Perils" setting "Perilous Lands." I really never got into Glorantha. While I really couldn't get into the P&P system I found the world one of the most realistic as there are like 97 human cultures alone. All of which fall into the standard Barbarian, Civilized, Nomad and Primitive backgrounds RQ has to offer. But with even greater variation. For instance... The Assiran Barbarians are SIZ +1 Have the Cultural Skills World Lore (Mountains) at +3% per year over 15 and Climb at +2% per year over 15 The above are irrespective of and in addition to profession Their Cultural Weapons are Axes, Swords, Spears, Javelins and Viking Round Shield They dislike helmets and favour the use of heavy shields. There nearest earth equivalent are Scandinavian Compair them with... The Bal'sani Barbarians at SIZ -1 Cultural Skills Dodge+1%, Track +3%, Sneak +1%, Hide +1%, World Lore (Hills) +1%, and World Lore (Mountians) +1% Again the above are per year over 15 irrespective of profession just because of the lifestyle of the Bal'sani people. Their Cultural Weapons are Spears, Swords, Bows and Javelins all at a base of 5% greater than the listed cultural base in the rule book. They dislike shields and helmets and are similar to the Riffs of Algeria and Morocco. Plus there world map which is in the form of an atlas (book) as opposed to a poster is easier to manipulate at the table and has hexes on it which I know some find distracting but I prefer. I am in the process of converting the entire culture book over to RQ and while I am only on page 25 of 103 if any are interested in seeing some pages from it let me know and I'll send yah a sample. It's kewl stuff Rodney From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 10 01:31:16 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:31:16 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 rules Message-ID: Some persons complained about the fact to have to buy the DnD PHB to play D20 system. Note that this is not a requirement because the rules are available on line through the Open Gaming Foundation. http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Jan 10 01:31:50 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:31:50 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <14CB4629.25291F5F.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <01e501c2b7eb$d93ac460$3410fea9@frkt5> Oh, geez--those Minarian Legends articles were just the tip of an enormous iceberg of essays that Glenn Rahmann later wrote, greatly detailing Minaria. He sent me a manuscript that's about 300 pages long that fleshes out everything. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:58 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's In a message dated 1/8/2003 11:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > Minaria, the world in which Divine Right (anyone remember > that game? I love it and am beta-testing a reissue) is set. I loved that game! I also loved the Minarian Legends articles in old Dragon Magazines. I am glad to hear about a reissue. Hey, if you need any old time DR players to help playtest, give me a hollar. Devin _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 10 01:36:19 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:36:19 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Detection Blank Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A08@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> One of the critters in Dorastor (the Thanatari Broo) is described as having a Detection Blank spell. I don't recall seeing a RQ3 writeup for this spell, any clues? p.s. The reason I'm asking is we met him, and he pissed all over us requiring 2 DIs to get away. Soul Sight and Find Enemy didn't work because that's what the referee interpreted Detection Blank as doing, in the absence of a spell writeup. We'd like to know, because he might still be around somewhere. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From peter at maranci.net Fri Jan 10 01:39:17 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:39:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Vote for RQ! Message-ID: <2903.216.118.190.11.1042123157.squirrel@webmail> For possibly the first time ever, FIVE RuneQuest sites are simultaneously listed in the Die Roller's Top 50 (http://www.rpggateway.com/Ratings/) today. I can't speak for the other sites, but I know that my hits definitely go up a bit when my site is on the list, and particularly when it's in the top five. At the moment, Tony Den's site is #2, and mine is #4, so RQ may be getting a look from a number of gamers who haven't been exposed to it before. But there's a high grudge factor on the list; twits tend to vote down highly ranked sites without looking at them, in order to boost their own rankings. So I hope I'm not out of line in suggesting that you might want to visit the following sites and then rate them a "5" on the associated vote link. Anything other than a 5 apparently drags the overall results for the site *down*, incidentally. Of course you don't actually *have* to visit the sites in order to vote for them, but that would be the honorable thing to do. And they all have some great RQ material in any case. You can vote for each site once per day, by the way, so if you *really* want to go all out, you might bookmark the voting links... Here are the sites, in no particular order: RuneQuest.ZA.org (http://www.runequest.za.org/) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=6634 Blue Sable altar (http://perso.club-internet.fr/manzato/pagepersocm/runequest/) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=8232 Matti J?rvinen's RuneQuest Page (http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/runequest/indexeng.html) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=6329 Ouijas RuneQuest Source (http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/ouija.htm) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=7240 Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! (http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=3611 ->Peter From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Jan 10 01:42:54 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:42:54 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Enchanted armour - rules Message-ID: <29494.196.8.104.31.1042123374.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> I have been reading the last series of Black Company Books by Glen Cook and was wondering how one would reporduce the special armour that lady wears. Check the odds - Her armour has been imbues with spells so that it radiates a dread pesence, kind of like having a constant sence of fear projected from her when she wears the armour. So I got to thinking: It would be a pretty simple task to enchant the armour with a spell matrix, maybe as a jewel set on the breastplate, or on the helm or such. One could then put something like a serious demoralise spell in the matrix, maybe use a magic point matrix to store points so that the demoralise spirit you bind is really powerful. So far so good, but now, how do you set it so that it has this effect permenently, or for along period when a trigger is enacted? One would also need to make some sort of immunity talismen for your own people as well, or they could also suffer the armours effects. any thoughts on this? -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 01:47:19 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:47:19 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] StolenBjorn's current RQ campagin Message-ID: I am running the Pavis campagin, but plan to weave all my bought -but never played campagins together into a huge campagin like some of the biggest Warhammer campagins (riskland). I allso fill inn the areas between the detailed supplements with settings I write myself, I've made a "Warhammerinspired country in the blankland of Retrint, and make a little Duck haven in a bay west for Corflu called "Skoddeheimen"(Norwegian for "Home of the mists". (squeezing the "Sanctuary" setting in between holy country and Corflu, stuffing "Daughters of Dorkness(Menetia)" in between EOL and Erigia, and finally Eldrad between the Redlands and Balazar. I get my Lunar stuff from Issaries.inc, and related links from their site, it is very cool, I think. ------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Jan 10 01:48:28 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:48:28 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] OT: DR References: <14CB4629.25291F5F.00047AF1@aol.com> <009501c2b7d9$690bc340$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> Message-ID: <01fe01c2b7ee$2bff5b50$3410fea9@frkt5> The beta rules are far, far more complex than the original's. Take, for instance, the new winter rules: these optional rules allow for the seasons the play out thru the course of the game, affecting travel, combat, and which nations can be activated. These rules aren't especially fun, but what we've *loved* is using boats to sail up and down rivers! And the addition of new Barbarian warlords (why should Juulute be the only one?)! And twice as many magic items! The beta rules are so complex, in fact, that I'm indexing them all in Word. It's just too hard to keep track of all the rules so far. Glenn wisely kept with the tiered system of rules complexity, but our group loves lots of options. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch" To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:19 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Wow haven't heard DR mentioned in a long time keep us posted on the test 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: To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:58 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's > In a message dated 1/8/2003 11:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, jellen at ameritech.net writes: > > > Minaria, the world in which Divine Right (anyone remember > > that game? I love it and am beta-testing a reissue) is set. > > I loved that game! I also loved the Minarian Legends articles in old Dragon Magazines. I am glad to hear about a reissue. Hey, if you need any old time DR players to help playtest, give me a hollar. > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > 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 stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 01:58:39 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:58:39 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Homemade settings (scourcebooks) for Gloranta Message-ID: If anyone have made settings in one of the blanklands, or other locations, I'm extremely interested! I have made a setting in Retrint, Fronela, and is designing a duch haven in "Skoddeheimen", Prax ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it ------------------------------------------ free* for 2 months ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jan 10 02:08:52 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 08:08:52 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20Q In-Reply-To: <3E1CFBF8.2050904@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <000901c2b7f1$058c0920$670a0a0a@dohealth.com> > > For me, the RQ magic system would be the first to > go. I can't > >stand it! Takes all kinds, eh? > > > Yup tho it seems glorantha and rq magics style... are close knit. Well, back when my gaming group played RQ, we never used Glorantha except occasionally, and even then it was heavily modified. I had my own campaign world that I used for AD&D, RQ, and now 3rd Ed. D&D. The other DM in our group used a mishmash of worlds depending on his mood. In my mind, the setting and the RPG system are completely separate. Rich Allen From lance at dyasdesigns.com Fri Jan 10 02:06:15 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 09:06:15 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ D20 In-Reply-To: <15900.16214.435559.673888@suldrun.rim.net> References: <3568883.1042038167099.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <15900.16214.435559.673888@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <3E1D8FE7.9080602@dyasdesigns.com> Viktor Haag wrote: >aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > I never liked the vitality/wound thing - just appologist DnD > > hit points 'cause they weren't willing to let hit dice go. > >Mutants and Masterminds does away with hit points. The sidebar on >page 10 gives a capsule summary of the bits in M&M that differ >from that "other game" (i.e. D20 games): > > "No hit points: Characters in [M&M] do not have hit points > based on their level and [CON] bonus, and damage is not > rolled using other dice. Instead, each attack has a damage > modifier used to calculate a Difficulty Class. The character > makes a Damage saving throw against that Difficulty Class > and the result of the saving throw determines the effect or > damage the character suffers." > >Rather elegant, really. No hit points, and no dice needed other >than a D20. > > I was working on a hitpointless system before seeing this... and the similarities ummm were cool, the differences were notable (my system wasnt specifically for Superheroes and so Is I think a little grittier), I used a runequest like armor absorbtion before the saving throw was made and used riposte to do multi-attacks and used relative success on attack as the basis for damage. Anyway....many of the rules I was injecting into D20 were directly RQ inspired. No doubt about it RuneQuests combat sensibilities have retained a lot of impact on me. If the combat doesnt get results that feel like RQ, im not sure If I would like it. From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jan 10 02:09:26 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:09:26 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Detection Blank Message-ID: <4529665.1042124966532.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> IIRC Detection Blank was identical in RQ2 to countermagic with two differences: (1) It only worked on detection spells; (2) Casters of countered spells didn't know that their spells had been countered. Sounds like Sir's ref got that one on the nose! Cheers, Ash > from: "Hibbs, Phil" > date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:36:19 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Detection Blank > > One of the critters in Dorastor (the Thanatari Broo) is described as having > a Detection Blank spell. I don't recall seeing a RQ3 writeup for this spell, > any clues? > > p.s. The reason I'm asking is we met him, and he pissed all over us > requiring 2 DIs to get away. Soul Sight and Find Enemy didn't work because > that's what the referee interpreted Detection Blank as doing, in the absence > of a spell writeup. We'd like to know, because he might still be around > somewhere. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Fri Jan 10 02:16:55 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:16:55 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Enchanted armour - rules Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745D44A@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> Toni, You should look at Pete site for its Imbued Magic creation system (http://www.runequest.org/imbue.htm). That would make it for the permanent effect. To protect your own poeple, you could add some conditions in your enchantment not to affect poeple making allegeance to you or any equivalent Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : Tony Den [mailto:tiberius at runequest.za.org] Envoy? : jeudi 9 janvier 2003 15:43 ? : rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet : [RQ-Rules] Enchanted armour - rules I have been reading the last series of Black Company Books by Glen Cook and was wondering how one would reporduce the special armour that lady wears. Check the odds - Her armour has been imbues with spells so that it radiates a dread pesence, kind of like having a constant sence of fear projected from her when she wears the armour. So I got to thinking: It would be a pretty simple task to enchant the armour with a spell matrix, maybe as a jewel set on the breastplate, or on the helm or such. One could then put something like a serious demoralise spell in the matrix, maybe use a magic point matrix to store points so that the demoralise spirit you bind is really powerful. So far so good, but now, how do you set it so that it has this effect permenently, or for along period when a trigger is enacted? One would also need to make some sort of immunity talismen for your own people as well, or they could also suffer the armours effects. any thoughts on this? -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! _______________________________________________ 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 Fri Jan 10 02:23:30 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 15:23:30 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Detection Blank Message-ID: <20030109153011.8DB0E4C1DC@thinbits.com> Phil Hibbs. > One of the critters in Dorastor (the Thanatari Broo) is described as having > a Detection Blank spell. I don't recall seeing a RQ3 writeup for this spell, > any clues? I haven't either so I winged it. I ruled that it prevented all detection magic and non-mundane skills from detecting the protected target. What that means is Find Enemy, Detect Magic, Detect Iron, Soul Sight... ALL magic detection fails to find that target. Also I consider Sense Chaos as a non-mundane skill and it also fails. As for DI's... It depends where the target is in. All the usual apply with consideration to holy ground, controlled lands and such. However, I would give ties to the Detection Blank. Even close ties. > p.s. The reason I'm asking is we met him, and he pissed all over us Sounds wet and messy. > requiring 2 DIs to get away. Soul Sight and Find Enemy didn't work because > that's what the referee interpreted Detection Blank as doing, in the absence > of a spell writeup. We'd like to know, because he might still be around > somewhere. As a player my greatest frustration is when they got away. As a GM, I take pleasure in the players being frustrated. :) Jim Bickmeyer - If I'm not having fun running it I doubt the players are having fun either. From steve at perrinworlds.com Fri Jan 10 04:07:37 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:07:37 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneQuest References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1D5DF6.3030003@zunder.org.uk> Message-ID: <008101c2b801$9d2dae90$9865fea9@wizard> Just had an exchange of email with Greg Stafford. He reminded me to keep Issaries and Chaosium separate in my mind. They are two different companies these days, with two different directions. Greg has no connection to Chaosium. Issaries has the RuneQuest name (which is being finalized--it is not final as yet). They are discussing how to use it on a product. Chaosium is trying to maintain the D100 system with BRP as an open engine. So RuneQuest's attachment to the D100 system may disappear. Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Zunder (Work-Moz)" To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 3:33 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneQuest > RuneQuest as a Gloranthan game just might be too much of a conflict with > Hero Wars for Issaries to run with. > On the other hand, as a true open engine, it could seize the high ground > again. Compared to D&D it's still a much better 2nd generation > simulationist game system. > > -- > Tom Zunder > tom at zunder.org.uk > www.elric.org.uk > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 04:09:51 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:09:51 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <03A12BE7.0143187C.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/9/2003 4:43:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > Funny how people are equating death of RQ with death of Glorantha. As far as I can tell there's about 3 times the number of people playing games in Glorantha now Hero Wars is out as was this time two years back. Providing the powers that be can maintain interest long enough to keep turning out new stuff I can't see it going the way of the dodo for a long while > yet. Well first, how can you tell? Did you take a survey or something? Second, two years ago HW was just being released or had just been released. The fact is that HW (shortly to become HQ) is a very inaccessible system and is not likely to become very popular in the future. It is definitely not the type of system that will hold any interest to a 16 year old wanting to get into the hobby. Devin From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jan 10 05:22:02 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:22:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <4583727.1042136522335.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> (This is really off topic, all Glorantha and not a lot of RQ, sorry, I'll shut up after this... well, maybe.) Here's how I back up Glorantha being alive and well: - The two biggest gaming societies I'm associated with (one with 60 members and one with 150 members) didn't have anyone doing anything Gloranthan at the start of 2000. Now there are over 30 people playing HW (4 groups) and RQ (1 group) over both. - The UK distributor of HW says it's one of their best selling RPG lines. - There's were more new commercially available products for Glorantha out in 2000/01 than at any time previous apart from 1982/3. This excludes RickM's reprints BTW. - According to them that was there, Convulsion wasn't just a collection of the usual suspects, but had some new faces there. It's may be sad but true (especially from someone that didn't like the system when he first saw it) but HW is more accessible for new players than either DnD or RQ. The main things that put people off traditional RPGS are the martial element and the bookeeping. While RQ or DnD can be bookeeping and combat light, the thrust of the rules are definately slanted in that direction. HW isn't. To be honest, if 16 year old power gamers don't want to play in Glorantha, fine, I'll wait 'til they're in their 20s to assimilate the ones that are left. From joemills at columbus.rr.com Fri Jan 10 06:06:11 2003 From: joemills at columbus.rr.com (Joe Mills) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:06:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #85 - 16 msgs References: <20030109004402.D664B4C274@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <000f01c2b812$2ca18460$dae5a618@columbus.rr.com> > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > > Ciao > Paul sommer I'm running a RQ3 PBEM campaign in Pavis, 1610. -- Joe From peter at maranci.net Fri Jan 10 06:49:40 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:49:40 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: <1774.216.118.190.11.1042141780.squirrel@webmail> * Steve Perrin wrote: >He reminded me to keep Issaries and Chaosium separate in my mind. They are two different companies these days, with two different directions. Greg has no connection to Chaosium. I'm truly sorry to say that that improves my opinion of Chaosium. >Issaries has the RuneQuest name (which is being finalized--it is not final as yet). They are discussing how to use it on a product. That's very disturbing news! So Issaries might put out some Hero Wars piece of...material...and call it "RuneQuest"?!? That's bleeping awful. And not just because I really dislike Hero Wars, and have come to hate the "new" Glorantha. I don't plan to support whatever Issaries new "RuneQuest" is on my site, but if they're taking even the name away from the RQ system, well, I just don't know. I mean, am I going to have to deal with a bunch of obnoxious Gloranthan scholars coming to my site and making snotty remarks about it not being true to Greg's vision? If so, I'm going to feel pretty stupid about having acquired the runequest.org domain. I'll be tempted to turn it into a "Hero Wars' RuneQuest sucks!" page, or something. :D And I'd have to find a new name for my site...jeeze, I really hate the thought of it. Six years of building up my readership and standing in the search engines wasted. >Chaosium is trying to maintain the D100 system with BRP as an open engine. Something I *begged* them to do ten years ago. Sigh. >So RuneQuest's attachment to the D100 system may disappear. So confusing and annoying...grrrrrrrr... Thanks for the info, though, Steve... ->Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 10 06:52:16 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 19:52:16 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A14@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Devin: >The fact is that HW ... is a very inaccessible system I'm not so sure that's as true as it may appear. It's very inaccessible to us old simulationists, but I don't think new players have such a hard time with it. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 06:54:00 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:54:00 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <47B7B7AA.42BB594C.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/9/2003 1:22:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > It's may be sad but true (especially from someone that didn't like the system when he first saw it) but HW is more accessible for new players than either DnD or RQ. The main things that put people off traditional RPGS are the martial element and the bookeeping. While RQ or DnD can be bookeeping and combat light, the thrust of the rules are definately slanted in that direction. HW isn't. To be honest, if 16 year old power gamers don't want to play in Glorantha, fine, I'll wait 'til they're in their 20s to assimilate the ones that are left. > > From what I've seen, with the combination of RickM's reprints and new Gloranthan material for HW, RQ is making a bit of > a comeback as well. > > Cheers, > > Ash The reason HW is making a comeback is because it arose from a situation where nothing was available at all. When you go from no active Gloranthan system at all to a new one you are going to, by definition, pick up people. The fact is, however, that HW is very inaccessible to new gamers because it has no hard and fast ruleset. The rules are counter-intuitive and not newbie friendly since they require the DM to basically decide all of the specifics as they go. Most new DMs want their hand held and that requires, for better or worse, voluminous amounts of rules. Most newbie RPers also want action and combat and learn how to truly role play as they mature as gamers. In any event, sales figures support my position overwhelmingly. I am not, BTW, saying HW is a bad system. I am merely saying that it is very unlikely that most (aside from antecdotal incidents like your gaming association) new 16 year old role players are going to make their leap into the hobby by way of HW. P.S. List admin - if this is veering too much off topic, please chastise me and I will stop. Regards, Devin From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 06:57:20 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:57:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: <5C41BA3E.383F6A50.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/9/2003 2:52:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, phil.hibbs at cgey.com writes: > I'm not so sure that's as true as it may appear. It's very inaccessible to > us old simulationists, but I don't think new players have > such a hard time > with it. > > Phil Hibbs. Time will tell. I can only imagine a DM who has never ever role played before being presented with a system like HW where there is basically no guidance as to what magic powers actually do specifically and a system like D&D or, for that matter, RQ2 or 3 where each and every spell is precisely detailed as to its precise effects. HW requires, IMO, a lot of creative storytelling on the part of the DM and, quite frankly, a good working knowledge of the RQ system that predated it to work well. Devin From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 06:59:13 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:59:13 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: <0F8A954C.0771B67D.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/9/2003 2:49:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, peter at maranci.net writes: > I mean, am I going to have to deal with a bunch of obnoxious Gloranthan > scholars coming to my site and making snotty remarks about > it not being true to Greg's vision? If they do I'll help you batter them down. Devin (fellow anti-scholar) From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jan 10 07:13:19 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:13:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #85 - 16 msgs In-Reply-To: <000f01c2b812$2ca18460$dae5a618@columbus.rr.com> Message-ID: <20030109201319.71653.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com> --- Joe Mills wrote: > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this > list are > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or > 3 campaign at the > present and if so in what area/geographical > location of glorantha?? I am running a campaing in the Mirror Sea Bay (Currently in Deeper). I use a mixture of RQ 2/3/4+ rules Leon Kirshtein __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From pontus.amberg at telia.com Fri Jan 10 07:39:05 2003 From: pontus.amberg at telia.com (Pontus Amberg) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 21:39:05 +0100 Subject: SV: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's In-Reply-To: <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <000901c2b81f$41a82230$3200a8c0@brainst8> I run one using RuneQuest 3 where the characters are in Prax (Pavis). /Pontus -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Fr?n: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] F?r paul Sommer Skickat: den 8 januari 2003 23:57 Till: rq-rules at crashbox.com ?mne: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Hi guys jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? Ciao Paul sommer ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" --- 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 trentfs at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 10 07:52:56 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:52:56 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 Runequest/Glorantha Message-ID: On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:54:00 -0500 DevinC at aol.com wrote: > I am not, BTW, saying HW is a bad system. I am > merely saying that it is very unlikely that > most (aside from antecdotal incidents like your > gaming association) new 16 year old role > players are going to make their leap into the > hobby by way of HW. > Perhaps I'm wrong here (the last HW product I bought was the Deluxe Edition rules) but the fact that HW (apparently) expects not only GMs but even players to assimilate *several* 200+pp books of background data before they can really appreciate the game would be more than enough to frighten away almost all potential new players, at least in my experience. Recalling the near-revolt my players had when I tried to make them read 5pp cult write-ups, I can only imagine the reaction if I'd assigned them the Glorantha Intro book PLUS Thunder Rebels PLUS Storm Tribe (not even mentioning the rules!). Talk about a steep learning curve... Really not trying to engage a pro/anti-HW debate, just describing the way it appears on the shelves at the local game shop, Trent From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 10 08:22:57 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 13:22:57 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:49:40 -0500 (EST) Peter Maranci wrote: > That's very disturbing news! So Issaries might > put out some Hero Wars > piece of...material...and call it > "RuneQuest"?!? That's bleeping awful. > And not just because I really dislike Hero > Wars, and have come to hate the > "new" Glorantha. I don't plan to support > whatever Issaries new "RuneQuest" > is on my site, but if they're taking even the > name away from the RQ > system, well, I just don't know. > My heart sank when I read Steve's news, and I'm glad to see someone else is bothered as well. While Greg Stafford may not necessarily realize it, for as many people to whom RuneQuest=Glorantha there are perhaps just as many (especially those who came up through RQ3 -- like me) to whom RuneQuest=BRP, and to release some non-BRP Gloranthan product called "RuneQuest" would (or at least SHOULD)create as much or more confusion, resentment, and outrage as when RQ3 tried to de-emphasize Glorantha. I can understand Greg wanting to keep the RuneQuest trademark away from anyone else, and if the most effective way to do so is to release some HW-related product called RuneQuest I can understand why he might consider doing that, but I still can't see how whatever that product might be (assuming it has nothing to do with BRP/RQ1-3) wouldn't leave a *lot* of people feeling cheated and betrayed. A much better tactic, IMO, would be for Greg to license the trademark back to Chaosium and let them use it as an umbrella-name for their newly-revitalizing BRP efforts. Although very few people under 30 are likely to have ever actually *played* the game, I daresay the brand/trademark might still carry some cachet among 'serious' gamers, including those who haven't necessarily even *heard* of Glorantha, for its "legendary" status. Trent From matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi Fri Jan 10 11:19:02 2003 From: matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Matti_J=E4rvinen?=) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 02:19:02 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Re:active currnet runequest campaign's References: <20030108221415.21D6E4C265@thinbits.com> <3E1CACA6.DAACD256@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <012e01c2b83d$ef622e20$0515670a@arenanet.fi> > jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are > running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign > at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of > glorantha?? I run two active Finnish RuneQuest campaigns in Glorantha, named Riskimaa (Riskland) and Ehilmin valo (The Light of Ehilm). My Riskland Campaign is the Riskland Campaign of the Dorastor Book with some own additions but The Light of Ehilm is set in Daran (in Ralios) and I have written the description of Daran using my ideas of the Stygian Church of Saint Ehilm. I also have third non active RuneQuest game, Tulen maa (The Land of Fire), which is set in Teshnos. I have used HW material in it and written more cultural info on Teshnos. I hope my Teshnos cultural article will be published in the English Glorantha fanzine of Kalikos (Finnish Gloranthan Association), The Zin Letter, whose chief editor I am. By the way, RuneQuest is very popular RPG in Finland and the Finnish RuneQuest books are still available. I also know many quite young players who play RuneQuest in Glorantha, so I think RuneQuest isn't dying out in Finland. Our Gloranthan Association supports Glorantha with both RuneQuest and Hero Wars. Personally, I don't like the Hero Wars rules and prefer RuneQuest to Hero Wars but the Hero Wars (or soon HeroQuest) material can be quite useful when running Glorantha with RuneQuest. Well, this is the first time I write on this list. :) Matti J?rvinen Email: matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi Home Page: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/englanti.html RuneQuest Page: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/runequest/indexeng.html From paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk Fri Jan 10 10:36:25 2003 From: paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk (paul Sommer) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 00:36:25 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: result Current running RQ campaigns References: <20030109204804.610224C266@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3E1E0779.235F3A92@get2net.dk> Current running games or campaigns with RQ From: "Alan Chambers" I'm currently running a RQ2/3 hybrid game, but it's in my own world. From: "Jim Bickmeyer" Until this last year I had been running RQ3 (modified) in four areas. 1 Gloranthaian Griffin Island. 2 Dragon Pass. 3 Sun County/Pavis. 4 The West and Sog City. From: "Andrew Vallance" RuneQuest 2 campaign currently based in and around Pavis County at the moment, but about to shift down to the Defender's Shore. From: "J and/or Ellen" My PBEM is set in the Young Kingdoms. The campaign is on hiatus at the moment, however, as I overhaul my house rules. Once I'm done, I'll restart the YK campaign and launch Glorantha, probably at Apple Lane. From: "Tony Den" I am, my group only p;lays RQ3 at the moment. We don't use Glorantha From: Peter Johansson Although I'm currently having a break in my RQ/Glorantha campaign to play Pendragon, it is still very much alive in my head and I will pick it up again during the spring. It is situated in Sartar at a Humakti fort/temple called Marsh End (next to Upland Marsh). We use a RQ3 modified version of RQ2, but it is still mostly RQ2. From: "Gianni" I have been a player in a RQ2 campaign for slightly more than 1 year. We play at least once a month. The party is basically a group of Sartarites who got in trouble with the Lunars and were sentenced to enslavement. We were deported from Sartar to Raus Fort through Prax. Now we are playing in and around the Great Bog, doing missions for Duke Raus, our master, as far north as Sun County, and as far south as Corflu. The GM is a veteran RQ2 GM and player. None of the players ever played RuneQuest (I did play/master CoC and other BRPS-based rolegames, the other players did not). Everybody loves the rules and the setting. From: "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch" well I run one, but no where near glorantha From: Michael Christian I would probably call mine semi-active as life frequently gets in the way and are often a month+ between sessions. I don't run a Gloranthan game though. Fantasy Europe: Roman Empire at its height From: Gerall Kahla I'm currently trying out the RQ3 rules in a world that's part of Glorantha, but not on any map. (Read: I'm winging it!) From: "Steve Perrin" I last ran my version of RQ (SPQR for the obligatory plug) about three years ago. From: "Bjorn Stolen" I am running the Pavis campagin, From: "Hibbs, Phil" RQ3, Dorastor (Riskland), Rune level characters From: GameMaster1978 at cs.com I have an RQ campaign running in the old "Powers & Perils" setting "Perilous Lands." From: "Joe Mills" I'm running a RQ3 PBEM campaign in Pavis, 1610. From: Leon Kirshtein I am running a campaing in the Mirror Sea Bay (Currently in Deeper). I use a mixture of RQ 2/3/4+ rules From: "Pontus Amberg" I run one using RuneQuest 3 where the characters are in Prax (Pavis). From vhaag at rim.net Fri Jan 10 10:30:01 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:30:01 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <15902.1529.464880.284399@suldrun.rim.net> trentfs at ix.netcom.com writes: > A much better tactic, IMO, would be for Greg to license the > trademark back to Chaosium and let them use it as an > umbrella-name for their newly-revitalizing BRP > efforts. A very good suggestion, and someone should politely ask Greg if he would consider this, so that RuneQuest==BRP could survive. On the other hand, I'm not sure that Chaosium would be at all interested in doing that. They already have Stormbringer; does RQ3 really have a viable shelf-life without Glorantha? I'm not sure it does. What would be really nice is if Greg licensed the RQ trademark to Rick to permit him to reprint at least RQ2. It would be nice if some of the RQ3 materials could also be reprinted over time as well, but I'd be happy if RQ2 by itself were reprinted to go with the other fine work that Rick's already done. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels." From ulo at metrocast.net Fri Jan 10 12:51:42 2003 From: ulo at metrocast.net (Christopher E. Fasulo) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 20:51:42 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: result Current running RQ campaigns References: <20030109204804.610224C266@thinbits.com> <3E1E0779.235F3A92@get2net.dk> Message-ID: <001c01c2b84a$d2d99240$0100a8c0@Beowulf> I just joined the list a day ago, so I hope I'm doing this right. I've been running RQ3 in middle earth, centered in dunland for about 2 years now, but before that it was fantasy earth at 100A.D. Christopher ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul Sommer" To: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 6:36 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: result Current running RQ campaigns > Current running games or campaigns with RQ > > From: "Alan Chambers" > I'm currently running a RQ2/3 hybrid game, but it's in my own world. > > From: "Jim Bickmeyer" > Until this last year I had been running RQ3 (modified) in four areas. 1 > Gloranthaian Griffin Island. 2 Dragon Pass. 3 Sun County/Pavis. 4 The West > and Sog City. > > From: "Andrew Vallance" > RuneQuest 2 campaign currently based in and around Pavis > County at the moment, but about to shift down to the Defender's > Shore. > > From: "J and/or Ellen" > My PBEM is set in the Young Kingdoms. The campaign is on hiatus at the > moment, however, as I overhaul my house rules. Once I'm done, I'll restart > the YK campaign and launch Glorantha, probably at Apple Lane. > > From: "Tony Den" > I am, my group only p;lays RQ3 at the moment. We don't use Glorantha > > From: Peter Johansson > Although I'm currently having a break in my RQ/Glorantha campaign to > play Pendragon, it is still very much alive in my head and I will pick > it up again during the spring. It is situated in Sartar at a Humakti > fort/temple called Marsh End (next to Upland Marsh). We use a RQ3 > modified version of RQ2, but it is still mostly RQ2. > > From: "Gianni" > I have been a player in a RQ2 campaign for slightly more than 1 year. We > play at least once a month. > The party is basically a group of Sartarites who got in trouble with the > Lunars and were sentenced to enslavement. We were deported from Sartar to > Raus Fort through Prax. Now we are playing in and around the Great Bog, > doing missions for Duke Raus, our master, as far north as Sun County, and as > far south as Corflu. > The GM is a veteran RQ2 GM and player. None of the players ever played > RuneQuest (I did play/master CoC and other BRPS-based rolegames, the other > players did not). Everybody loves the rules and the setting. > > From: "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch" > well I run one, but no where near glorantha > > From: Michael Christian > I would probably call mine semi-active as life frequently gets in the way > and are often a month+ between sessions. I don't run a Gloranthan game > though. Fantasy Europe: Roman Empire at its height > > From: Gerall Kahla > I'm currently trying out the RQ3 rules in a world that's > part of Glorantha, but not on any map. (Read: I'm winging it!) > > From: "Steve Perrin" > I last ran my version of RQ (SPQR for the obligatory plug) about three years > ago. > > From: "Bjorn Stolen" > I am running the Pavis campagin, > > From: "Hibbs, Phil" > RQ3, Dorastor (Riskland), Rune level characters > > From: GameMaster1978 at cs.com > I have an RQ campaign running in the old "Powers & Perils" setting "Perilous > Lands." > > From: "Joe Mills" > I'm running a RQ3 PBEM campaign in Pavis, 1610. > > From: Leon Kirshtein > I am running a campaing in the Mirror Sea Bay > (Currently in Deeper). I use a mixture of RQ 2/3/4+ > rules > > From: "Pontus Amberg" > I run one using RuneQuest 3 where the characters are in Prax (Pavis). > > From paul sommer paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk > Currently running my guys in the classic pavis setting with RQ3 much adapted > > Thanks guys ... > that gives us an overview > > Ciao > Paul sommer > > > > --- 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 trentfs at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 10 13:01:44 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 18:01:44 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: result Current running RQ campaigns Message-ID: Interesting that only about half the current campaigns are Glorantha-set. Mine were always Gloranthan but the last one ended in 1997 (i.e. pre-HW) and if I were to start a new one I don't know if I'd bother with Glorantha again. Sure I'm still fond of the old RQ2-vintage settings (Balazar, Pavis, Raus Fort), but Fantasy Earth has also been intriguing me. One thing is certain -- I no longer have the time, energy, or even desire to try and create my own fantasy world from scratch. Trent From ericla at ultranet.com Fri Jan 10 18:30:13 2003 From: ericla at ultranet.com (Eric Leventhal Arthen) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 02:30:13 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] result Current running RQ campaigns In-Reply-To: <3E1E0779.235F3A92@get2net.dk> References: <20030109204804.610224C266@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030110022815.00a2f170@pop.rcn.com> At 06:36 PM 1/9/03, you wrote: >Current running games or campaigns with RQ >------ I am running, with another GM, an RQ3 game that is in worlds of our own making. My son (15yrs) and a few of his friends are doing various gaming, but often are using RQ. Eric Leventhal Arthen ericla at ultranet.com From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 18:35:55 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:35:55 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: I'm 27, have a girlfriend, two kids, two cats a dog and a job. This gives me about 30 minutes per day to dedicate to roleplaying (Apart from the evenings I actually play.) A substansual part of this time the past 3 months have been spent on trying to dig up some material from GLorantha. So far, I've found some deacent stuff on Issaries' pages and "David Dunham's Glorantha table of contents" The stuff from Issaries available on the net about the Lunar Empire is in my oppinion very good; good enough for me to run several campagins in Dara Happa. (But then I have never found any alternative Dara Happa info) I really can't see what is so bad about that Lunar survey. As of the HW rules and it's inaccesibility, I haven't got a clue. I'll never buy them, never use them; only take the stuff written about Glorantha on those sites and play in that world with the beloved d100 system. According to one of the writers to this site, it is inaccessible because it doesn't herd the GM with loads of rules, well, not the best argument in my oppinion. If you've ever played White Wolf (Werewolf, Mage, Vampire, etc.) games, the rules takes about 2 pages of the sourcebook, leaving the GM to take all decitions (target no. difficulty, soke modifiers, etc) Still the game took off, especially among newbees (I think?) ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk Fri Jan 10 18:43:22 2003 From: ameron1 at blueyonder.co.uk (Ian 'Earl' Martin) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:43:22 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Current Games In-Reply-To: <20030109204804.610224C266@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <000101c2b87b$f34cf3b0$fc7ba8c0@main> Currently I run a Runequest 2/3 campaign around the Pavis area in 1620 with a 4 person group. I'm rebuilding my runequest/glorantha stuff as I go and have had some great help and advice along the way. The groups running through the first adventure in the strangers in prax book where they mix it with the coders, but alas they worked together for the first ever time, killed the coder bow-woman and ran off to new pavis with her head, making them quite the outlaws at the moment. Players have such a way of ruining a good adventure :) Ian 'Earl' Martin From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Fri Jan 10 18:52:03 2003 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:52:03 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Enchanted armour - rules References: <29494.196.8.104.31.1042123374.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <3E1E7BA3.486636C3@libra.seed.net.tw> Well, what about sorcery? Diminish Attack skill (pretty much the effect of Demoralize - just describe it as a fearful aura) multispelled (to a high number - basically anyone who could approach her) and nigh-permanent (depending on style of sorcery you use...). This would have an intensity (the penalty) and a MP backing it for the resistance checks. Then put on a condition of 'affects enemies of the wearer' or 'affects non-Whatevers'... With the last condition, getting the armor wouldn't be so cool as it would still affect the party... Jeremy Tony Den wrote: > I have been reading the last series of Black Company Books by Glen Cook > and was wondering how one would reporduce the special armour that lady > wears. Check the odds - Her armour has been imbues with spells so that it > radiates a dread pesence, kind of like having a constant sence of fear > projected from her when she wears the armour. So I got to thinking: > > It would be a pretty simple task to enchant the armour with a spell > matrix, maybe as a jewel set on the breastplate, or on the helm or such. > One could then put something like a serious demoralise spell in the > matrix, maybe use a magic point matrix to store points so that the > demoralise spirit you bind is really powerful. So far so good, but now, > how do you set it so that it has this effect permenently, or for along > period when a trigger is enacted? One would also need to make some sort > of immunity talismen for your own people as well, or they could also > suffer the armours effects. any thoughts on this? > > -- > Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jan 10 19:55:57 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 09:55:57 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <15902.1529.464880.284399@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <004f01c2b886$176b6d80$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello all > What would be really nice is if Greg licensed the RQ trademark to > Rick to permit him to reprint at least RQ2. It would be nice if > some of the RQ3 materials could also be reprinted over time as > well, but I'd be happy if RQ2 by itself were reprinted to go with > the other fine work that Rick's already done. If this were to happen, I am positive that RQ2 would become a hit! RQ2 plis all of Rick's reprints... now *that* would be a fine line in rolegames! G. From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jan 10 20:02:33 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:02:33 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <1774.216.118.190.11.1042141780.squirrel@webmail> Message-ID: <007101c2b887$03482270$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello Peter > >Issaries has the RuneQuest name (which is being finalized--it is not > final as yet). They are discussing how to use it on a product. > > That's very disturbing news! So Issaries might put out some Hero Wars > piece of...material...and call it "RuneQuest"?!? That's bleeping awful. > And not just because I really dislike Hero Wars, and have come to hate the > "new" Glorantha. I don't plan to support whatever Issaries new "RuneQuest" > is on my site, but if they're taking even the name away from the RQ > system, well, I just don't know. > > I mean, am I going to have to deal with a bunch of obnoxious Gloranthan > scholars coming to my site and making snotty remarks about it not being > true to Greg's vision? > > If so, I'm going to feel pretty stupid about having acquired the > runequest.org domain. I'll be tempted to turn it into a "Hero Wars' > RuneQuest sucks!" page, or something. :D And I'd have to find a new name > for my site...jeeze, I really hate the thought of it. Six years of > building up my readership and standing in the search engines wasted. Why do you think so? Since the RQ supplements are OOP (except for Rick's reprints), I think there are hundreds of RQ referees scouring the internet for RQ material. I'm sure your site is one of their favourite havens, and it shall remain such even if Issaries releases some "RQ"-named supplement. Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jan 10 20:14:21 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:14:21 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <15902.1529.464880.284399@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <00c101c2b888$a9592550$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello all > > A much better tactic, IMO, would be for Greg to license the > > trademark back to Chaosium and let them use it as an > > umbrella-name for their newly-revitalizing BRP > > efforts. > > A very good suggestion, and someone should politely ask Greg if > he would consider this, so that RuneQuest==BRP could survive. On > the other hand, I'm not sure that Chaosium would be at all > interested in doing that. Maybe we could send a kind of petition to Greg? After all, bringing new players to a 'new' RQ rolegame could also boost the sales of Issaries material (assumed the 'new' RQ would retain Glorantha as its default setting). Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jan 10 20:51:40 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 09:51:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: <7913783.1042192300685.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Gianni said: "RQ2 plus all of Rick's reprints... now *that* would be a fine line in rolegames!" The only problem I'd have with that is there's very little in that lot wasn't out in 1983. If someone could persuade the Staffordenfuhrer to officially sanction HW -> RQ conversions on a non-profit making basis (and someone be willing to do it) it would stand a better chance. The nearest comparison I can think of is with the classic Traveller reprints. From what I've seen of them is that they're only selling to classic Traveller enthusiasts and not picking up huge numbers of new players. Cheers, Ash PS: As a caveat, most people seem to find their way into Traveller these days via GURPS. From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 21:04:41 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 05:04:41 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: <1728BCD0.42F921B1.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 3:55:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, gianni at basicrps.com writes: > If this were to happen, I am positive that RQ2 would become a hit! RQ2 plis > all of Rick's reprints... now *that* would be a fine line > in rolegames! What's this thing called "Rick's Reprints"? Devin From DevinC at aol.com Fri Jan 10 21:11:49 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 05:11:49 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <71315BEE.0B41D577.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 2:35:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, stolenbjorn at hotmail.com writes: > According to one of the writers to this site, it is inaccessible because it doesn't herd the GM with loads of rules, well, not the best argument in my oppinion. If you've ever played White Wolf (Werewolf, Mage, Vampire, etc.) games, the rules takes about 2 pages of the sourcebook, leaving the GM to take all decitions (target no. difficulty, soke modifiers, etc) > Still the game took off, especially among newbees (I think?) Bjorn, unless you actually take a look at the HW system you really cannot get the gist of what I mean by HW being sparse on its rules. HW is basically smack midway between traditional RPGs like D&D and Traveller and Storytelling RPGs like Amber diceless. To my mind, this has made it inadequate in both arenas. For example, there is no description of what a Truesword spell does in HW. Indeed there are no spells even defined. Instead, the player basically makes up any powers or spells he wants to have, these are assigned a generic effect value that is basically the same for all spells, and gets the GM's approval. It is now up to the player and the GM to come up with, in descriptive terms, what the Truesword spell is and any special effects or circumstances that might arise from its use. This means, for example, no two games of Gloranthan HW will ever look even remotely the same. There is almost no transportability because there are no specific rules. Steve Perrin's Truesword in his HW game might be completely different from Truesword in my game. And while this flexibility can possibly be regarded as a strength because it frees the GM from the shackles of rules (in other words, he gets to decide everything about Truesword and make it exactly as he envisions it), it also places a huge burden on a newbie GM who has to basically figure out everything about every spell, weapon, magic item, cult, etc. on the fly! Devin From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 10 20:40:20 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:40:20 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] for Rich Allen Message-ID: Rich, I'd be interested to know more about those D20 system games that get rid of class, that changed the HP system and the like, and where to find more information on same. Also, did some games get rid of the Level/XP system and if yes, how do they do with character experience and improvement (acquiring skills, feats, spells, ...). As it is not a RQ-rules thread, please answer me privately : karamo at freesurf.fr Thanks. Alain. D20 is very close in concept to BRP; it would take very little editing to make the two compatible. D20 already borrows quite a bit from RuneQuest, and in my opinion adds some mechanics that were sorely lacking in RQ3. You can dump the class system (other D20 games have), you can change the HP system (other D20 games have), and on and on. The appeal to doing this is that the D20 label has an instantaneous meaning to thousands of RPGers who are playing D20 games right now. Like it or not, RuneQuest is no longer being supported, published, or played all that much. Rich Allen --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Jan 10 21:42:38 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:42:38 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Enchanted Armour - rules Message-ID: <5776.196.8.104.31.1042195358.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Jermey Martin Wrote; Well, what about sorcery? Diminish Attack skill (pretty much the effect of Demoralize - just describe it as a fearful aura) multispelled (to a high number - basically anyone who could approach her) and nigh-permanent (depending on style of sorcery you use...). This would have an intensity (the penalty) and a MP backing it for the resistance checks. Then put on a condition of 'affects enemies of the wearer' or 'affects non-Whatevers'... With the last condition, getting the armor wouldn't be so cool as it would still affect the party... Jeremy Aargh, fould sorcery:) Thanks, that would make far more sence. I wrote this at work with no sight of the rules,so had to check my memory which is better on Spirit and divine than Sorcery. Tony -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jan 10 22:04:59 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:04:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <5426169.1042196699525.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Devin said something I have to reply to, sorry it's HW related, but as it's untrue... "For example, there is no description of what a Truesword spell does in HW." The Truesword feat, and every other divine feat, is precisely defined in HW, unless the GM wants to change how it works. There's no burden on the referee at all - if he wants he can just let the default result for a feat stand. Humakts Truesword Stroke works identically to Orlanth's Swordhelp and Babeestor's Axe Trance - it's an augment to, or replacement for, whatever mundane ability character A is trying to nut character B with. Unlike RQ (FREX) which takes 7 or 8 pages (IIRC) of closely packed type describing how individual runespells work, the three main magic systems in HW can be described in three sentences: - Spirit's in fetchs act as extra APs; - Divine Feats increase target numbers; - Sorcery spells provide an edge to a character's AP bid. Bloody typical, I end up a RQ advocate on HW lists and seem to have ended up a HW advocate on here. Sorry y'all! Cheers, Ash From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 10 22:18:18 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:18:18 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sharing homewritten surveys of parts of Glorantha Message-ID: Matti J?rvinen: I would very much like to get my hands (eyes) on your Daran setting as I'm kind of collecting material on Glorantha. My project is to get a survey of Glorantha for personal use just as detailed and brilliant as the Sun Dome, Pavis and Dorastor settings. So far I've borrowed my brother in law's Sartar setting, taken Lunar Empire, Erigia, Carmania and the lunar cultures west of Sweet sea from Issaries.com and made a little Warhammerish state in Retrint, and another for Balazar. I allso have some promising stuff from the internet on Billini and Aggar. (Inspired by Willbour Smith's novels from southern Africa). I've allso stuffed "Daughters of darkness" "Sanctuary" and "Eldrad" into Glorantha allthough with some diffeculties. My next projects are writing a "sourcebook" on "Holy Country", and a little Duck haven between "Defenders shore" and "Holy Country" (in southern Prax). If any of you have some material on HC, I'd be very interested. If any of you have some stuff you after reading this think would interest me or you're interested in the stuff I've written (-mine is not online, but I could mail it to you), you're welcome to mail me! By the way: As I'm not that good in Finnish; is your material online (in Norwegian or) English somewhere? (Just some engightenment to the rest of you: Allthough Finland and Norway are neighbour countries, the languages are as different as english and chinese.) ------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 10 23:37:58 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:37:58 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rick's Reprints Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A1A@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Devin: >What's this thing called "Rick's Reprints"? http://www.glorantha.co.uk/shop/shop.html Phil Hibbs ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Sat Jan 11 01:54:26 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:54:26 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Enchanted Armour - rules Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A20@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> >Diminish Attack skill (pretty much the effect of Demoralize - just describe >it as a fearful aura) multispelled (to a high number - basically anyone who >could approach her) and nigh-permanent (depending on style of sorcery you >use...). This would have an intensity (the penalty) and a MP backing it >for the resistance checks. Then put on a condition of 'affects enemies of >the wearer' or 'affects non-Whatevers'... I would say that you can't cast a long-duration spell that affects anyone that comes into the radius of the spell - that's too much like a portable Warding. Overcoming MPs is done when the spell is cast, that's it. You can't do Multispell 10 Venom and just have it hit the first 10 people that come into range. Also, you can't put conditions on a spell. Where's the enchantment in all this? If it's a long-duration spell, it doesn't need an enchantment. Here's my suggestion, based on a liberal interpretation of the rules that I've seen Sandy use. Spell Spirit Binding Enchantment (2pts): contains Demoralize Spell Spirit Magic Point Matrix Enchantment: Extra MPs for the spirit 1 point linking condition between Binding and MPME (may not be necessary at GM's option if the two bindings are created as one). 1 point Activation condition (non-ally comes within 50m) Total cost: 4 POW + points in MPME. A high-powered Spell Spirit is of course cheaper on POW but harder to get. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From nikk at cyber-rights.net Sat Jan 11 02:18:33 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:18:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Arroin/Detection Blank/Active Campaigns/Andrew Mellinger Message-ID: <200301101518.h0AFIX33085959@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ARROIN There is no official cult write up of this cult. In River of Cradles it's a subcult to Chalana Arroy. I've added some additional information to pad it out as a subcult on my webpage: http://wwwcrashbox.com/nikk/trstconv.htm Which might make for a playable Arroini character. DETECTION BLANK IIRC this is a Cacodemon spell. So it's RQIII write up will be in Elder Secrets Book One. I think it stops you from being deteced by detection spells, or maybe as being chaotic (or is that False Form)? ACTIVE CAMPAIGNS I currently run a campaign set in Otkorion, 1623 ST, about two or three times a year (for a weekend at a time). The characters are all high level rune level characters, and the campaign is heading into it's seventh year of existence. I'm tempted to begin running a Dorastor campaign, and maybe work out a lot more Dorastor information. For me the Dorastor book just didn't cut it - not enough information, too... handwaving about what really went on. If I was to run a non-Gloranthan campaign I wouldn't use RuneQuest, I think there are better systems out there - but not for Glorantha. Especially not after I've spent years fiddling with the system to get it _just_ right and to mimic Glorantha properly. Saying that I don't think I would really want to run a non-Glorathan fantasy game either ways. ANDREW MELLINGER Is he around? I need a quick word with him so I can update my webpage... Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj4e5EcWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzYTB AJ9HPRyRycgWBxpPUu4vXor3Yi7sFgCfeSuG52FOhM6mvsBFsxZXCf1JU0I= =/xfK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From nikk at cyber-rights.net Sat Jan 11 02:20:51 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:20:51 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acid Message-ID: <200301101520.h0AFKpSV087472@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Oh, and with acid damage I actually rule that magical armour gets burnt away just like normal armour. My players complained once and said that this made no sense, and then I pointed out that in a game of magic derived from gods who once walked the earth, what place did common sense have? Basically I imagine protection spells et al as just creating magical equivalents of real world armour, with additional magical effects (like sound and visual effects) when cast. So a naked Humakti who casts shield would have some semi-emphemeral suit of armour on as he attacked. Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj4e5NIWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzVbJ AJ9S6pVJRTBX3rPY+EvUzk5rxWBpYACgooe9mmOLt1suVuzuo9CGEUvUcm4= =ENlf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From bick10 at attbi.com Sat Jan 11 02:34:56 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:34:56 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Enchanted Armour - rules Message-ID: <20030110154145.6DB2B4C1DC@thinbits.com> As a GM, I too have struggled with using game mechanics to get magic effects and items that I wanted. I have finally decided that in certian cases I would just ignore the mechanics in favor of the item and magic effects. I term these major magical items. I say why let the rules get in my way in this case. So, just make the armor with the effects you want. Be careful not to overdo it though. Jim Bickmeyer From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Jan 11 02:27:12 2003 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 23:27:12 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <7913783.1042192300685.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <3E1EE650.188871D9@libra.seed.net.tw> > > PS: As a caveat, most people seem to find their way into Traveller these days via GURPS. What a GREAT idea! GURPS Glorantha!! ... Sorry. Sorry. Very sorry... ;-) Jeremy From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sat Jan 11 02:31:28 2003 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 23:31:28 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] for Rich Allen References: Message-ID: <3E1EE74F.37CB318A@libra.seed.net.tw> Rich or whoever, I'm living in Taiwan, but going back to the US for Chinese New Year and also interested in D20 without classes, levels, whatever... What would be the best D20 system to buy and look into? Thanks, Jeremy From bick10 at attbi.com Sat Jan 11 02:41:04 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:41:04 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: <20030110162402.919774C1DC@thinbits.com> > PS: As a caveat, most people seem to find their way into Traveller these days > via GURPS. > > What a GREAT idea! GURPS Glorantha!! > But Jeremy, I heard someone did that. One of my players did a search for Glorantha on Kazaa and found a GURPS Glorantha. Or so he said. I don't know if it is "offical" or fan created. Jim From DevinC at aol.com Sat Jan 11 06:08:20 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:08:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rick's Reprints Message-ID: <70D2EE18.47A05A22.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 7:37:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, phil.hibbs at cgey.com writes: > Devin: > >What's this thing called "Rick's Reprints"? > > http://www.glorantha.co.uk/shop/shop.html > > Phil Hibbs Interesting. How did he get the rights to reprint this stuff? Devin From DevinC at aol.com Sat Jan 11 06:11:06 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:11:06 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sharing homewritten surveys of parts of Glorantha Message-ID: <37A1A36F.42C3BA2D.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 6:18:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, stolenbjorn at hotmail.com writes: > I've allso stuffed "Daughters of darkness" "Sanctuary" and > "Eldrad" into Glorantha allthough with some diffeculties. FYI, I set Eldarad in the Janube City States region west of the Lunar Empire. The thawing of the Syndics Ban gave a great reason for the city. Eldarad was an ancient city state of Janube which went under the Ban. When it emerged, the city was in ruins. Lunar Etyries cult now runs the city and books passage into it. Meanwhile, the original inhabitants reverted to savagery and form the primitive tribes of the area. While the scenarios in Eldarad...um....well....suck, the setting itself and the various tombs are pretty decent....sort of a Big Rubble West. Devin From DevinC at aol.com Sat Jan 11 06:20:32 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:20:32 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <27845DEE.28EF3C40.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 6:04:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > The Truesword feat, and every other divine feat, is precisely defined in HW, unless the GM wants to change how it works. There's no burden on the referee at all - if he wants he can just let the default result for a feat stand. Humakts Truesword Stroke works identically to Orlanth's Swordhelp and Babeestor's Axe Trance - it's an augment to, or replacement for, whatever mundane ability character A is trying to nut character B with. > > Unlike RQ (FREX) which takes 7 or 8 pages (IIRC) of closely packed type describing how individual runespells work, the three main magic systems in HW can be described in three sentences: > > - Spirit's in fetchs act as extra APs; > - Divine Feats increase target numbers; > - Sorcery spells provide an edge to a character's AP bid. > > Bloody typical, I end up a RQ advocate on HW lists and seem > to have ended up a HW advocate on here. Sorry y'all! Ash, while HW does indeed tell you what the GAME EFFECTS of Truesword do, it does not tell you what the spell actually does. That is the nature of HW. For example, take combat. In RQ combat is very specific. A swings with a specific weapon which does specific damage and B parries. It is very intuitive and easy to visualize, especially for novice gamers. If the parry fails, the weapon does damage against armour and, if it penetrates, does damage to a location. Again, it is all very specific and easy to visualize. There is really no leap of intuition required. In HW, person A attacks (less with a weapon and more with an attack rating) and person B, if his, loses action points. What exactly does losing an action point(s) mean? A person versed in HW and who is good at it can describe in vivid detail what he determines that to be. Is an AP loss a wound? Is it tripping and falling out of position? Is it a critical wound? Is it simply a loss of morale? HW does not define any of this...it leaves that part of the story telling to the DM. But RQ specifically defines it. In RQ if your leg goes to zero hit points you fall down, etc. Once again, I am not actually criticizing HW. With a very good DM and players it is probably an awesome system. But for a newbie DM who is trying to get his hands around DMing and the rules, having to also essentially make up flourishes and descriptions on the fly out of thin air can be intimidating and taxing, especially when RQ basically hands you the specifics of what is happening on a silver platter. Even D&D is less friendly in this respect than RQ. In D&D one has generic hit points. What does it mean when a warrior with 25 hit points takes a hit with a sword for 8 points of damage in D&D? In some ways D&D is like HW in this regard. The DM has to make up on the fly what that means. Did the warrior suffer a minor wound? Or is he just fatigued? Or did he take a major hit but is tough enough to shrug it off. That was one of the things I really liked about RQ....the combat and spells were so specific that often the dice rolls spoke for themselves. I think that other than the higher death rate in RQ, it is likely the PERFECT and best game for new players and DMs to learn role playing. Devin From matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi Sat Jan 11 06:58:01 2003 From: matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Matti_J=E4rvinen?=) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 21:58:01 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Sharing homewritten surveys of parts of Glorantha References: Message-ID: <00aa01c2b8e2$99d6b520$0515670a@arenanet.fi> Bjorn Stolen wrote: > By the way: As I'm not that good in Finnish; is your material > online (in Norwegian or) English somewhere? Sorry, but my description of Daran is only in Finnish and not online. It's actually based on a scenario in the Finnish RPG magazine, named Magus. However, I could perhaps tell you some Daran ideas in English via email if you can understand my bad English (or my even worse Swedish :)). Anyway, it's off topic on this list and, so you can contact me by email. I'm also really interested in your material, too. Matti J?rvinen Email: matti.jarvinen at pp3.inet.fi Home Page: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/englanti.html RuneQuest Page: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/runequest/indexeng.html From ulo at metrocast.net Sat Jan 11 08:48:10 2003 From: ulo at metrocast.net (Christopher E. Fasulo) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:48:10 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? References: <27845DEE.28EF3C40.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <000c01c2b8f1$f7f67af0$0100a8c0@Beowulf> I actually like the higher death rate in RQ, not the dying part, but the chance that I might, even some lowly stiff with a dagger has a chance of taking you out, makes you look a combat in a totaly different way than you would in a level system. Sorry for getting off the subject. Christopher ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 2:20 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? > In a message dated 1/10/2003 6:04:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, aescleal at btinternet.com writes: > > > The Truesword feat, and every other divine feat, is precisely defined in HW, unless the GM wants to change how it works. There's no burden on the referee at all - if he wants he can just let the default result for a feat stand. Humakts Truesword Stroke works identically to Orlanth's Swordhelp and Babeestor's Axe Trance - it's an augment to, or replacement for, whatever mundane ability character A is trying to nut character B with. > > > > Unlike RQ (FREX) which takes 7 or 8 pages (IIRC) of closely packed type describing how individual runespells work, the three main magic systems in HW can be described in three sentences: > > > > - Spirit's in fetchs act as extra APs; > > - Divine Feats increase target numbers; > > - Sorcery spells provide an edge to a character's AP bid. > > > > Bloody typical, I end up a RQ advocate on HW lists and seem > > to have ended up a HW advocate on here. Sorry y'all! > > Ash, while HW does indeed tell you what the GAME EFFECTS of Truesword do, it does not tell you what the spell actually does. That is the nature of HW. For example, take combat. In RQ combat is very specific. A swings with a specific weapon which does specific damage and B parries. It is very intuitive and easy to visualize, especially for novice gamers. If the parry fails, the weapon does damage against armour and, if it penetrates, does damage to a location. Again, it is all very specific and easy to visualize. There is really no leap of intuition required. > > In HW, person A attacks (less with a weapon and more with an attack rating) and person B, if his, loses action points. What exactly does losing an action point(s) mean? A person versed in HW and who is good at it can describe in vivid detail what he determines that to be. Is an AP loss a wound? Is it tripping and falling out of position? Is it a critical wound? Is it simply a loss of morale? HW does not define any of this...it leaves that part of the story telling to the DM. But RQ specifically defines it. In RQ if your leg goes to zero hit points you fall down, etc. > > Once again, I am not actually criticizing HW. With a very good DM and players it is probably an awesome system. But for a newbie DM who is trying to get his hands around DMing and the rules, having to also essentially make up flourishes and descriptions on the fly out of thin air can be intimidating and taxing, especially when RQ basically hands you the specifics of what is happening on a silver platter. > > Even D&D is less friendly in this respect than RQ. In D&D one has generic hit points. What does it mean when a warrior with 25 hit points takes a hit with a sword for 8 points of damage in D&D? In some ways D&D is like HW in this regard. The DM has to make up on the fly what that means. Did the warrior suffer a minor wound? Or is he just fatigued? Or did he take a major hit but is tough enough to shrug it off. > > That was one of the things I really liked about RQ....the combat and spells were so specific that often the dice rolls spoke for themselves. I think that other than the higher death rate in RQ, it is likely the PERFECT and best game for new players and DMs to learn role playing. > > Devin > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From DevinC at aol.com Sat Jan 11 09:21:16 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:21:16 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <24FCB684.730BB81E.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/10/2003 4:48:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, ulo at metrocast.net writes: > I actually like the higher death rate in RQ, not the dying part, but the > chance that I might, even some lowly stiff with a dagger has a chance of > taking you out, makes you look a combat in a totaly > different way than you > would in a level system. > > Sorry for getting off the subject. Oh I agree completely. In fact, one complaint I have heard about HW is that it is very difficult to actually die. But, that said, the death rate in RQ can be tough on newbie players. They are just getting into the game and they die in the first combat. Could be a sort of turn-off. Devin From rog_benham at hotmail.com Sun Jan 12 01:23:30 2003 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:23:30 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: I'm running two campaign worlds at the moment, neither of which is Glorantha, both homegrown instead. >From: paul Sommer >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's >Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 23:56:38 +0100 > >Hi guys > >jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? > >Ciao >Paul sommer > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >"Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" > > > > >--- 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 ------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From rog_benham at hotmail.com Sun Jan 12 01:50:10 2003 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:50:10 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere than locking it entirely to just one world. >From: Viktor Haag >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest >Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:30:01 -0500 > >trentfs at ix.netcom.com writes: > > A much better tactic, IMO, would be for Greg to license the > > trademark back to Chaosium and let them use it as an > > umbrella-name for their newly-revitalizing BRP > > efforts. > >A very good suggestion, and someone should politely ask Greg if >he would consider this, so that RuneQuest==BRP could survive. On >the other hand, I'm not sure that Chaosium would be at all >interested in doing that. > >They already have Stormbringer; does RQ3 really have a viable >shelf-life without Glorantha? I'm not sure it does. > >What would be really nice is if Greg licensed the RQ trademark to >Rick to permit him to reprint at least RQ2. It would be nice if >some of the RQ3 materials could also be reprinted over time as >well, but I'd be happy if RQ2 by itself were reprinted to go with >the other fine work that Rick's already done. > > >-- >Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion > +--+ >"This movie doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence > with barrels." > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ------------------------------------------ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. ------------------------------------------ Get 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From ulo at metrocast.net Sun Jan 12 07:22:41 2003 From: ulo at metrocast.net (Christopher E. Fasulo) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 15:22:41 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Where does everyone live? Message-ID: <002401c2b9af$3191f6a0$0100a8c0@Beowulf> Rodney Leary wrote: >Hey I'm just kinda courious as we seem to have a world->wide group here where we all live. >It would be a shame to find out some of us could live close >to each other when we could be playing RQ face to face. >Rodney Leary >Rochester >New Hampshire >USA Small world Christopher Fasulo Strafford New Hampshire USA --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 12 10:52:40 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 17:52:40 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? References: <24FCB684.730BB81E.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <3E20AE48.6000705@earthlink.net> IMO, that's where the DM needs to step in and fudge the rolls a bit. Games are meant to be enjoyed. If the players don't, what's the point? I've almost always fudged my dice rolls when GM'ing newbies to ensure they have an enjoyable time and to give ME time to figure out their playstyle(s) and reason(s) for RPGing. Helps me develop lots of campaign material only for those who will appreciate it. Some people just want to roll-play while others want more roleplaying. Both can be enjoyable with the right players but it's up to the GM to be able to pick up on which playstyle he/she should offer. David Smart DevinC at aol.com wrote: >But, that said, the death rate in RQ can be tough on newbie players. They are just getting into the game and they die in the first combat. Could be a sort of turn-off. > > From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 12 10:53:35 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 17:53:35 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? References: <27845DEE.28EF3C40.00047AF1@aol.com> <000c01c2b8f1$f7f67af0$0100a8c0@Beowulf> Message-ID: <3E20AE7F.3000203@earthlink.net> I'll join you in that sentiment. David Smart Christopher E. Fasulo wrote: >I actually like the higher death rate in RQ, not the dying part, but the >chance that I might, even some lowly stiff with a dagger has a chance of >taking you out, makes you look a combat in a totaly different way than you >would in a level system. > > From GameMaster1978 at cs.com Sun Jan 12 23:39:06 2003 From: GameMaster1978 at cs.com (GameMaster1978 at cs.com) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 07:39:06 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Where does everyone live? Message-ID: <60.2bc83ff7.2b52bbea@cs.com> In a message dated 1/11/2003 3:23:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, ulo at metrocast.net writes: << >Rodney Leary >Rochester >New Hampshire >USA Small world Christopher Fasulo Strafford New Hampshire USA >> Awesome, I ended up finding some people who lived near each other, but no one even within 200 miles of me, then the last person who replies ends up 20 minutes away. Kewl, we gotta talk. And the name even sounds familiar. Maybe we know each other. I'll e-mail yah off list. Rod From jurrubin at earthlink.net Mon Jan 13 05:44:25 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:44:25 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: Message-ID: <3E21B789.2000004@earthlink.net> Amen! GAWD, I'd love to see a official Traveller version of BRP! David Smart Roger Benham wrote: >I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere than locking it entirely to just one world. > > From Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz Mon Jan 13 05:27:29 2003 From: Tony.Williamson at aucklandcity.govt.nz (Williamson, Tony) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 07:27:29 +1300 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Message-ID: <03Jan13.090757nzdt.119071@inetgate.akcity.govt.nz> Runequest 2 definitely, with some Runequest 3 add ons like extra Rune Magic and armour points for weapons etc. We have a group of about 12 players on and off running in 2-3 different games all based around Pavis, the Prax, and Sartar. -----Original Message----- From: paul Sommer [mailto:paul.s.sommer at get2net.dk] Sent: Thursday, 9 January 2003 11:57 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:active currnet runequest campaign's Hi guys jus a quick question ..but how many people on this list are running/playing in an ACTIVE current runequest 2 or 3 campaign at the present and if so in what area/geographical location of glorantha?? Ciao Paul sommer ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Sig?? we dooon't need no stinking sig senor!" --- 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 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 vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Mon Jan 13 16:34:29 2003 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:34:29 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? References: <27845DEE.28EF3C40.00047AF1@aol.com> <000c01c2b8f1$f7f67af0$0100a8c0@Beowulf> <3E20AE7F.3000203@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3E224FE5.72F40B19@libra.seed.net.tw> 3E D&D has two optional rules listed (I'm using them both - I don't know about others...). The first is that any damage of 50 points or more requires a difficult save or 'Death from Massive Damage' (so we won't scoff at 200' falls anymore...). The second is that if you roll a 20 on a hit, you threaten a critical. If you roll a second 20 on the check to see if you crit, you threaten instant death. A success on the third gives you an instant kill, no matter the HP. I agree this is a small chance, but I don't think a 16-yo street-punk with a knife has a much better chance against Joe Runelord... The fact that high-level characters can have 200+ hp bothers me though. I suppose if you look at that as parries, luck and a few DIs, it might not seem so bad... Regards, Jeremy "D. Smart" wrote: > I'll join you in that sentiment. > > David Smart > > Christopher E. Fasulo wrote: > > >I actually like the higher death rate in RQ, not the dying part, but the > >chance that I might, even some lowly stiff with a dagger has a chance of > >taking you out, makes you look a combat in a totaly different way than you > >would in a level system. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Jan 14 00:00:29 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:00:29 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Using HW magic rules for epic battles? Message-ID: Ash Wrote: Unlike RQ (FREX) which takes 7 or 8 pages (IIRC) of closely packed type describing how individual runespells work, the three main magic systems in HW can be described in three sentences:  - Spirit's in fetchs act as extra APs; - Divine Feats increase target numbers; - Sorcery spells provide an edge to a character's AP bid. I try to mix the Warhammer battle rules with gloranthan setting (magics), and from the little you wrote here; do you think this HW stuff for magics could work in epic scale (100 - 10.000+ participants in a battle, etc) battles?   ------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Jan 14 00:16:23 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:16:23 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Eldrad further west Message-ID: Devin wrote: FYI, I set Eldarad in the Janube City States region west of the Lunar Empire.The thawing of the Syndics Ban gave a great reason for the city. Eldarad was an ancient city state of Janube which went under the Ban. When it emerged, the city was in ruins. Lunar Etyries cult now runs the city and books passage into it. Meanwhile, the original inhabitants reverted to savagery and form the primitive tribes of the area. What a brilliant idea! I'll move my Eldrad at once! It's no problem as my players just fiddle around in Pavis. And YES, ------------------------------------------ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. ------------------------------------------ Get 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Tue Jan 14 00:40:03 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:40:03 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] D20 without classes and levels Message-ID: For information : extracts of Q&A on official Wizards of the Coast D20 web page : Q: Does a d20 System game have to have classes and levels? A: No. Nothing in the licenses or the System Reference Document require the use of classes or levels. Q: Does a d20 System game have to have Armor Class and hit points? A: No. Nothing in the licenses or the System Reference Document require the use of Armor Class or hit points. So a Glorantha D20 (or OGL) could be very similar to Runequest 3, with a D20 instaed of a D100. Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Tue Jan 14 00:46:43 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:46:43 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] More than100% skills Message-ID: How are you guys dealing with skills beyond 100% skill ? I am especially interested in non-combat skills. I see several possibilities (whether or not official in RQ3) : - just getting more specials and criticals, without anything else; - right to split the number of attack (OK in combat, but what with non combat skills ?) - right to reduce parry/dodge of adversary by (skill-100)% ? (OK again in combat, but what with other skill) ? - a system like HW with bumps (not sure of how it could work with percentile dice) Any difference if the 100%+ is natural, due to Characteristics bonus, magic, or whatever ? Does SPQR handle this in a specific manner ? Well, a new thread is on... Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From ollerenb at telus.net Mon Jan 13 08:04:27 2003 From: ollerenb at telus.net (Bruce Ollerenshaw) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:04:27 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <3E21B789.2000004@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000301c2ba7e$31ca91c0$6401a8c0@ab.hsia.telus.net> Hi (jumping in at last), Are there any unofficial Traveller versions on the web? Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Smart" To: Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:44 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > Amen! GAWD, I'd love to see a official Traveller version of BRP! > > David Smart > > Roger Benham wrote: > > >I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere than locking it entirely to just one world. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From jakyer at sympatico.ca Mon Jan 13 12:57:17 2003 From: jakyer at sympatico.ca (Jeff Kyer2) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:57:17 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] GloranthaCon Trivia Contest - contributors needed References: Message-ID: <3E221CFD.8DFF9ED3@sympatico.ca> Gathered Tribesfolk; As Gloranthacon draws near (less than eight weeks!) we remember that one of the oldest traditions of a Gloranthacon is the "The Pub Triva Contest." We've got a pub. We've got a con. Now we need some trivia... We'd like the Gloranthan tribe to help us with this trivial pursuit. Four of the five rounds (Geography of Glorantha; Spirits, Gods & Scriptures; The Lunars; Past, Present & Future) we will squeeze out of our illustrious guests. For the fifth, though, we want your help - and whether or not you are coming, you can join this competition and win a prize. The first round will simply be "Gloranthan Esoterica!" We want a list of 10 questions, starting with a few relatively simple ones and getting steadily more difficult until they reach a crescendo of frightfulness with question 10, which should truly test the mettle of the most boookish Gloranthaphile! Come up with your list of 10 questions, with answers (and ideally sources as well) and submit them to us. The one we think best suits the quiz - remember, they should start easy and get harder - the aim is for everyone to have fun, not be humilated for the ignorant rogues they undoubtedly are!) - will win its creator their choice of a map of the Lunar Empire, a copy of Moon Rites, or the Imperial Lunar Handbook, regardless of whether they are coming to Gloranthacon. However, if he or she is also coming to the con, then there will also be a free drink at the bar to celebrate. Caveat: We would like to avoid questions like 'list ten subcults of Orlanth' - we would prefer questions which have a definite answer. Send any replies to Paul Rocchi at procchi at sympatico.ca or to gloranthacon at glorantha.com We will be taking trivia entries until Feb 21, 2003. Hope to hear from you soon! Jeff Kyer Gloranthacon VIII Organizer March 7-9, 2003 Toronto, Canada http://www.gloranthacon.com P.S. For those coming to Gloranthacon, they have to be pre-registered by February 14th, 2003. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: gloranthacon-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Jan 14 00:54:24 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:54:24 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Message-ID: I like Glorantha. I respect any other wiev, but to me, the only weak spot with Glorantha is that the companies\ dudes with the rights to publish never got their finger out. But if you're fed up with Lord of the Rings rip off -settings, like D&D, warhammer, etc, Glorantha is a good choise. I allso like how it emphatizes other cultures than cliche european narsicistic medieval ones, and flirts with cultures from the far and middle east etc. Allso; if you like to make settings oneself, and have decided that you don't bother waiting for more official stuff to come, Glorantha is brilliant! (Rough outline ready to be detailed out.) It would be fun to hear arguments on why Glorantha sucks... PS: If this is too far off the topics intended for this site, notify me, and I'll stick to rules only. ------------------------------------------ Protect your PC - ------------------------------------------ Click here ------------------------------------------ for McAfee.com VirusScan Online ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Jan 14 01:46:13 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 09:46:13 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting References: Message-ID: <3E22D135.7030809@talmeta.net> Bjorn Stolen wrote: > It would be fun to hear arguments on why Glorantha sucks... Most of my gut-reactions as to why Glorantha sucks have more to do with the guys who argue enddlessly on the Glorantha Digest as to why the Lunar Pilum -MUST- be 1.17m in length, rather than 1.2m, etc., etc., ad nauseum. The setting is fine; I've never used it per se, though I have played there once or twice. I've gone so far as to place countries with Gloranthan names in the backwaters of my Oerik continent (though my next campaign is more likely to be d20 than RQ; with 3 GMs sharing the world we use, finding one system we could all agree on was important for the concept of using the same characters in different campaigns...) -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - my lips may promise but my heart is a whore From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Jan 14 02:02:58 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 07:02:58 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] More than100% skills References: Message-ID: <005e01c2bb14$dcec02f0$9865fea9@wizard> Since SPQR uses a "number of successes" algorithm, skills above 100% simply make getting a high number of successes likelier. There are four levels of success. Simple success, 50% of what is needed success, 10% of what is needed success, and 1% of what is needed success. The last is usually just an 01 but actually increases when you get over 150% (simple rounding). The more successes you have in excess of a counter roll, the more special circumstances (specials, criticals, shortened time, extra information) you get. Thanks for the chance for a plug. Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "RAMEAU Alain" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:46 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] More than100% skills > How are you guys dealing with skills beyond 100% skill ? > I am especially interested in non-combat skills. > > I see several possibilities (whether or not official in RQ3) : > - just getting more specials and criticals, without anything else; > - right to split the number of attack (OK in combat, but what with non > combat skills ?) > - right to reduce parry/dodge of adversary by (skill-100)% ? (OK again in > combat, but what with other skill) ? > - a system like HW with bumps (not sure of how it could work with > percentile dice) > > Any difference if the 100%+ is natural, due to Characteristics bonus, > magic, or whatever ? > > Does SPQR handle this in a specific manner ? > > > Well, a new thread is on... > > Alain. > > > > --- 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 ulo at metrocast.net Tue Jan 14 02:25:39 2003 From: ulo at metrocast.net (Christopher E. Fasulo) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:25:39 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting References: Message-ID: <002601c2bb18$07653e40$0100a8c0@Beowulf> Bjorn Stolen wrote: >It would be fun to hear arguments on why glorantha sucks... I actually dont mind Glorantha, I just prefer other world to run RQ...well that and the ducks suck. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bjorn Stolen" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 8:54 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting > I like Glorantha. I respect any other wiev, but to me, the only weak spot with Glorantha is that the companies\ dudes with the rights to publish never got their finger out. But if you're fed up with Lord of the Rings rip off -settings, like D&D, warhammer, etc, Glorantha is a good choise. I allso like how it emphatizes other cultures than cliche european narsicistic medieval ones, and flirts with cultures from the far and middle east etc. > > Allso; if you like to make settings oneself, and have decided that you don't bother waiting for more official stuff to come, Glorantha is brilliant! > > (Rough outline ready to be detailed out.) > > > It would be fun to hear arguments on why Glorantha sucks... > > > PS: If this is too far off the topics intended for this site, notify me, and I'll stick to rules only. > > > > ------------------------------------------ > Protect your PC - > ------------------------------------------ > Click here > ------------------------------------------ > for McAfee.com VirusScan Online > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 > From jellen at ameritech.net Tue Jan 14 02:28:45 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 09:28:45 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting References: <002601c2bb18$07653e40$0100a8c0@Beowulf> Message-ID: <008b01c2bb18$766ded00$3410fea9@frkt5> Ducks are one of the few things I like about Glorantha. Them, and the physiology of Elves & Dwarves. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher E. Fasulo" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 9:25 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Bjorn Stolen wrote: >It would be fun to hear arguments on why glorantha sucks... I actually dont mind Glorantha, I just prefer other world to run RQ...well that and the ducks suck. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bjorn Stolen" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 8:54 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting > I like Glorantha. I respect any other wiev, but to me, the only weak spot with Glorantha is that the companies\ dudes with the rights to publish never got their finger out. But if you're fed up with Lord of the Rings rip off -settings, like D&D, warhammer, etc, Glorantha is a good choise. I allso like how it emphatizes other cultures than cliche european narsicistic medieval ones, and flirts with cultures from the far and middle east etc. > > Allso; if you like to make settings oneself, and have decided that you don't bother waiting for more official stuff to come, Glorantha is brilliant! > > (Rough outline ready to be detailed out.) > > > It would be fun to hear arguments on why Glorantha sucks... > > > PS: If this is too far off the topics intended for this site, notify me, and I'll stick to rules only. > > > > ------------------------------------------ > Protect your PC - > ------------------------------------------ > Click here > ------------------------------------------ > for McAfee.com VirusScan Online > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 > _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 14 02:42:29 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:42:29 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <3E21B789.2000004@earthlink.net> <000301c2ba7e$31ca91c0$6401a8c0@ab.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: <01a601c2bb1a$61baa180$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> we always used the space game from worlds of wonder and played traveller that way 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: "Bruce Ollerenshaw" To: Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 4:04 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > Hi (jumping in at last), > > Are there any unofficial Traveller versions on the web? > > Bruce > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "D. Smart" > To: > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:44 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > > > > Amen! GAWD, I'd love to see a official Traveller version of BRP! > > > > David Smart > > > > Roger Benham wrote: > > > > >I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to > create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my > least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere > than locking it entirely to just one world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 kruch7 at cox.net Tue Jan 14 02:45:51 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:45:51 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting References: <002601c2bb18$07653e40$0100a8c0@Beowulf> Message-ID: <01c201c2bb1a$da10c0b0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> I liked the early glorantha stuff, but as things changed and all it got confusing and dwarves and guns just didn't; fit my vision. I love the early rq2 stuff, but the more rq3 stuff I got the less and less I enjoyed it, then as the rules lawyers begin to pick the bones to death , I said hey I love the system time to move it to a new world :0 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: "Christopher E. Fasulo" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:25 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting > Bjorn Stolen wrote: > > >It would be fun to hear arguments on why glorantha sucks... > > I actually dont mind Glorantha, I just prefer other world to run RQ...well > that and the ducks suck. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bjorn Stolen" > To: > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 8:54 AM > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting > > > > I like Glorantha. I respect any other wiev, but to me, the only weak spot > with Glorantha is that the companies\ dudes with the rights to publish never > got their finger out. But if you're fed up with Lord of the Rings rip > off -settings, like D&D, warhammer, etc, Glorantha is a good choise. I allso > like how it emphatizes other cultures than cliche european narsicistic > medieval ones, and flirts with cultures from the far and middle east etc. > > > > Allso; if you like to make settings oneself, and have decided that you > don't bother waiting for more official stuff to come, Glorantha is > brilliant! > > > > (Rough outline ready to be detailed out.) > > > > > > It would be fun to hear arguments on why Glorantha sucks... > > > > > > PS: If this is too far off the topics intended for this site, notify me, > and I'll stick to rules only. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > Protect your PC - > > ------------------------------------------ > > Click here > > ------------------------------------------ > > for McAfee.com VirusScan Online > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > --- 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From jeff.kyer at cgi.com Tue Jan 14 02:28:46 2003 From: jeff.kyer at cgi.com (KYER, JEFFREY) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:28:46 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthacon VIII - March 7-9 Message-ID: <3E22DB2E.4AC3D361@cgi.com> Hi; Sorry for the long post. We're putting on Gloranthacon in about 8 weeks and I thought I would relay some information here. I think that items of interest to RuneQuest players will be several RuneQuest seminars, the rules-free Lunar discussions and a Dorastor RQ session run by Sandy Petersen. Check out the website at www.gloranthacon.com and see if there's something you want to see. Thanks for your time and forebearance; Jeff Start message: Gloranthacon VIII March 7-9, 2003 in Toronto, Canada "Orlanth is Dead. Its time to party!" The sons and daughters of the Goddess gather for ceremony and celebration. The convention features an array of Gloranthan freeforms, adventure modules and seminars, together with select games from other roleplaying systems such as RuneQuest and Pendragon Pass. Plus, the official launch party for Issaries Inc's HeroQuest roleplaying game! Our Guests of Honour include the _Rad_ Emperor himself, Greg Stafford, and the rumoured head of the Imperial Secret Service, the indefatigable Mark Galeotti. Supporting luminaries include Nick Brooke, David Dunham, Martin Laurie, Robin Laws, Stephen Martin, Sandy Petersen, Roderick Robertson and Ken Rolston. Even barbarians are welcome under the healing rays of the Red Moon. Soon, all Glorantha will be under Her benevolent gaze. Highlights: Some of our featured events include the HeroQuest Launch party, Gaming With Greg, Gloranthan Lore Auction, Eat At Geo's, Gloranthan Computing, the GTA dinner, Lawn Dart Wars, the Imperial Lunar Handbook seminars and all things Gloranthan. Featured Live-Action/Freeform Game: Birth of the Goddess Can you become one of the Seven Mothers? Or will the Goddess just become fuel for cruel Carmanian sorceries? Written by Mark Galeotti, we discover what really happened in Zero Wane. Recent News: Our schedule is up on the website: Checkout http://www.gloranthacon.com/events.html for details - we have over 60 events planned with more arriving every day. Moon Rites: Jelenkev Variorum, volume I Moon Rites is a 60 page collection of Lunar material featuring articles, fiction, scenarios and artwork from some of Glorantha's most talented explorers and shapers. It includes excerpts from Greg Stafford's Lunar novel, Gladiators by Martin Laurie, Crime & Punishment by Mark Galeotti, the Crimson Bat, decadent cults, myths, encounters and more! Moon Rites will be printed in conjunction with the Chaos Society, proud publishers of Tradetalk and other fine Gloranthan works. For a limited time, Moon Rites can be pre-ordered through our website, www.gloranthacon.com while supplies last. Cost is $13 US ($21 CDN) - if you order before Dec 21, 2002, we will cover the cost of postage in North America. Check out www.Tradetalk.de as well. Contest: Win a game with Greg! Greg Stafford has kindly offered to run a game of HeroQuest for six lucky players. Two seats will be awarded to randomly chosen pre-registrants. Other spots will be awarded as prizes during various events during the convention as well - check out our schedule for details. Other Activities: For those who are not wanting to spend their whole time in Toronto dealing with All Things Glorantha, we have organized a walking tour of downtown Toronto, designed to hit some of the museums, galleries and parks. For some highlights, checkout www.toronto.com for some hot tips. When is it? March 7th to 9th, 2003 Where is it? Gloranthacon is being held at the Toronto Colony Hotel, 89 Chestnut St., Toronto, Ontario. Call Toll Free 1-800-387-8687 (or 416-977-0707)or link to and reserve your room before Feb 14th. Make sure you mention you are a part of GloranthaCon to get the convention rate. Single or Double$109 CDN (about $70 US) Triple $124 ($80 US) Quad $139 ($90 US) Con rates extend from Sunday, March 2nd to Tuesday, March 11th. Remember to book your room before February 14th so we can make our room commitment! Pre-registration: Pre registration for the weekend is $50 (US) until Feb 1, 2003. All pre-payments must be received by Feb 3, 2002 GTA dinner is an additional $30 (US) and seating is limited Sign up online at www.gloranthacon.com or mail us at: Gloranthacon VIII 374 Glenholme Ave. Toronto, Ontario M6E 3E5 Canada Make all checks and money orders payable to Gloranthacon. Paypal is also accepted. Send funds to Glorantha at Glorantha.com Other Ways to Contact Us: Discussion of the convention and ideas as well as help and advice for events can be found at gloranthacon at yahoogroups.com Email us at gloranthacon at glorantha.com Hope to see you there! Jeff Kyer and the GloranthaCon Ring From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jan 14 02:50:15 2003 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:50:15 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Message-ID: And an excellent game Future World was: I had great fun plugging both Magic World and Future World into Stormbringer (1st Edition) and sending players on extended jaunts round the multiverse... Sadly though, Future World side-stepped the whole spaceships issue... Steve, any idea what the chances are of Chaosium ever re-publishing any of the Worlds of Wonder games? Cheers, Nick Middleton (Who bizarrely has been thinking about a pseudo Luther Arkwright campaign recently and so last weekend had dug out Worlds of Wonder etc...) "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon To: minion of Arioch" cc: Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest Sent by: rq-rules-admin at cr ashbox.com 13/01/2003 15:42 Please respond to rq-rules we always used the space game from worlds of wonder and played traveller that way 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: "Bruce Ollerenshaw" To: Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 4:04 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > Hi (jumping in at last), > > Are there any unofficial Traveller versions on the web? > > Bruce > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "D. Smart" > To: > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:44 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > > > > Amen! GAWD, I'd love to see a official Traveller version of BRP! > > > > David Smart > > > > Roger Benham wrote: > > > > >I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to > create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my > least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere > than locking it entirely to just one world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Tue Jan 14 03:11:41 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 09:11:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] More than100% skills References: Message-ID: <3E22E53D.8020606@concentric.net> RAMEAU Alain wrote: > How are you guys dealing with skills beyond 100% skill ? > I am especially interested in non-combat skills. > > I see several possibilities (whether or not official in RQ3) : > - just getting more specials and criticals, without anything else; > - right to split the number of attack (OK in combat, but what with non > combat skills ?) > - right to reduce parry/dodge of adversary by (skill-100)% ? (OK again in > combat, but what with other skill) ? > - a system like HW with bumps (not sure of how it could work with > percentile dice) > > Any difference if the 100%+ is natural, due to Characteristics bonus, > magic, or whatever ? > > Does SPQR handle this in a specific manner ? The Ringworld RPG has an interesting take on this: given that in Known Space, many folks are hundreds of years old, skills are assumed to be able to increase to multiple 100s. I don't have the details in front of me (I can check later if folks are interested) but the gist is that trans-100% skills reduce the chance of critical failures and can improve outcome for non-combat skills (e.g. research or construction tasks). I've thought that something like this would be useful in a fantasy setting as well if you've got long-lived races; e.g. Tolkien-esqe Elves or Moorcock's Vadhag (from the Corum books). Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From bick10 at attbi.com Tue Jan 14 03:18:24 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:18:24 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Message-ID: <20030113162539.ED1B34C1DC@thinbits.com> Bjorn Stolen wrote: > >It would be fun to hear arguments on why glorantha sucks... Christopher E. Fasulo > I actually dont mind Glorantha, I just prefer other world to run RQ...well > that and the ducks suck. Hey! I like the Ducks. The most memorable PC after 20 years is Blacky the Duck. Urban Scout (thief); Wanted in Pavis as a Black Fang (he wasn't, rumor spread by other players); Rune Lord (of Ermal the Trickster-Pathfinder); Known consorter of ogres (he Did NOT know they were). Qwack! The sound of his short sword on the bar top calling for more beer. On elves and dwarves. I do not like the official version of them. To inhuman. Yea, I know they were suppose to be. But I did not like that. So my game, my way. I also added Halfling into the Dragon Pass area as a non-human refugee race. A player wanted to try it, so suddenly they were always there. What I like about Glorantha is that there is plenty of myths and a world tied to it. What I don't like is someone telling me that I am wrong because I did or ignore something that is suppose to be official. Again, my game, my way. Jim From aragan at ucla.edu Tue Jan 14 03:26:57 2003 From: aragan at ucla.edu (Anthony Ragan) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 08:26:57 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting In-Reply-To: <20030113162539.ED1B34C1DC@thinbits.com> References: <20030113162539.ED1B34C1DC@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030113082056.F3C5.ARAGAN@ucla.edu> While scanning the heavens for a sign, bick10 at attbi.com wrote on Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:18:24 +0000: > Hey! I like the Ducks. I do too. I also like Glorantha overall, though it's not my favorite game world. (That's WFRP's Old World setting) I especially like the religious structure (still the best I've seen in any game) and the setting around Pavis, though I have mixed feelings about the Lunar Empire as a setting. Back to ducks, years ago I played one named Angus McQuack, a Humakti Rune Duck. Sure, it broke all the rules (I think), but damn, he was fun to play. Well, up until the day he volunteered to hold the gate of the fort against attacking trollkin and the Zorak Zoran Rune Lord stepped out of the crowd. The feathers flew then. :) *************** --Anthony Ragan Irishspy at mindspring.com, Irishspy at yahoo.com Writing credits at: http://makeashorterlink.com/?W57026C72 From jellen at ameritech.net Tue Jan 14 03:39:15 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:39:15 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting References: <20030113162539.ED1B34C1DC@thinbits.com> <20030113082056.F3C5.ARAGAN@ucla.edu> Message-ID: <00cb01c2bb22$4f4884b0$3410fea9@frkt5> My fave PC ever was Thumper, a Humakti Sword *Rhino Rider*. His steed was named Bambi. Thumper got his name because that's the only way he could steer: by whaling on the rhino's head with a two-by-four to get its attention. A rip-off of Yosemite Sam riding the dragon or elephant or whatever it was. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Ragan" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:26 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting While scanning the heavens for a sign, bick10 at attbi.com wrote on Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:18:24 +0000: > Hey! I like the Ducks. I do too. I also like Glorantha overall, though it's not my favorite game world. (That's WFRP's Old World setting) I especially like the religious structure (still the best I've seen in any game) and the setting around Pavis, though I have mixed feelings about the Lunar Empire as a setting. Back to ducks, years ago I played one named Angus McQuack, a Humakti Rune Duck. Sure, it broke all the rules (I think), but damn, he was fun to play. Well, up until the day he volunteered to hold the gate of the fort against attacking trollkin and the Zorak Zoran Rune Lord stepped out of the crowd. The feathers flew then. :) *************** --Anthony Ragan Irishspy at mindspring.com, Irishspy at yahoo.com Writing credits at: http://makeashorterlink.com/?W57026C72 _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 06:28:11 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:28:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] More than100% skills Message-ID: <7B91FDE5.499EB5A2.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 11:11:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, slposey at concentric.net writes: > RAMEAU Alain wrote: > > How are you guys dealing with skills beyond 100% skill ? > > I am especially interested in non-combat skills. > > > > I see several possibilities (whether or not official in RQ3) : > > - just getting more specials and criticals, without anything else; > > - right to split the number of attack (OK in combat, but what with non > > combat skills ?) > > - right to reduce parry/dodge of adversary by (skill-100)% ? (OK again in > > combat, but what with other skill) ? > > - a system like HW with bumps (not sure of how it could work with > > percentile dice) > > > > Any difference if the 100%+ is natural, due to > Characteristics bonus, > > magic, or whatever ? > > > > Does SPQR handle this in a specific manner ? My last RQ campaign ended with characters pushing 150% in skills. As the campaign was designed to take the players into Heroquesting (indeed they had started to do so) and that would raise them into the multiple hundreds of %, I had to think about this. What I came up with was the following: First, an ever escalating series of special hits.. So: 1/5th of the required hit % = special 1/20th = critical 1/100th = special critical 1/200th = special critical x2 1/300th = special critical x3 and so forth. Special criticals did special damage and ignored armour. Extra special criticals did further increasing damage multiples. In addition, for combat I allowed the character to decide to either divide his attacks into multiples or to use the excess over 100% to lower the opponents. This worked well since the choice depended upon one's opponent. Against a single very powerful opponent, the characters would elect to take a single attack at full value, since taking multiple attacks against a 95%+ parry is very unproductive. But against multiple trollkin, frex, they could heroic fray into combat sweeping many away in a single round. Attacks had to be split so that all attacks but the last were at 100% or more. The last could be at any %. Thus, a hero with a 335% longsword attack could attack a runelord with 3 attacks of, say, 110%, 105%, and 20%. As far as other skills, there are enough opposed skill rolls (like Move Silently) to make skills over 100% useful. In addition, there are enough difficulty modifiers (slick, rainsoaked sheer wall) to make skills like climb over 100% very useful. For those few skills where neither of the above are much helpful (for example, Dance or Sing), the increased special chances are still moderately useful. Devin From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 06:34:20 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:34:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Message-ID: <254E0F74.48D6364E.00047AF1@aol.com> The two main objections I always heard to Glorantha were ducks and jack-o-bears. Ducks, in my vision of Glorantha, are cursed humans who refused to aid Yelm during the troubles before Time and were cursed. They were meant to be laughed at and funny looking and so forth. I had several players who played nothing but ducks and they generally played them as bitter and very sensitive about crude remarks as to their appearance and stature. Jack-o-bears I ruled, which since became official I think, did not actually have a pumpkin on their heads (as shown in the stupid cover to Griffin Mountain). Rather they had a round, hairless head that was orange in colour and from a distance might look like a pumpkin. There was no stem and they had real eyes and teeth, not a hollow pumpkin head. Given the powerful nature of their harmonize, once the players accepted my vision of jack-o-bears, they became the fearsome creature they should be. Really the name is what needs to be changed. Devin From rico at ricosweb.com Tue Jan 14 06:43:38 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 12:43:38 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting In-Reply-To: <254E0F74.48D6364E.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <003f01c2bb3c$117f4320$670a0a0a@dohealth.com> My problem with Glorantha is the same problem I have with all published settings: I don't like people telling me what my setting should look like. I don't spend hours and hours detailing every little political tie and squabble, I don't even spend minutes on it. If a character asks about something I haven't written up yet, I make it up on the spot. Inconsistencies are a lot of fun, in my opinion! Seriously, I've never had a single complaint about my game worlds, and everyone has fun. I have more fun because I don't have to deal with "But the Lunar Empire has never been here!" or "This part of the realms doesn't have elfs!" and so on. My campaign world is my own, and I've used at least five different RPG systems (if you count AD&D being separate from 3rd Ed, which I do) when gaming on it. Rich Allen > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com > [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of DevinC at aol.com > Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:34 PM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting > > > The two main objections I always heard to Glorantha were > ducks and jack-o-bears. > > Ducks, in my vision of Glorantha, are cursed humans who > refused to aid Yelm during the troubles before Time and were > cursed. They were meant to be laughed at and funny looking > and so forth. I had several players who played nothing but > ducks and they generally played them as bitter and very > sensitive about crude remarks as to their appearance and stature. > > Jack-o-bears I ruled, which since became official I think, > did not actually have a pumpkin on their heads (as shown in > the stupid cover to Griffin Mountain). Rather they had a > round, hairless head that was orange in colour and from a > distance might look like a pumpkin. There was no stem and > they had real eyes and teeth, not a hollow pumpkin head. > Given the powerful nature of their harmonize, once the > players accepted my vision of jack-o-bears, they became the > fearsome creature they should be. > > Really the name is what needs to be changed. > > Devin > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 06:49:03 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:49:03 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <1ADD746F.5C782A64.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 12:34:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, vesper at libra.seed.net.tw writes: > The fact that high-level characters can have 200+ hp bothers me though. I > suppose if you look at that as parries, luck and a few DIs, > it might not seem > so bad... > > Regards, > > Jeremy One thing non-3rd ed D&D players may not realize is that while high level characters have lots of hp in D&D, in 3rd edition, high level characters can deal a massive amount of damage with a weapon. So while 3rd edition might have scaling problems in a fight between a trollkin and a rulelord in that you won't tend to get a Rurik result, fights between high level folks are not the tedious attrition battles they were in 2nd ed AD&D. For example, a strong barbarian with a two handed axe can threaten a critical on a pretty low roll if he takes the proper feats. With other damage increasing feats and barbarian rage he can easily do 70 damage on a single hit, and possibly more with magic weapons and spells up and running. I have been told of 3rd ed warriors doing over 100 damage on a single swing. Devin From aescleal at btinternet.com Tue Jan 14 06:54:45 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:54:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Using HW magic rules for epic battles? Message-ID: <4235745.1042487685791.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Hero Wars will work for an unlimited number of participants on a side - trouble is, as others have pointed out, it's main strength is also it's main weakness - GM interpretation! Cheers, Ash > from: Bjorn Stolen > date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:00:29 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Using HW magic rules for epic battles? > > Ash Wrote: > > Unlike RQ (FREX) which takes 7 or 8 pages (IIRC) of closely packed type > describing how individual runespells work, the three main magic systems in HW can be described in three sentences: > ?- Spirit's in fetchs act as extra APs; > - Divine Feats increase target numbers; > - Sorcery spells provide an edge to a character's AP bid. > > > I try to mix the Warhammer battle rules with gloranthan setting (magics), and from the little you wrote here; do you think this HW stuff for magics could work in epic scale (100 - 10.000 participants in a battle, etc) battles? > ? > > > > ------------------------------------------ > MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and > ------------------------------------------ > 2 months FREE* > ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 07:01:15 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:01:15 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What's wrong with the stuff on issaries' sites? Message-ID: <518EE445.3DC70C82.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/11/2003 6:52:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, jurrubin at earthlink.net writes: > IMO, that's where the DM needs to step in and fudge the rolls a bit. > Games are meant to be enjoyed. If the players don't, what's the point? > > I've almost always fudged my dice rolls when GM'ing newbies to ensure > they have an enjoyable time and to give ME time to figure out their > playstyle(s) and reason(s) for RPGing. Helps me develop lots of campaign > material only for those who will appreciate it. Some people just want to > roll-play while others want more roleplaying. > > Both can be enjoyable with the right players but it's up to > the GM to be > able to pick up on which playstyle he/she should offer. > > David Smart I have had some epic debates on fudging on various lists. Suffice to say that: 1. I NEVER fudge die rolls 2. My players appreciate me as a DM because of this fact, as they know every success is a trial passed and is well earned 3. The spectre of looming defeat makes the game more exciting 4. As a player, if I think my DM is fudging die rolls (especially in my favour) I will quit the game as it diminishes the fun for me I frankly think that if a person as a DM don't want a certain outcome in his game, he shouldn't have designed it into the scenario in the first place. If one doesn't want the party to die in a fight, don't have them fight, or have the fight be fisticuffs or some non-lethal format, or write up that the players, if defeated, are taken prisoner. When I first ran RQ it was with a bunch of longtime D&D players. I warned them over and over that in RQ combat was deadly and that they needed to rethink their usual dungeon bashing strategies. RQ combat requires, as in real life, much more planning, intelligence, scouting, etc. And while I was sorely tempted to fudge the dice and give them a break when they would simply form up into a double column and walk right into the front door of the bad guys, I realized that they would never learn a needed lesson until they experienced it firsthand. And so, many RQ characters died before they got their survival rate up. And yes, I even lost some players. But in the end it was worth it and the campaign lasted 9 years. Devin From peter at maranci.net Tue Jan 14 07:11:29 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:11:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Thanks! Message-ID: <1451.216.118.190.11.1042488689.squirrel@webmail> I just wanted to say "thanks!" to everyone who voted for the RQ sites. As of today RuneQuest sites are #1 and #2 on the Die-Roller's Top 50, and all five of the RQ sites in competition have been boosted way up in the ratings. You guys kick @ss! Here's hoping that we bring in some new gamers into the RQ fold. I'm considering setting up a small "Vote for RQ" section on my site with the voting links, by the way - I'll post about it (briefly) if I do. Thanks again! ->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 Jan 14 07:30:03 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:30:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha Message-ID: <4213.216.118.190.11.1042489803.squirrel@webmail> When I was first introduced to Glorantha in the mid-1980's, I loved it. It was a totally amazing world to game in. I liked Ducks, Gonn Orta, Chaos Humakt, everything. It was all totally fun. Here's what I hate about Glorantha now: 1. The scholars. Those assholes for whom Glorantha wasn't a world to play in and have fun, but rather a sociological thought-experiment and insanely huge body of "knowledge". Their sole purpose was to measure the size of their flaccid...mentalities...by who could remember the most meaningless details and be nastiest in flaming those who didn't agree with them. 2. Greg. He's a charming fellow with a weirdly magnetic personality, and I have no doubt at all that he's a truly great gamemaster, as well as being extremely creative (and apparently extremely lucky, to boot). But his penchant to jerk around Glorantha and the people who want to roleplay with it has gone beyond all reason, and has become just plain annoying. Plus, he had me killed by torture in GloranthaCon I. :D 3. Too ^%@#ing much detail. Glorantha had a lot of great detail by the early 1990s. Now, the level of information available about the world is just insane - *particularly* because most of the new material seems to either be pointless or present just to contradict previous information (thanks, Greg). By the way, I believe that this will be the reason that Hero Wars will never expand beyond its cult fan base. The learning curve is insanely forbidding now. 4. Hero Wars. I don't like the system. I REALLY don't like the system. And a lot of the people who play it seem very arrogant to me. Most of them can't talk about RQ without constantly putting it down. Come on, fellas, if you're *that* insecure about your system at least be a little subtle about it! 5. The sense of fun. It's gone. Maybe it's me, but I don't think so. I'd love to play or GM in classic Glorantha. Unfortunately my vision of that world may have been hopelessly tainted by "modern" Glorantha. Fortunately making up interesting and different new worlds is really easy. Which reminds me, years ago I worked up a campaign in which everyone started out playing themselves, immediately got killed, and had to explore the afterlife (this was long before White Wolf, by the way). I don't think I ever finished adapting the RQ mechanics for ghosts, though. Has anyone done anything like that? Also, speaking of RQ in space: a friend of mine in college wrote up 80% of an adaptation of RQ for space which he called (as I remember) "Star Quest". I was just moving some stuff out of storage and saw it listed on the contents of one of my boxes. I'm tempted to dig it out and see how it holds up! ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 07:37:38 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 12:37:38 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Message-ID: The main reason I liked Glorantha back in the day was that it took what are basically familiar tropes from fantasy and history and put interesting and unique twists on them. Describe the Lunars as Romans, the Orlanthi as Celts or Vikings, the Praxians as Amerinds, and the various non-humans as their Tolkein/Disney counterparts and the players have an instant frame of reference. Then, as the campaign progresses and their understanding of the world deepens they begin to see, and appreciate, the differences. Because of this basic/superficial resemblance to familiar archetypes, I never felt that Glorantha really had all that steep of a learning curve. I also liked the way that myth, religion, and the Otherworld were melded and juxtaposed with the mundane and the constant tangible sense of Wonder that provided -- on the one hand Gimpy's Tavern and Raus Fort, on the other the Block, the Cradle, and Gonn Orta's castle -- and, last but certainly not least, I liked the fact that, for all it's Campbellian seriousness, Glorantha was also really funny, with Ducks and Trollball and Mostali mating rituals and crossdressing Sun Domers and so on -- no other world setting that I know of had so much funny stuff so seemlessly ingrained into something so fundamentally serious. Trent Trent From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 07:43:58 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:43:58 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha Message-ID: <40725EE9.2C8B291F.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 3:30:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, peter at maranci.net writes: > When I was first introduced to Glorantha in the mid-1980's, I loved it. It > was a totally amazing world to game in. I liked Ducks, Gonn Orta, Chaos > Humakt, everything. It was all totally fun. > > Here's what I hate about Glorantha now: > > 1. The scholars. Those assholes for whom Glorantha wasn't a world to play > in and have fun, but rather a sociological thought-experiment and insanely > huge body of "knowledge". Their sole purpose was to measure the size of > their flaccid...mentalities...by who could remember the most meaningless > details and be nastiest in flaming those who didn't agree with them. Amen! When I first brought up the scholar vs gamer debate on the RQ list and got shot down over and over again, I left. I came more and more to think of the scholars as people whose lives were so dismally devoid of purpose that they felt the need to immerse themselves in a fantasy world and treat it as if it were real. If all of that mental energy had instead been devoted to the study of REAL LIFE cultures, perhaps we would understand a lot more of our own world by now. > 2. Greg. He's a charming fellow with a weirdly magnetic personality, and I > have no doubt at all that he's a truly great gamemaster, as well as being > extremely creative (and apparently extremely lucky, to boot). But his > penchant to jerk around Glorantha and the people who want to roleplay with > it has gone beyond all reason, and has become just plain annoying. Plus, > he had me killed by torture in GloranthaCon I. :D I seriously doubt Greg has ever evinced much interest in GMing. He has always struck me as rather ambivalent about RQ or any game system in general and I always flet that he felt any such attempts to systemize his world only tarnished it. > 3. Too ^%@#ing much detail. Glorantha had a lot of great detail by the > early 1990s. Now, the level of information available about the world is > just insane - *particularly* because most of the new material seems to > either be pointless or present just to contradict previous information > (thanks, Greg). By the way, I believe that this will be the reason that > Hero Wars will never expand beyond its cult fan base. The learning curve > is insanely forbidding now. This is because Greg's entire raison d'etre with Glorantha is to try to mirror the way real world myths develop. The problem with this is that it is IMO pointless to try and mirror real world mythic development in a world that is not like ours and did not develop like ours. It's like trying to make salami taste like ice cream. What's the point? Just get real ice cream. If the point of Glorantha is to gain insight into real world mythic structures and evolution.....JUST STUDY THE REAL WORLD!!! This is my major argument with the scholars. Whenever I pointed out that in a world where magic works and the gods actually walked the earth people would react differently than they do in our world, I was constantly criticized for not being able to understand the subtleties of the relationship between men and their gods. > 4. Hero Wars. I don't like the system. I REALLY don't like the system. And > a lot of the people who play it seem very arrogant to me. Most of them > can't talk about RQ without constantly putting it down. Come on, fellas, > if you're *that* insecure about your system at least be a little subtle > about it! I also do not personally like the system, though I can indeed understand how others like it. For me it is far to open ended and story-telling for my taste, the combat way too abstract, places too much burden on the DM, and its systems are far too counter-intuitive. For the record, apparently Greg thought this too because HQ seems to tout having cleaned up much of the problems I have enumerated. > 5. The sense of fun. It's gone. Maybe it's me, but I don't think so. No...it's gone. When a game feels more like school or work than a game....it's gone. > I'd love to play or GM in classic Glorantha. Unfortunately my vision of > that world may have been hopelessly tainted by "modern" Glorantha. > Fortunately making up interesting and different new worlds is really easy. Yep. Exactly why I went and made up my own, which I run now. > Also, speaking of RQ in space: a friend of mine in college wrote up 80% of > an adaptation of RQ for space which he called (as I remember) "Star > Quest". I was just moving some stuff out of storage and saw it listed on > the contents of one of my boxes. I'm tempted to dig it out > and see how it > holds up! Didn't BRP have a space version? Devin From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 07:49:17 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:49:17 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha is a fine setting Message-ID: <250BEFD2.0E61A58B.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 3:37:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, trentfs at ix.netcom.com writes: > The main reason I liked Glorantha back in the day was that it took what are > basically familiar tropes from fantasy and history and put interesting and > unique twists on them. Describe the Lunars as Romans, the Orlanthi as Celts or > Vikings, the Praxians as Amerinds, and the various non-humans as their > Tolkein/Disney counterparts and the players have an instant frame of > reference. Then, as the campaign progresses and their understanding of the > world deepens they begin to see, and appreciate, the differences. Because of > this basic/superficial resemblance to familiar archetypes, > I never felt that > Glorantha really had all that steep of a learning curve. I think trolls were the best example of this. Those of us who played RQ before Trollpak (RQ2) came out know that trolls were portrayed basically as D&D or fairy tale beings. Even old illustrations of RQ trolls had them as the "troll under the bridge" type of dumb big monster. Then out came trollpak and trolls were changed forever. That was indeed a strength of Glorantha in its heyday.....the revalation that trolls were actually Uz, elves were actually Aldryami, dwarves were actually Mostali, etc. Devin From aragan at ucla.edu Tue Jan 14 08:43:27 2003 From: aragan at ucla.edu (Anthony Ragan) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:43:27 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha In-Reply-To: <4213.216.118.190.11.1042489803.squirrel@webmail> References: <4213.216.118.190.11.1042489803.squirrel@webmail> Message-ID: <20030113133224.F3EB.ARAGAN@ucla.edu> While scanning the heavens for a sign, "Peter Maranci" wrote on Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:30:03 -0500 (EST): > 1. The scholars. Those assholes for whom Glorantha wasn't a world to play > in and have fun, but rather a sociological thought-experiment and insanely > huge body of "knowledge". Ah, the old RQ-digest. I left sometime around the Nth argument over the Aeolian Heresy, or whatever it was. It seems they were offended whenever anyone wanted to talk about RQ the game. > 2. Greg. (...) But his > penchant to jerk around Glorantha cf., "Gregging." :) > 3. Too ^%@#ing much detail. Glorantha had a lot of great detail by the > early 1990s. Now, the level of information available about the world is > just insane - *particularly* because most of the new material seems to > either be pointless or present just to contradict previous information > (thanks, Greg). I solved that problem by simply not buying anything put out for HeroWars. I'll make my own version of Glorantha, thanks. :) (Besides, I'm more interested in the low to mid-level stuff than high-end Heroquesting.) > 5. The sense of fun. It's gone. Maybe it's me, but I don't think so. Only if you let them take it away from you. I couldn't care less what the Glorantha "elite" decide about the mythic relations between Heortland and the Ernalda corn dance (though I'm sure it will be the subject of months of debate and flame). I'll develop the parts I think are fun, so there. :P ;-) > Fortunately making up interesting and different new worlds is really easy. Speaking of which, I recall finding a site for an interesting world a guy made using RQ3 -- the campaign area was the Chesapeake Bay. Does tha ring a bell with anyone? > *************** --Anthony Ragan Irishspy at mindspring.com, Irishspy at yahoo.com Writing credits at: http://makeashorterlink.com/?W57026C72 From gerall at chromebob.com Tue Jan 14 09:55:44 2003 From: gerall at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:55:44 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest In-Reply-To: References: <3E21B789.2000004@earthlink.net> <000301c2ba7e$31ca91c0$6401a8c0@ab.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: <3E2343F0.9010104@chromebob.com> Bruce Ollerenshaw wrote: > Hi (jumping in at last), > > Are there any unofficial Traveller versions on the web? > http://www.basicrps.com/links/stefan/brp.html This is the closest thing I've found so far... It's a little sketchy, but it uses BRPS like it was intended. Have fun! -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Jan 14 10:15:19 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:15:19 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha Message-ID: <1e.7362e98.2b54a287@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 3:45:29 PM Central Standard Time, Anthony Ragan writes: > Speaking of which, I recall finding a site for an interesting world a > guy made using RQ3 -- the campaign area was the Chesapeake Bay. Does > tha ring a bell with anyone? > Hmmm, Is it the one where the Vikings had sellted in the area and were interacting with the locals? If so, then its here: Vikings and Skraelings Campaign -Ken Murphy- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From tmmurphy at uclink4.berkeley.edu Tue Jan 14 12:10:09 2003 From: tmmurphy at uclink4.berkeley.edu (Trevor Murphy) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:10:09 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] fatigued by Fatigue Message-ID: This may already been addressed before, but has anyone found a good fix for the RQ3 Fatigue rules? They call for too much bookkeeping for simple mind. Does anyone have a simple, elegant way to prevent characters from wandering around like Michelin Men packed with multiple layers of armor and goodies? From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jan 14 12:19:26 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 20:19:26 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] fatigued by Fatigue Message-ID: <0FE0CD91.68DB36A7.00047AF1@aol.com> In a message dated 1/13/2003 8:10:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, tmmurphy at uclink4.berkeley.edu writes: > This may already been addressed before, but has anyone found a good > fix for the RQ3 Fatigue rules? They call for too much bookkeeping > for simple mind. Does anyone have a simple, elegant way to prevent > characters from wandering around like Michelin Men packed > with > multiple layers of armor and goodies? Enc does much more in RQ3 than fiddle with fatigue. It subtracts directly from Dodge and magic skills. Why not simply apply ENC to all dex or str based skills? Kind of like D&D does now. Devin From Rjmeints at aol.com Tue Jan 14 12:22:27 2003 From: Rjmeints at aol.com (Rjmeints at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 20:22:27 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics and Glorantha Message-ID: All, Devin recently asked about how I secured the rights to publish the Gloranthan Classics. There's no real mystery to it. My Colleague, Colin Phillips, and I put together a simple plan detailing what we wanted to do and how we would accomplish it. We presented it to Greg Stafford, who responded with a number fo concerns, which, when answered, led to us agreeing on the deal. I believe that we succeeded in getting the deal because we were already known enough quantities in Gloranthan circles who could deliver the end product. We also didn't need anything from Issaries other than their approval. They only had to say "yes" and we took it from there. We also bore all the financial risk and did 99% of the work. Greg's input was mainly supportive, and mainly centers on OK'ing the final contents of each reprint. In return, Issaries benefits numerous ways, especially in terms of getting a lot of Glorantha (almost 1000 pages) back in print. Issaries didn't even have to provide us with any files of the originals; we scanned all of the text and art in and cleaned it up before combining new art with a new layout. We were fortunate to get a number of unpublished pieces from Greg and a few others, which added another small new aspect to each volume. In short, we put together a plan, and then asked. In some ways, it's a shame that Volume IV - Borderlands and Plunder will be the last volume published. I've enjoyed working on each of them and wish there were more volumes to do, but the simple truth is that there really isn't enough RQ2 material left to reprint once Vol IV is out, other than the Map Set also scheduled for this summer. Spending copious amounts of time over the last 4 years sifting through all the original Runequest products I have rediscovered my love of Glorantha. Reading through Griffin Mountain in particular was a wonderful journey. Glorantha has a depth and richness I have never found in any other game. I've enjoyed many other games, including D&D, Traveller, Cthulhu, Elric, etc., but the game world of Glorantha has something for everybody. Plenty of philosophy, religion, culture, politics, and good old dungeon crawls. All that and my two favorite creatures, DUCKS and JACK O'BEARS. Being an old time Uncle Scrooge fan, just like Greg Stafford, ducks will always have a place in any game of mine. As for Jack O'Bears, they are way too cool for words. Who cares if you have to suspend disbelief. That's what roleplaying is all about. Who cares if they don't make sense. I thought that's what make believe was all about. When I want everything to have a logical, reasoned foundation in reality, I'll just live my regular life. If anyone wants to know more about the Gloranthan Classics, please email me. www.glorantha.info (no longer glorantha.co.uk) Thanks, Rick --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jpw at gtemail.net Tue Jan 14 12:38:01 2003 From: jpw at gtemail.net (John Whitehead) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 20:38:01 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics and Glorantha Message-ID: <20030114013801.20094.qmail@verizonmail.com> OK Catalog? Price list? RQ 2 back in print? Tell me please. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rjmeints at aol.com Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 20:22:27 EST To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics and Glorantha > All, > > Devin recently asked about how I secured [snip] I'll just live my regular life. > > If anyone wants to know more about the Gloranthan Classics, > please email me. > > > > Thanks, > Rick > -- _______________________________________________ Talk More, Pay Less with Net2Phone Direct(R), up to 1500 minutes free! http://www.net2phone.com/cgi-bin/link.cgi?143 From Rjmeints at aol.com Tue Jan 14 13:12:17 2003 From: Rjmeints at aol.com (Rjmeints at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:12:17 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics Message-ID: <12a.200510b1.2b54cc01@aol.com> Here's the scoop on the classics available, in short: Volume I - Pavis and Big Rubble (316 pages) Volume II - Griffin Mountain (256 pages + 12 pages handouts) Volume III - Cult Compendium (352 pages) They contain everything the originals contained, plus more art and a few previously unpublished bits. The Compendium has 44 RQ2 cults, including all of those in Cults of Terror and Cults of Prax. These reprints have all new layout, but contain the material as published for Runequest 2. No updates for RQ3 or HW have been made. Before anyone asks, I will not be publishing the Runequest rules. I do not have the rights. I tried to get them, but could not. The only volume left for me to publish this year is Borderlands and Plunder. As a special offer to the RQ Rules Crowd, I'll sell the softcover versions for $25 each, which includes US postage. Overseas airmail postage is $15 extra per book. I also had hardcover versions of the books as well, but can't really do a deal on them because they were so much more expensive to make. They're $60 each. Rick Meints www.glorantha.info --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From alanchambers at attbi.com Tue Jan 14 13:29:47 2003 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:29:47 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics References: <12a.200510b1.2b54cc01@aol.com> Message-ID: <014601c2bb74$ceec7a80$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> > > As a special offer to the RQ Rules Crowd, I'll sell the softcover versions > for $25 each, which includes US postage. Overseas airmail postage > is $15 extra per book. I also had hardcover versions of the books as > well, but can't really do a deal on them because they were so much > more expensive to make. They're $60 each. > > Rick Meints > www.glorantha.info > And how do we identify ourselves as list members? I'd love to have a softcover copy of Pavis and the Big Rubble. Alan From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Jan 14 14:12:51 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:12:51 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: Message-ID: <00a201c2bb7a$d35f0820$9865fea9@wizard> No idea. I'm thinking of talking to Charlie Krank to see if he'd like to publish SPQR as a new expanded Magic World. Worlds of Wonder as such did not sell all that well. Superworld went through two printings, but the second one took years to sell out. We sidestepped spaceships because we could have spent the whole 16 pages discussing building them. One of my favorite short campaigns was a combined Future World Magic World setup where a bunch of mercenaries hired by The Mob went through a portal and ran into a fortress controlled by some very nasty fantasy badguys. They cleaned it out and fortified it again with things like a laser tripod weapon when the good guys sent to clean out the bad guys showed up and attacked. The faceoff was great. One of the great scenes was the merc with the force blade taking on the dragon. He died, but the Dragon wasn't interested in the fight any more, either. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > > And an excellent game Future World was: I had great fun plugging both Magic > World and Future World into Stormbringer (1st Edition) and sending players > on extended jaunts round the multiverse... Sadly though, Future World > side-stepped the whole spaceships issue... > > Steve, any idea what the chances are of Chaosium ever re-publishing any of > the Worlds of Wonder games? > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton > (Who bizarrely has been thinking about a pseudo Luther Arkwright campaign > recently and so last weekend had dug out Worlds of Wonder etc...) > > > > "Joseph Elric > Smith Mormon To: > minion of Arioch" cc: > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > Sent by: > rq-rules-admin at cr > ashbox.com > > > 13/01/2003 15:42 > Please respond to > rq-rules > > > > > > > we always used the space game from worlds of wonder and played traveller > that way > 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: "Bruce Ollerenshaw" > To: > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 4:04 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > > > > Hi (jumping in at last), > > > > Are there any unofficial Traveller versions on the web? > > > > Bruce > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "D. Smart" > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 11:44 AM > > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest > > > > > > > Amen! GAWD, I'd love to see a official Traveller version of BRP! > > > > > > David Smart > > > > > > Roger Benham wrote: > > > > > > >I actually take the opposite view- BRP can be used much like GURPS to > > create more or less any background.  A separation from Glorantha- my > > least favourite gameworld- would allow the system more expansion rathere > > than locking it entirely to just one world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From ollerenb at telus.net Tue Jan 14 16:41:58 2003 From: ollerenb at telus.net (Bruce Ollerenshaw) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:41:58 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RuneQuest References: <3E21B789.2000004@earthlink.net> <000301c2ba7e$31ca91c0$6401a8c0@ab.hsia.telus.net> <3E2343F0.9010104@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <001c01c2bb8f$a7cc59a0$6401a8c0@ab.hsia.telus.net> Gerall Kahla wrote: > http://www.basicrps.com/links/stefan/brp.html > > This is the closest thing I've found so far... It's a > little sketchy, but it uses BRPS like it was intended. > > Have fun! > Thanks! That's a great little article. Bruce From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Tue Jan 14 20:56:58 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 03:56:58 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745D5BB@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> > When I was first introduced to Glorantha in the mid-1980's, I loved > it. It was a totally amazing world to game in. I liked Ducks, Gonn > Orta, Chaos Humakt, everything. It was all totally fun. > > Here's what I hate about Glorantha now: > > 1. The scholars. Those assholes for whom Glorantha wasn't a world to > play in and have fun, but rather a sociological thought-experiment and > insanely huge body of "knowledge". Their sole purpose was to measure > the size of their flaccid...mentalities...by who could remember the > most meaningless details and be nastiest in flaming those who didn't > agree with them. > Well this is exactly my definition of what a Lankhor My priest is ;-) > 3. Too ^%@#ing much detail. Glorantha had a lot of great detail by the > early 1990s. Now, the level of information available about the world > is just insane - *particularly* because most of the new material seems > to either be pointless or present just to contradict previous > information (thanks, Greg). By the way, I believe that this will be > the reason that Hero Wars will never expand beyond its cult fan base. > The learning curve is insanely forbidding now. > I'd love to play or GM in classic Glorantha. Unfortunately my vision > of that world may have been hopelessly tainted by "modern" Glorantha. > Fortunately making up interesting and different new worlds is really > easy. When I first ran into RuneQuest, it was RQ3 French edition, I enjoyed the game System. I was already familiar with BRP throughout COC and Stormbringer, but I think that RQ is much more precise (perhaps too much). However, I was never able to conduct a campaign in the Glorantha settings. In the rule book, there was only ten pages which describes the world and more, I had no reference at all about it. Even the first supplements didn't help and I Finally run my campaigns into my own world, which is more related to M. Morcook Multivers (players were moving from world to world, mixing fantasy with post modern worlds). It was only when the Genertela and the "Gods of Glorantha" books were released that I fully understood the potential of Glorantha. Helas that was a little too late for me. > Also, speaking of RQ in space: a friend of mine in college wrote up > 80% of an adaptation of RQ for space which he called (as I remember) > "Star Quest". I was just moving some stuff out of storage and saw it > listed on the contents of one of my boxes. I'm tempted to dig it out > and see how it holds up! That could be fun to use. I already use some of the COC 80 materials for a modern world setting Pascal _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 14 22:11:43 2003 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon minion of Arioch) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 06:11:43 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics References: <12a.200510b1.2b54cc01@aol.com> <014601c2bb74$ceec7a80$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> Message-ID: <013e01c2bbbd$b844e0d0$6f7ba8c0@kenneith93j41k> I have my copy and it is fantastic, hoping the wife will be getting me griffin mountain for Valentines day :) 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: "Alan Chambers" To: Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 9:29 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics > > > > > > As a special offer to the RQ Rules Crowd, I'll sell the softcover versions > > for $25 each, which includes US postage. Overseas airmail postage > > is $15 extra per book. I also had hardcover versions of the books as > > well, but can't really do a deal on them because they were so much > > more expensive to make. They're $60 each. > > > > Rick Meints > > www.glorantha.info > > > And how do we identify ourselves as list members? I'd love to have a > softcover copy of Pavis and the Big Rubble. > Alan > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 22:53:05 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:53:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Glorantha In-Reply-To: <20030114013103.0D0224C268@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030114115305.67453.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Peter Maranci: > When I was first introduced to Glorantha in the mid-1980's, I loved it. It > was a totally amazing world to game in. I liked Ducks, Gonn Orta, Chaos > Humakt, everything. It was all totally fun. > > Here's what I hate about Glorantha now: > > 1. The scholars. Those assholes for whom Glorantha wasn't a world to play > in and have fun, but rather a sociological thought-experiment and insanely > huge body of "knowledge". Their sole purpose was to measure the size of > their flaccid...mentalities...by who could remember the most meaningless > details and be nastiest in flaming those who didn't agree with them. OK, the Gloranthan Digest can be a bit heavy, especially when the same people are having their pointless arguments, but ignore that and ignore some of the websites and ignore the Unfinished Works and the rest of Glorantha is scholar-light. There are anoraks in every gaming area, I know people who can tell you anything about Middle Earth, even the things published from Tolkein's dustbin. > 2. Greg. He's a charming fellow with a weirdly magnetic personality, and I > have no doubt at all that he's a truly great gamemaster, as well as being > extremely creative (and apparently extremely lucky, to boot). But his > penchant to jerk around Glorantha and the people who want to roleplay with > it has gone beyond all reason, and has become just plain annoying. Plus, > he had me killed by torture in GloranthaCon I. :D I think he's split between seeing Glorantha as a world in its own right, with stories, histories and mythologies and Glorantha as a game world with rules and scenarios. Don't forget that Glorantha existed in story form way before the games came out. However, that doesn't help those of us who like to roleplay in Glorantha. The answer is simple - forget Greg Stafford and use the source books or web information. > 3. Too ^%@#ing much detail. Glorantha had a lot of great detail by the > early 1990s. Now, the level of information available about the world is > just insane - *particularly* because most of the new material seems to > either be pointless or present just to contradict previous information > (thanks, Greg). By the way, I believe that this will be the reason that > Hero Wars will never expand beyond its cult fan base. The learning curve > is insanely forbidding now. There is a lot of detail, but that doesn't stop people from ignoring it. When we started playing in Glorantha, we didn't know anything about the world, the gods or anything. We set up shop in Sartar, moved to Prax, moved to Balazar and learned things on the way. Those of us who wanted to know more bought extra books and read up on them. Those that didn't carried on as before. You do need some background knowledge, especially where the cults are concerned (Orlanth - Chaos and Lunars bad, trolls bad, earth good) but that can come with playing. We were shown Cults of Prax and told to pick a cult to join, when we had played for a couple of months or so. We looked through them and chose the cults that sounded good to us. At that level, the background is pretty irrelevant. Of course, if you like the background then you can sink into it as deeply as you want. > 4. Hero Wars. I don't like the system. I REALLY don't like the system. And > a lot of the people who play it seem very arrogant to me. Most of them > can't talk about RQ without constantly putting it down. Come on, fellas, > if you're *that* insecure about your system at least be a little subtle > about it! I am not keen on the HW system, personally, and if I started roleplaying again (over my wife's dead body) it would be with RQ in Glorantha. However, why should a system put you off playing RQ in Glorantha? That's like saying "I don't like playing Dragon Pass, so I won't play RQ in Glorantha". > 5. The sense of fun. It's gone. Maybe it's me, but I don't think so. We started playing in RQ2, moved to RQ3 when the new stuff came out ("new" being relative) and had as much fun tromping through Dorastor as we ever had in RQ2. Fun is what you put into the game and what you get out of it. I've played RQ games that are like having teeth pulled, because the GM and the players were far too serious. If your games in Glorantha aren't fun, then the only people to blame are those involved in the playing and GMing. > I'd love to play or GM in classic Glorantha. Unfortunately my vision of > that world may have been hopelessly tainted by "modern" Glorantha. Seems a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You don't like the new Gloranthan culture, so you throw away the Classic Glorantha. It's a shame because Glorantha is the best world I have played in. Maybe we are getting jaded as we get older and have forgotten how good it used to be. > Fortunately making up interesting and different new worlds is really easy. Why make the effort when a perfectly good world is already there? I'm too old and busy to do that, unfortunately. Now, Alternate Earth is a different matter entirely, that is well worth making the effort for. Anthony Ragan: > I solved that problem by simply not buying anything put out for > HeroWars. I'll make my own version of Glorantha, thanks. :) You've missed out a treat in Storm Tribe and Thunder Rebels, then. They are perfect for running an Orlanthi game and have loads of hints to RQ cults. Fantastic background material. > (Besides, I'm more interested in the low to mid-level stuff than > high-end Heroquesting.) It takes all sorts, I suppose :-) > > 5. The sense of fun. It's gone. Maybe it's me, but I don't think so. > > Only if you let them take it away from you. I couldn't care less what > the Glorantha "elite" decide about the mythic relations between > Heortland and the Ernalda corn dance (though I'm sure it will be the > subject of months of debate and flame). I'll develop the parts I think > are fun, so there. :P ;-) Morris Dancing in Glorantha, now there's something I'd like to see. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 15 00:21:08 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:21:08 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Encumbrance and fateague Message-ID: I'm currently trying to tinker a bit with the encumbrance vs. fategue myself. I think fighting with a lot of stuff (enc.) should affect the fighting abilities more on the DEX SR rather than fategue. When we spar with longswords wearing padding, we can do just as many things in armour as without, roll, salto, etc. but mabue a bit slower. Actually some of the tecniqes we use only work if people are slowed down with armor. If they haven't, the fight is just to quick to do them (ref. Steven Segal). Based on personal experience, I find it hard to beleave that a warrior dressed up in full plate only can fight for 2 - 3 minutes before go tumbling down exhasusted... I'll use myself as an example: When I was drafted (We have a conscription army in Norway) and got my gear on for the first time to go out on a march (ca. 16 kg of stuff), my body was compleately fucked after 2 hours of sedate walking. Six months later, wading happily about in the lovely Norwegian nature with an additional burden of a recoilless rifle and ammo strapped on one's back; totaling around 28 kg, fealt allmost as wearing T-shirt and Shorts! (Excaggerating a bit...) Now some of you who bother reading this last of my tedios mails might remark that my CON and STR had increased significantly during those months, but no, I'd rather say it had decreased, acording to my running results, strenght tests, etc. My theory which I'll try and make rules after, is that you get used to encumbrance you are familiar with; say a kind of "Skill increase" in "wearing that hot itching hauberk" or "Bastard sword carrying" This "Skill" (I'll call it somthing else) will increase as the months pass by and can them be used to subtract from the enc. cost, so that a full plate armour will the first day feal very uncomftable (the full enc. effect; f. exs.20) but after some months might have dropped to -say half. ------------------------------------------ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From nikk at cyber-rights.net Wed Jan 15 00:41:40 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 05:41:40 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Why I love Glorantha Message-ID: <200301141341.h0EDfedO067368@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >1. The scholars. Oh i could not agree so much. I left the GD soon after debate came down to nothing but how long Sun Dome Templars spears were. It all seemed a bit pointless to me. I mean, the scholastic element shouldn't be ignored, the "hanging togetherness" of Glorantha where the scholastic element manage to stick everything together and come up with excellent explanations for something seemingly contradictory is excellent. But by the by it's all very boring. I remember having conversations along the lines of "IMG it's like this" with responses listing the many reasons why it shouldn't, sometimes wiht good reasons, but quite often just because it didn't fit in with their strict interpretation of Glorantha and ignoring the possibility that it might make a really good gaming tool/experience. >2. Greg. I like some of the New Glorantha. I like the many new gods, I've enjoyed converting it, I'm sure that by the by it'll add to my game. I dislike Gregging entire areas out of existence, I dislike Gregging truths held dear to my heart. >4. Hero Wars. I don't think it's a _bad_ system. I mean, it's flawed. I worry about how much it was actually playtested (and by playtest I mean by people who went out primarily to break the rules to see how far they'd bend) and how many of the normal roleplaying experiences can now be reduced down to a single die roll (not the greatest thing IMO). Still it does have some benefits over and above RuneQuest, but I've managed to get RQ to handle high level gaming, HeroQuests and all the other guff that HW was s'posed to do so I see little reason to change. >5. The sense of fun. I still think it's fun. Later this month, my PCs shall travel to the Lunar Empire, see the Crimson Bat, dine in Glamour, and maybe bump off a Shargashi priest (unless they head off in the wrong direction, always a possibility)... Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj4kE5MWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzTnN AJ0ZOiGobCc40dmXCDjpyAduGkLpUACeNoEdj3qiLdo1uF2ZaPJng4yht5w= =yZ5v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From bick10 at attbi.com Wed Jan 15 01:09:35 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:09:35 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Encumbrance and fateague Message-ID: <20030114141705.E9F174C265@thinbits.com> > Based on personal experience, I find it hard to beleave that a warrior dressed > up in full plate only can fight for 2 - 3 minutes before go tumbling down > exhasusted... I'll use myself as an example: In RQ3 using standard Fatigue rules, I haven't seen Tumbling Down Exhausted result. They just get worse as time goes on. The blows get slower and the parry/dodges get clumsier as they enter negative fatigue and subtract that from their skills. But fall down? We had two Rune Lord Humakti go at it. (PC & NPC) They agreed to full armor, no magic. I think the fight lasted 10 minutes game time. The player even backed off and circled a couple of rounds to roll for recovered FG. At the end the 100%+ skill were quite low with the player rolling misses for the first time in a very long time. It was interesting to watch the degradation of skill as the fight went on. After that, there wasn't the scoffing at spells like vigor. (That's fine Jim, If the merchant doesn't have a Bladesharp 5, I'll buy that Vigor matrix instead) > When I was drafted (We have a conscription army in Norway) and Joined the USMC myself. Did get to do a winter war in Norway. Up above the artic circle. > got my gear on for the first time to go out on a march (ca. 16 > kg of stuff), my body was compleately fucked after 2 hours of > sedate walking. Six months later, wading happily about in the > lovely Norwegian nature with an additional burden of a > recoilless rifle and ammo strapped on one's back; totaling > around 28 kg, fealt allmost as wearing T-shirt and Shorts! > (Excaggerating a bit...) In my case, I considered it conditioning. By the way, didn't know you guys ever wore t-shirts outside. > Now some of you who bother reading this last of my tedios mails might remark > that my CON and STR had increased significantly during those months, but no, I'd > rather say it had decreased, acording to my running results, strenght tests, > etc. Actually, my first physical fitness test after boot camp was better than any while I was in. As I understand it the three months boot resulted in a tearing down and rebuild of my muscles. After wards they got some rest and healed. Then with less exercise I was able to perform better. Rest and healing has a lot to do with fitness improvement, it seems. > My theory which I'll try and make rules after, is that you get used to > encumbrance you are familiar with; say a kind of "Skill increase" in > "wearing that hot itching hauberk" or "Bastard sword > carrying" This "Skill" (I'll call it somthing else) will increase > as the months pass by and can them be used to subtract from the enc. cost, so > that a full plate armour will the first day feal very uncomftable (the full enc. > effect; f. exs.20) but after some months might have dropped to -say half. Instead of skill, how about, proficiency. Yea I know D&D loves that word. But that is what you gain. Put chain on me and I will be clumsy and slow with it on. Run me around for three months and I will gain a far level of proficiency with it. Survive combat and a little more training, well, I will mostly be able to carry it without hindrance. I agree the ENC for Armor could be reduced. Now just determine the levels of proficiency. There might be other factors as well, such as how well it fits. Jim From lance at dyasdesigns.com Wed Jan 15 01:54:34 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:54:34 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <200301101520.h0AFKpSV087472@mailserver1.hushmail.com> References: <200301101520.h0AFKpSV087472@mailserver1.hushmail.com> Message-ID: <3E2424AA.3030000@dyasdesigns.com> One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in some cool simulational way. The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively influence many. Any thoughts? Lance Dyas Decision Driven Gaming Center. http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleply From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Jan 15 02:11:46 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:11:46 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Encumbrance and fateague References: <20030114141705.E9F174C265@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <006501c2bbdf$41abbb70$9865fea9@wizard> While not necessarily defending the RQ3 Fatique rules (I changed them in SPQR), I have to say that armor makes a real difference in the body's fatigue in combat or other hard exertion. The real problem is not the weight, which is often well distributed and easy to carry. The problem is airflow. There isn't any. This means that you bake inside the armor with no way to let the sweat out. I have fought inside, in armor, and been exhausted in almost no time because there was just no way to let my skin breathe. A sixty pound pack and cotton fatigues just isn't the same thing as 60 pounds of armor, no matter how well distributed. You can fight longer outside, but even that takes you down before too long. Steve Perrin, perspiring just thinking about it ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:09 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Encumbrance and fateague > > Based on personal experience, I find it hard to beleave that a warrior > dressed > > up in full plate only can fight for 2 - 3 minutes before go tumbling down > > exhasusted... I'll use myself as an example: > > In RQ3 using standard Fatigue rules, I haven't seen Tumbling Down Exhausted > result. They just get worse as time goes on. The blows get slower and the > parry/dodges get clumsier as they enter negative fatigue and subtract that from > their skills. But fall down? > > We had two Rune Lord Humakti go at it. (PC & NPC) They agreed to full armor, > no magic. I think the fight lasted 10 minutes game time. The player even > backed off and circled a couple of rounds to roll for recovered FG. At the end > the 100%+ skill were quite low with the player rolling misses for the first > time in a very long time. It was interesting to watch the degradation of skill > as the fight went on. After that, there wasn't the scoffing at spells like > vigor. (That's fine Jim, If the merchant doesn't have a Bladesharp 5, I'll buy > that Vigor matrix instead) > > > When I was drafted (We have a conscription army in Norway) and > > Joined the USMC myself. Did get to do a winter war in Norway. Up above the > artic circle. > > > got my gear on for the first time to go out on a march (ca. 16 > > kg of stuff), my body was compleately fucked after 2 hours of > > sedate walking. Six months later, wading happily about in the > > lovely Norwegian nature with an additional burden of a > > recoilless rifle and ammo strapped on one's back; totaling > > around 28 kg, fealt allmost as wearing T-shirt and Shorts! > > (Excaggerating a bit...) > > In my case, I considered it conditioning. By the way, didn't know you guys > ever wore t-shirts outside. > > > Now some of you who bother reading this last of my tedios mails might remark > > that my CON and STR had increased significantly during those months, but no, > I'd > > rather say it had decreased, acording to my running results, strenght tests, > > etc. > > Actually, my first physical fitness test after boot camp was better than any > while I was in. As I understand it the three months boot resulted in a tearing > down and rebuild of my muscles. After wards they got some rest and healed. > Then with less exercise I was able to perform better. Rest and healing has a > lot to do with fitness improvement, it seems. > > > My theory which I'll try and make rules after, is that you get used to > > encumbrance you are familiar with; say a kind of "Skill increase" > in > > "wearing that hot itching hauberk" or "Bastard sword > > carrying" This "Skill" (I'll call it somthing else) will > increase > > as the months pass by and can them be used to subtract from the enc. cost, so > > that a full plate armour will the first day feal very uncomftable (the full > enc. > > effect; f. exs.20) but after some months might have dropped to -say half. > > Instead of skill, how about, proficiency. Yea I know D&D loves that word. But > that is what you gain. Put chain on me and I will be clumsy and slow with it > on. Run me around for three months and I will gain a far level of proficiency > with it. Survive combat and a little more training, well, I will mostly be > able to carry it without hindrance. > > I agree the ENC for Armor could be reduced. Now just determine the levels of > proficiency. There might be other factors as well, such as how well it fits. > > Jim > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 15 02:14:31 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:14:31 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New vs. old Glorantha Message-ID: ------------------------------------------ Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and ------------------------------------------ get 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 15 02:19:42 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:19:42 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Skills above 100% Message-ID: I think that the "Land of Ninja" have some interesting rules on that area in their Ki skills. I will introduce the Ki rules to the entire Glorantha, not just for the Jap's, as there in my oppinion is nothing special about Eastern Martial arts; it's just that that's the fassion theese days. Nowadays old european martial arts are beeing resurrected, and they have just as much to fare with as the eastern dudes. (Not meant to critisize eastern martial artists, just the mythical aura Bruce Lee and Jacki Chan movies have made in the west.) ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8 is here: Try it ------------------------------------------ free* for 2 months ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From jellen at ameritech.net Wed Jan 15 04:30:47 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:30:47 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <200301101520.h0AFKpSV087472@mailserver1.hushmail.com> <3E2424AA.3030000@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <019301c2bbf2$acf40c30$3410fea9@frkt5> I like! Much more useful a characteristic than APP. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 8:54 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in some cool simulational way. The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively influence many. Any thoughts? Lance Dyas Decision Driven Gaming Center. http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleply _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Wed Jan 15 07:52:36 2003 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael Christian) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:52:36 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> It seems like POW is something that already covers this. Perhaps not all of the things that you have in mind, but at least some of them. Putting more oomph behind spells, aura making it harder to use stealth, etc. -----Original Message----- From: Lance Dyas [mailto:lance at dyasdesigns.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:55 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in some cool simulational way. The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively influence many. Any thoughts? Lance Dyas Decision Driven Gaming Center. http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleply _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From lance at dyasdesigns.com Wed Jan 15 13:48:54 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:48:54 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> Message-ID: <3E24CC16.8030408@dyasdesigns.com> POW is obviously the Psychic Strength Analog.... it seemed that the psyche deserves differentiated... POW is almost entirely good effects even the Pow negatively affects stealth went out in later version of the system... or am I misrecalling. Michael Christian wrote: >It seems like POW is something that already covers this. Perhaps not all of >the things that you have in mind, but at least some of them. Putting more >oomph behind spells, aura making it harder to use stealth, etc. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Lance Dyas [mailto:lance at dyasdesigns.com] >Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:55 AM >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some >characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it >added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in >some cool simulational way. > >The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic >Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO >makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding >things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells >and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively >influence many. > >Any thoughts? > >Lance Dyas > >Decision Driven Gaming Center. >http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleply > > > From lance at dyasdesigns.com Wed Jan 15 16:40:34 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:40:34 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> Message-ID: <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately understood. Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth thing... EGO takes it over. Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect it is actually not trivial... For Instance... Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit static... if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. 16 - 20 = d3-1 21 - 25 = d3 26 - 30 = d3 +1 31 - 35 = 2d3 36 - 40 = 2d3+1 obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be significant... The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their POW is only midlin... Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) Lance Dyas http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ Michael Christian wrote: >It seems like POW is something that already covers this. Perhaps not all of >the things that you have in mind, but at least some of them. Putting more >oomph behind spells, aura making it harder to use stealth, etc. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Lance Dyas [mailto:lance at dyasdesigns.com] >Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:55 AM >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some >characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it >added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in >some cool simulational way. > >The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic >Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO >makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding >things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells >and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively >influence many. > >Any thoughts? > >Lance Dyas > > From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Jan 16 01:48:06 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 08:48:06 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> What effects would public ridicule/praise have on one's EGO? Due to the fluid nature of the stat *and* its potential pervasiveness throughout the system, it seems like it's too realistic to be workable (like the Duck vs. Troll pressing/fending scenario). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 11:40 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately understood. Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth thing... EGO takes it over. Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect it is actually not trivial... For Instance... Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit static... if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. 16 - 20 = d3-1 21 - 25 = d3 26 - 30 = d3 +1 31 - 35 = 2d3 36 - 40 = 2d3+1 obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be significant... The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their POW is only midlin... Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) Lance Dyas http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ Michael Christian wrote: >It seems like POW is something that already covers this. Perhaps not all of >the things that you have in mind, but at least some of them. Putting more >oomph behind spells, aura making it harder to use stealth, etc. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Lance Dyas [mailto:lance at dyasdesigns.com] >Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:55 AM >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >One of the things I always liked about RQ rules was the fact that some >characteristics were not wholely beneficial... SIZ was balanced... it >added a visualization to the character and afffected the mechanics in >some cool simulational way. > >The idea i had was to take it another step forward. EGO being a psychic >Analog to SIZ is useful for some things and detrimental to others. EGO >makes learning difficult. (You are more than ever dependent on finding >things challenging enough.) EGO puts some of the weight behind spells >and without sufficient EGO your Charism is unlikely to aggressively >influence many. > >Any thoughts? > >Lance Dyas > > _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From vhaag at rim.net Thu Jan 16 03:29:34 2003 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:29:34 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Problem With Glorantha In-Reply-To: <40725EE9.2C8B291F.00047AF1@aol.com> References: <40725EE9.2C8B291F.00047AF1@aol.com> Message-ID: <15909.35950.816537.82468@suldrun.rim.net> DevinC at aol.com writes: > > > I'd love to play or GM in classic Glorantha. Unfortunately > > my vision of that world may have been hopelessly tainted by > > "modern" Glorantha. Fortunately making up interesting and > > different new worlds is really easy. > > Yep. Exactly why I went and made up my own, which I run now. For me, sticking to Meints reprints as the "hard material" and picking over the AH RQ3 material for "ideas" is proabably the best way to go. > Didn't BRP have a space version? Yup. Ringworld and the Ringworld Companion were published. Then the license disappeared for various reasons. I personally rather like the game, but I know others have said it one of the weaker implementations of BRP. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "Apparently the filmmakers saw no problem ... with a fight scene so incomprehnsibly choreographed it seems to consist mostly of a chair." From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Thu Jan 16 03:38:20 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:38:20 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A38@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Interesting idea, but I don't like the roleplaying shackles that it would tend to impose. There is a similar problem with INT, but to a lesser extent. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 16 03:53:11 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:53:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ki Skills In-Reply-To: <20030115163917.3273D4C269@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030115165311.15070.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Bjorn Stolen: > I think that the "Land of Ninja" have some interesting rules on that area > in their Ki skills. I will introduce the Ki rules to the entire Glorantha, > not just for the Jap's, as there in my oppinion is nothing special about > Eastern Martial arts; it's just that that's the fassion theese days. I used Ki skills in Kralorela, but used them for all skills, not the reduced skill subset in Land of Ninja. I introduced a physical characteristic of CHI (base 3D6) which was used rather than using fatigue points, that way the Ki Masters could increase their CHI and could use them as a specific system. > Nowadays old european martial arts are beeing resurrected, and they have > just as much to fare with as the eastern dudes. (Not meant to critisize > eastern martial artists, just the mythical aura Bruce Lee and Jacki Chan > movies have made in the west.) I also used them for some Dragonewts and the Storm Dragon group of Ninjas, moving the skills out of Kralorela and into the EWF. They seemed to work really well. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Thu Jan 16 04:15:35 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:15:35 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] POW and spirit combat Message-ID: In my house rules, I am not using the standard 1D3 spirit damage in spirit combat but a Spirit Damage based on POW : POW Spirit Damage 1-5 1 6-10 1D3 11-15 1D6 16-20 1D10 21-30 2D6 31-40 3D6 each +10 +1D6 In addition, the POW gives also a Spirit Protection (SP) calculated by POW/5 (0.5+ rounded up). This spirit protection reduces the spirit damages (like armor vs weapon damage) New spells have been created on this basis : * Spirit Screen, a variable spirit magic spell that add +1 to SP * Spirit Claws, a variable pirit magic spell that add +1 to SD * Spirit Shield : a 2 points divine magic spell which adds +5 to SP. * Resist Spirit Attack, a sorcery spell which add +1 (per intensity) to SP Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 16 13:38:24 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:38:24 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> Message-ID: <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> J and/or Ellen wrote: >What effects would public ridicule/praise have on one's EGO? Due to the >fluid nature of the stat *and* > Cool I hadnt actually considering EGO as changing but you are right Now you make me want it even more ;-) EGO is often where psychic damage is taken!... Similar to the old reduce your power from spirit combat - works very nicely as a potential side effect of critical intimidation attacks... hehehe >its potential pervasiveness throughout the >system, > That just means it needs WELL considered once or twice or thrice(ie hacked to death by designer types) then playtested... for ongoing use it wouldnt necessarily be particularly complex If its expressed in ways that fit with the rest... of the rules. > it seems like it's too realistic > I think if we think of it like hitpoints.. and have it heal naturally at some arbitrary rate we wont have to be too realistic.. (realism might be having >to be workable (like the Duck vs. >Troll pressing/fending scenario). > You will have to explain this one.... as I am a newbie on the list (I assume this relates to the impracticality of a duck actually fighting a troll...?) >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Lance Dyas" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 11:40 PM >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into >limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect >analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their >learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go >huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately >understood. > >Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth >thing... EGO takes it over. > >Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect >it is actually not trivial... >For Instance... > >Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit >static... >if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence >Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have > >EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. >16 - 20 = d3-1 >21 - 25 = d3 >26 - 30 = d3 +1 >31 - 35 = 2d3 >36 - 40 = 2d3+1 >obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools >for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to >calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to >hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that >mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. > >So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be >significant... >The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... > >Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their >POW is only midlin... > >Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) > >Lance Dyas >http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ > >Michael Christian wrote: > > >> >> > > > From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 16 13:43:52 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:43:52 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A38@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A38@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <3E261C68.7070302@dyasdesigns.com> Hibbs, Phil wrote: >Interesting idea, but I don't like the roleplaying shackles that it would >tend to impose. There is a similar problem with INT, but to a lesser extent. > >Phil Hibbs. > Hell let people adjust their characters EGO and SIZe to be what they want them to be within the reaches of their race and reasonability if they arent happy with the roll.. It doesnt necessarily shackle as much as describe. If the negatives are properly systemetised with the goods it all comes out in the end. Lance From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 16 13:51:29 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:51:29 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] POW and spirit combat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E261E31.6010502@dyasdesigns.com> RAMEAU Alain wrote: >In addition, the POW gives also a Spirit Protection (SP) calculated by >POW/5 (0.5+ rounded up). >This spirit protection reduces the spirit damages (like armor vs weapon >damage) > > I probably needed this in my Spirit Combat using EGO rules >New spells have been created on this basis : >* Spirit Screen, a variable spirit magic spell that add +1 to SP >* Spirit Claws, a variable pirit magic spell that add +1 to SD >* Spirit Shield : a 2 points divine magic spell which adds +5 to SP. >* Resist Spirit Attack, a sorcery spell which add +1 (per intensity) to SP > >Alain. > Cool rules like the spell flavors, bringing some effects from 2nd edition forward sort of... I like that .. Lance Dyas From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 16 14:12:20 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 22:12:20 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] POW and spirit combat Message-ID: <25.32c491a8.2b577d14@aol.com> Hey gang, If you'd like a little different spin on the usual Spirit Combat, check out the rules in the CoC sourcebook 'The Golden Dawn' concerning Astral/Psyhchic ( I can't remember what its called exactly there) Combat rules. Essentially the normal RQ Spirit Combat, but 1/3 of the MP loss inflicted is taken at physical damage. -Ken Murphy- BTW, sometime last year *somebody* sent around a 3 page scan of an article on Ghosts/Spirits and their different effects/powers/abilities (I think it was for CoC, but easily usable in RQ). Checking my stuff, I discovered that the virus that killed my *old* computer ate the 2nd and 3rd pages of said article. Does anyone here remember said article? If so, could I get someone to send me a copy? Thanks in advance :) --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jellen at ameritech.net Thu Jan 16 16:41:49 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 23:41:49 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> If EGO's to be used like the other stats, then its fluidity would force you to recalculate certain skills as the EGO goes up & down. Drag, like the Duck-Troll Scenario. A few months ago, I bemoaned the fact that a Troll with a pike would always have the SR advantage over a Duck with a dagger. This seemed not only unfair to me but also unrealistic--what's to stop the Duck from pressing, i.e. running up closer to the Troll so that the Duck would be at an advantage? I'd considered implementing RQ4's pressing/fending system, but it seemed to be needlessly complicated--every round, someone would inevitably press and the other would fend, so the option really negates itself. I finally decided to dump weapon length & SIZ from SR calculations altogether and just use DEX (and fatigue) to determine SR. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 8:38 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ J and/or Ellen wrote: >What effects would public ridicule/praise have on one's EGO? Due to the >fluid nature of the stat *and* > Cool I hadnt actually considering EGO as changing but you are right Now you make me want it even more ;-) EGO is often where psychic damage is taken!... Similar to the old reduce your power from spirit combat - works very nicely as a potential side effect of critical intimidation attacks... hehehe >its potential pervasiveness throughout the >system, > That just means it needs WELL considered once or twice or thrice(ie hacked to death by designer types) then playtested... for ongoing use it wouldnt necessarily be particularly complex If its expressed in ways that fit with the rest... of the rules. > it seems like it's too realistic > I think if we think of it like hitpoints.. and have it heal naturally at some arbitrary rate we wont have to be too realistic.. (realism might be having >to be workable (like the Duck vs. >Troll pressing/fending scenario). > You will have to explain this one.... as I am a newbie on the list (I assume this relates to the impracticality of a duck actually fighting a troll...?) >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Lance Dyas" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 11:40 PM >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into >limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect >analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their >learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go >huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately >understood. > >Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth >thing... EGO takes it over. > >Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect >it is actually not trivial... >For Instance... > >Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit >static... >if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence >Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have > >EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. >16 - 20 = d3-1 >21 - 25 = d3 >26 - 30 = d3 +1 >31 - 35 = 2d3 >36 - 40 = 2d3+1 >obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools >for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to >calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to >hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that >mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. > >So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be >significant... >The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... > >Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their >POW is only midlin... > >Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) > >Lance Dyas >http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ > >Michael Christian wrote: > > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 16 17:23:21 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:23:21 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> Message-ID: <3E264FD9.3060703@dyasdesigns.com> J and/or Ellen wrote: >If EGO's to be used like the other stats, > > >then its fluidity > Im thinking of less fluid but damageable.. Spirit Combat might affect it, Torture ... effects it.. and criticals on influence(Ridicule and Praise) and things of that sort migh affect it. Some magics should be written in terms of bloating or diminishing the targets EGO. Regular everyday effects like normal insults are washed away in the course not qualifying for a wounded/bloating ego effect. If you get what I mean. Hand the player x purple dragon tear tokens to remind them of their or bloated/wounded ego(they gained or lost x/2 pts) these might actually represent 1 percentage point of effect on most of the skills that EGO affects. So those are full percentage minuses when agressive challenging folk to fight for their country and pluses when seeing if the Shy girl feels like she's up for your company. >would force you >to recalculate certain skills as the EGO goes up & down. > hmmm that could be problematic... Of course couldn't this come up with any form of "Stat" Damage or Enhancement you might find. How common the characters are ego wounded/bloated can be kept under control a lot easier than the combat scenario you are talking about I think. > Drag, like the >Duck-Troll Scenario. > >A few months ago, I bemoaned the fact that a Troll with a pike would always >have the SR advantage over a Duck with a dagger. This seemed not only unfair >to me but also unrealistic--what's to stop the Duck from pressing, i.e. >running up closer to the Troll so that the Duck would be at an advantage? >I'd considered implementing RQ4's pressing/fending system, but it seemed to >be needlessly complicated--every round, someone would inevitably press and >the other would fend, so the option really negates itself. I finally decided >to dump weapon length & SIZ from SR calculations altogether and just use DEX >(and fatigue) to determine SR. > Where do i find RQ4 rules? The deadly dance is indeed a constantly fluctuating state. The standard defense with a long weapons is definitely the threat represented by fending IRL. But that can easily be considered a benefit on or simply a part of ones "parry" skill although keeping the SR calculations in initial round of engagement makes sense. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Lance Dyas" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 8:38 PM >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >J and/or Ellen wrote: > > > >>What effects would public ridicule/praise have on one's EGO? Due to the >>fluid nature of the stat *and* >> >> >> >Cool I hadnt actually considering EGO as changing but you are right Now >you make me want it even more ;-) EGO is often where psychic damage is >taken!... Similar to the old reduce your power from spirit combat - >works very nicely as a potential side effect of critical intimidation >attacks... hehehe > > > >>its potential pervasiveness throughout the >>system, >> >> >> >That just means it needs WELL considered once or twice or thrice(ie >hacked to death by designer types) then playtested... for ongoing use >it wouldnt necessarily be particularly complex If its expressed in ways >that fit with the rest... of the rules. > > > >>it seems like it's too realistic >> >> >> >I think if we think of it like hitpoints.. and have it heal naturally at >some arbitrary rate we wont have to be too realistic.. (realism might be >having > > > >>to be workable (like the Duck vs. >>Troll pressing/fending scenario). >> >> >> >You will have to explain this one.... as I am a newbie on the list (I >assume this relates to the impracticality of a duck actually fighting a >troll...?) > > > >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Lance Dyas" >>To: >>Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 11:40 PM >>Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ >> >> >>I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into >>limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect >>analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their >>learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go >>huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately >>understood. >> >>Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth >>thing... EGO takes it over. >> >>Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect >>it is actually not trivial... >>For Instance... >> >>Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit >>static... >>if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence >>Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have >> >>EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. >>16 - 20 = d3-1 >>21 - 25 = d3 >>26 - 30 = d3 +1 >>31 - 35 = 2d3 >>36 - 40 = 2d3+1 >>obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools >>for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to >>calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to >>hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that >>mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. >> >>So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be >>significant... >>The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... >> >>Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their >>POW is only midlin... >> >>Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) >> >>Lance Dyas >>http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ >> >>Michael Christian wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >_______________________________________________ >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 Jan 16 23:20:14 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 06:20:14 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E264FD9.3060703@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <001b01c2bd59$9f7725c0$3410fea9@frkt5> RQ4 rules: http://members.aol.com/Ethesis/mw2/hero/he1/rqiv.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 12:23 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ J and/or Ellen wrote: >If EGO's to be used like the other stats, > > >then its fluidity > Im thinking of less fluid but damageable.. Spirit Combat might affect it, Torture ... effects it.. and criticals on influence(Ridicule and Praise) and things of that sort migh affect it. Some magics should be written in terms of bloating or diminishing the targets EGO. Regular everyday effects like normal insults are washed away in the course not qualifying for a wounded/bloating ego effect. If you get what I mean. Hand the player x purple dragon tear tokens to remind them of their or bloated/wounded ego(they gained or lost x/2 pts) these might actually represent 1 percentage point of effect on most of the skills that EGO affects. So those are full percentage minuses when agressive challenging folk to fight for their country and pluses when seeing if the Shy girl feels like she's up for your company. >would force you >to recalculate certain skills as the EGO goes up & down. > hmmm that could be problematic... Of course couldn't this come up with any form of "Stat" Damage or Enhancement you might find. How common the characters are ego wounded/bloated can be kept under control a lot easier than the combat scenario you are talking about I think. > Drag, like the >Duck-Troll Scenario. > >A few months ago, I bemoaned the fact that a Troll with a pike would always >have the SR advantage over a Duck with a dagger. This seemed not only unfair >to me but also unrealistic--what's to stop the Duck from pressing, i.e. >running up closer to the Troll so that the Duck would be at an advantage? >I'd considered implementing RQ4's pressing/fending system, but it seemed to >be needlessly complicated--every round, someone would inevitably press and >the other would fend, so the option really negates itself. I finally decided >to dump weapon length & SIZ from SR calculations altogether and just use DEX >(and fatigue) to determine SR. > Where do i find RQ4 rules? The deadly dance is indeed a constantly fluctuating state. The standard defense with a long weapons is definitely the threat represented by fending IRL. But that can easily be considered a benefit on or simply a part of ones "parry" skill although keeping the SR calculations in initial round of engagement makes sense. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Lance Dyas" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 8:38 PM >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ > > >J and/or Ellen wrote: > > > >>What effects would public ridicule/praise have on one's EGO? Due to the >>fluid nature of the stat *and* >> >> >> >Cool I hadnt actually considering EGO as changing but you are right Now >you make me want it even more ;-) EGO is often where psychic damage is >taken!... Similar to the old reduce your power from spirit combat - >works very nicely as a potential side effect of critical intimidation >attacks... hehehe > > > >>its potential pervasiveness throughout the >>system, >> >> >> >That just means it needs WELL considered once or twice or thrice(ie >hacked to death by designer types) then playtested... for ongoing use >it wouldnt necessarily be particularly complex If its expressed in ways >that fit with the rest... of the rules. > > > >>it seems like it's too realistic >> >> >> >I think if we think of it like hitpoints.. and have it heal naturally at >some arbitrary rate we wont have to be too realistic.. (realism might be >having > > > >>to be workable (like the Duck vs. >>Troll pressing/fending scenario). >> >> >> >You will have to explain this one.... as I am a newbie on the list (I >assume this relates to the impracticality of a duck actually fighting a >troll...?) > > > >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Lance Dyas" >>To: >>Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 11:40 PM >>Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ >> >> >>I already made a response to this... but it seems to have floated into >>limbo...so maybe this one will too. Aside from POW being a perfect >>analog for STR.... If you told anyone that the difficulty of all their >>learning tests was increased by their POW/2 modifier.. the would go >>huh?... but if you say the same thing about their EGO it is immediately >>understood. >> >>Yes if you are using EGO, then POW no longer does that negative stealth >>thing... EGO takes it over. >> >>Trying to bring this into the game everywhere it logically could affect >>it is actually not trivial... >>For Instance... >> >>Spirit Combat doing D3 damage to Magic Points... always seemed a bit >>static... >>if POW is Psychic STR... lets see how we can make EGO and POWER influence >>Damage.... kind of like SIZ+STR both affect damage.... maybe we could have >> >>EGO + POW : Spirit Combat Damage. >>16 - 20 = d3-1 >>21 - 25 = d3 >>26 - 30 = d3 +1 >>31 - 35 = 2d3 >>36 - 40 = 2d3+1 >>obviously if we speed up spirit combat with this... we need some tools >>for reducing the Magic Point loss as well.... or use EGO and POW to >>calculate Magic Points... OK magic points could be calculated similar to >>hitpoints..(EGO+POW)/2 but to represent the cumbersomeness of that >>mightier EGO penalize the Spirit Combat Resistance Roll. >> >>So even though I like the idea myself... the rules implications could be >>significant... >>The funnest part to me... is actually tidbits like the learning penalty... >> >>Humans ofcourse could be the race with the highest EGO... even if their >>POW is only midlin... >> >>Any other non-dismissive thoughts ;-) >> >>Lance Dyas >>http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ >> >>Michael Christian wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > >_______________________________________________ >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 stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jan 16 23:06:17 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:06:17 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armor and fategue Message-ID: Steve wrote: "The real problem is not the weight, which is often well distributed and easy to carry. The problem is airflow. There isn't any. This means that you bake inside the armor with no way to let the sweat out. I have fought inside, in armor, and been exhausted in almost no time because there was just no way to let my skin breathe." Allthough I haven't had that much experience with medieval armor (Restricted to a weekend LARP where I wore an "Italian nobleman's" padded tunic) and on a viking marked, wearing a short armed padded tunic); I am sure your arguments are very good, and I don't really argue on them. My point is that I think the fategue rules overdoes it a bit. Say a Medieval Knight, wearing full plate and padding under went into a fight, that would leave an OK dude with -say 7 fategue pts. Say he had around 28 fategue points to begin with, makes him topple over and faint from fategue after 35 combat turns, about 6 minutes. I think that made it quite risky to go into a battle in the medieval times with epic mellees. This gets even worse in the ancient battles, where several thousands were locked together in a deadly pushing contest. So what I'm saying isn't that the rules are utterly crap and illogical, just suggesting that they should be adjusted a bit to make cowardism and mortality the main reasons for loosing battles, not the protection... Mabye the strong presence of magic in Glorantha and CON / Fategue increase spells does it? That makes changing the system (provided one agrees with me in that the rules makes people tired a bit to soon) unnessecary. Anyway, I've made my house rules on the subject now and are as follows: Enc isn't subtracted from total fategue. So a dude with a spear and a dude in full plate wielding a poleaxe would have the same fategue points (provided their str and con were equal). Instead Enc is put into a big formula (the weak spot on my rules) and pitted against the STR and SIZ\10 of the character. The result is a percentage value that is consulted with a table I've made. The higher %, the slower moverate and bigger DEX SR modifier. (So the armoured one would perhaps have a move of 2, and a DEX SR of mabye 4, compared to the speardude with his move of 3 and his DEX SR of 3.) The formula for those interested: ENC or KG x 100 6 + X = % burden STR + SIZ\10 Burden% +DEX SR -Move 25% + 0 -0% 50% + 1 - 20% 75% + 2 - 40% 100% + 3 - 60% 125% + 4 - 80% 125% + Parry only at half percentage. Strx4 roll required to manage to move. Then I use the rules from the Coloseum box, letting the move be doubbled for doubble the fategue etc. (Making the max move for a horse 24 by spending 18 F.Pts in one turn.)   ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 17 00:03:03 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:03:03 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Roleplaying INT Message-ID: That's the eternal question about the influence of rolepaying on dice roll... While you are not asked to jump over the game table for a Jump skill, or juggle with your glass of soda to get a bonus to your character's DEX roll, you are generally requested to role play your bargaining and other charisma and talking skills. It's definitely fun (generally the best moments in the game, with fumbles and critical), but a bit abnormal in my opinion from a purely rule-oriented point of view. Roleplaying a low INT character may be possible, but playing well a genius is difficult ! At least for me :-)) Alain _______________________________________ Message: 1 From: "Hibbs, Phil" To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:38:20 -0000 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Interesting idea, but I don't like the roleplaying shackles that it would tend to impose. There is a similar problem with INT, but to a lesser extent. Phil Hibbs. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 17 00:07:29 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:07:29 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: EGO Message-ID: Reading the mails on EGO made me think of this story, and I think it could have a place in RQ: The latest Willbour Smith book, where the setting is ancient Egypt, we follow a great Magus (And some other rather uninteresting characters) The magical foe is a Sudanese shaman with his huge dick as a kind of foci (Or EGO) if you like. On one occation, they enter somthing that could be called Spirit combat, where the Shaman's mantra is to simulate copulation movements towards the Magus (which is a castrated ex. slave). The magus wins, and the outcome is plain for all to see, as the Shaman ejaculates, and his dick shrinks into a rather unsignificant state... In my oppinion, EGO would cover "arrogance", self asteem, personally related; where POW covers carisma; more what the surroundings wiev of a person. So an emperor could have much POW (psycological APP) and enjoy support from the masses, and make it harder for enemies to make him the fool publically (Rather like Clinton!) He could still have a low EGO, be unsecure, etc. This would give a player lot to roleplay on. (How to cover fear of speaking in public, etc.) The opposite example, would be extremely arrogant and not much likeable; the guy in the movies that nobody listens to, but nevertheless talks constantly... Totally agree with Ego beeing much more relevant than APP (I give all creatures 3d6 app rolls, as they only are relevant within the race; what is considered pretty by humans, doesn' nessecarily be pretty amongst Aldryami, etc.) ------------------------------------------ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 17 00:38:46 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:38:46 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic Message-ID: Jelly wrote: > >A few months ago, I bemoaned the fact that a Troll with a pike would always > >have the SR advantage over a Duck with a dagger. This seemed not only unfair > >to me but also unrealistic--what's to stop the Duck from pressing, i.e. > >running up closer to the Troll so that the Duck would be at an advantage? > >I'd considered implementing RQ4's pressing/fending system, but it seemed to > >be needlessly complicated--every round, someone would inevitably press and > >the other would fend, so the option really negates itself. Well from the little experience I have with fencing (not much), I'm afraid this is the way fencing works. As long as the UZ have the option to step away from the Duck, he will, as the perfect timing and distance means everything in duels. (The ultimate range is to stay so close to an opponents blow that he might think that he got you!) So allthough you think it is needlesly complicated, it's realistic. And when you come to think about it, it's not that time consuming to have the participants statin' "I'll try and close" and "I'll back away" from time to time. The clue with the closing is when you're in a room / in the woods, etc, where backing is impossible / difficult. Then you always have the option as GM to have people make rolls to see wether they see where they step. It's absolutely possible, and happens all the time that the one backing slips or steps on farming iplements leaned up against the barn, etc. This doesn't make short weapons useless. Many tecniqes have been developed to parry an incoming blow as you close, and then end the fight with a combined grapple / stabbing manouvre. Fiore Del Libere, Talhoffer and Silva (Martial arts instructors from medieval Europe whose manuals have survived) -all state that a foe with a dagger is one of the most dangerous opponents of all. Because the Dagger is handy, devious, subltle and extremely quick. Next time you face an opponent with a longsword, and you only have a dagger, hold it with the blade pointing down in your right hand. When he strikes at you, you close with your right foot, as you sweep the blow aside with your right arm bent to ca.80 degrees, taking the hit on the daggerblade, holding it along you underarm. Then swing in with your left leg, grab the opponents right elbow with your left arm and punch him in the side of the neck down into his lungs; end of fight. -If you just get the first parry right, you've earned youself a longsword!  ------------------------------------------ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. ------------------------------------------ Get 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From lance at dyasdesigns.com Fri Jan 17 01:19:40 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 08:19:40 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQIV development... In-Reply-To: <001b01c2bd59$9f7725c0$3410fea9@frkt5> References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E264FD9.3060703@dyasdesigns.com> <001b01c2bd59$9f7725c0$3410fea9@frkt5> Message-ID: <3E26BF7C.9070607@dyasdesigns.com> J and/or Ellen wrote: >RQ4 rules: http://members.aol.com/Ethesis/mw2/hero/he1/rqiv.htm > > Is anyone developing based on this or diverging from this (Is that one of the purposes of this list?) It seems to have some nice advancements from RQIII. Obviously due to copyright issues, a full - rewrite in order, but for fan/or personal usage A WIKI might even be interesting.. Anyway, It obviously needs layout work ;-) as well as completion. Its a real hard read.. Lance Dyas Dragonlords Decision Driven Gaming & diceless roleplay http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ From lance at dyasdesigns.com Fri Jan 17 01:36:04 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 08:36:04 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: EGO In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E26C354.9050109@dyasdesigns.com> It occured to me that when affecting Charism - Ego that is below your racial mean is a penalty and Ego above your racial mean is also considered a penalty. Lance Dyas Dragonlords Decision Driven Gaming - diceless roleplay http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Jan 17 02:08:20 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:08:20 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQIV development... References: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC9813@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> <3E24F452.4050908@dyasdesigns.com> <020901c2bca5$1d39d3f0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E261B20.9030907@dyasdesigns.com> <000b01c2bd21$f7b06c20$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E264FD9.3060703@dyasdesigns.com> <001b01c2bd59$9f7725c0$3410fea9@frkt5> <3E26BF7C.9070607@dyasdesigns.com> Message-ID: <007a01c2bd71$1b41dad0$3410fea9@frkt5> My current house rules are about an equal blend of RQ3, RQ4, and SPQR. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lance Dyas" To: Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 8:19 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQIV development... J and/or Ellen wrote: >RQ4 rules: http://members.aol.com/Ethesis/mw2/hero/he1/rqiv.htm > > Is anyone developing based on this or diverging from this (Is that one of the purposes of this list?) It seems to have some nice advancements from RQIII. Obviously due to copyright issues, a full - rewrite in order, but for fan/or personal usage A WIKI might even be interesting.. Anyway, It obviously needs layout work ;-) as well as completion. Its a real hard read.. Lance Dyas Dragonlords Decision Driven Gaming & diceless roleplay http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/ _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From lance at dyasdesigns.com Fri Jan 17 02:10:25 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:10:25 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Roleplaying INT In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E26CB61.60005@dyasdesigns.com> Roleplaying varius EGO values should be way more than doable at the most obviously level meekness or arrogance of a character (and that is one way of seeing EGO) should be quite expressable as a part of the roleplay . And the Straight Jacketing effect is mollified because it should be implemented balanced and cheap/free to develop. >Roleplaying a low INT character may be possible, but playing well a genius >is difficult ! At least for me :-)) > > >Alain > >_______________________________________ >Message: 1 >From: "Hibbs, Phil" >To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" >Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ >Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:38:20 -0000 >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > >Interesting idea, but I don't like the roleplaying shackles that it would >tend to impose. There is a similar problem with INT, but to a lesser >extent. > >Phil Hibbs. > > From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jan 17 02:15:30 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 08:15:30 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <001b01c2bd59$9f7725c0$3410fea9@frkt5> Message-ID: <000501c2bd72$1b4567d0$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> > RQ4 rules: http://members.aol.com/Ethesis/mw2/hero/he1/rqiv.htm Has anyone re-formatted this into a more standard format? Or at least put the table information into readable tables? I've been meaning to do this for years, but I wasn't in on the playtest so I'm not sure how some of them *should* be arranged, and I haven't had much time to experiment. Rich From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 17 03:38:22 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:38:22 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Iron equipment Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A3E@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> How do you determine the cost of iron equipment? Iron costs 700p per enc, so do you just multiply the ENC of the armour by that much and add that to the basic cost? ENC is not just weight, and a substantial portion of most armour types, and many weapons, is not metal. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jan 17 04:45:15 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:45:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Iron equipment In-Reply-To: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A3E@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <20030116174515.91045.qmail@web41108.mail.yahoo.com> I use a simple formula for iron items: Item Cost / 10 x Enc x 700 I then add the cost of any enchantments. Leon Kirshtein --- "Hibbs, Phil" wrote: > How do you determine the cost of iron equipment? > Iron costs 700p per enc, so > do you just multiply the ENC of the armour by that > much and add that to the > basic cost? ENC is not just weight, and a > substantial portion of most armour > types, and many weapons, is not metal. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be > privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young > Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not > the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, > disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive > this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies > of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Jan 17 05:01:48 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:01:48 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic References: Message-ID: <00ec01c2bd89$56d7d5f0$3410fea9@frkt5> I stick with my original assertion (and that of RQ1-3's designers): pressing and fending is a pointless tactic because the presser will negate the fender 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, but so are a million other tedious details that most players don't use. But if pressing/fending works for you and your group, besta luck. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bjorn Stolen" To: Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 7:38 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic Jelly wrote: > >A few months ago, I bemoaned the fact that a Troll with a pike would always > >have the SR advantage over a Duck with a dagger. This seemed not only unfair > >to me but also unrealistic--what's to stop the Duck from pressing, i.e. > >running up closer to the Troll so that the Duck would be at an advantage? > >I'd considered implementing RQ4's pressing/fending system, but it seemed to > >be needlessly complicated--every round, someone would inevitably press and > >the other would fend, so the option really negates itself. Well from the little experience I have with fencing (not much), I'm afraid this is the way fencing works. As long as the UZ have the option to step away from the Duck, he will, as the perfect timing and distance means everything in duels. (The ultimate range is to stay so close to an opponents blow that he might think that he got you!) So allthough you think it is needlesly complicated, it's realistic. And when you come to think about it, it's not that time consuming to have the participants statin' "I'll try and close" and "I'll back away" from time to time. The clue with the closing is when you're in a room / in the woods, etc, where backing is impossible / difficult. Then you always have the option as GM to have people make rolls to see wether they see where they step. It's absolutely possible, and happens all the time that the one backing slips or steps on farming iplements leaned up against the barn, etc. This doesn't make short weapons useless. Many tecniqes have been developed to parry an incoming blow as you close, and then end the fight with a combined grapple / stabbing manouvre. Fiore Del Libere, Talhoffer and Silva (Martial arts instructors from medieval Europe whose manuals have survived) -all state that a foe with a dagger is one of the most dangerous opponents of all. Because the Dagger is handy, devious, subltle and extremely quick. Next time you face an opponent with a longsword, and you only have a dagger, hold it with the blade pointing down in your right hand. When he strikes at you, you close with your right foot, as you sweep the blow aside with your right arm bent to ca.80 degrees, taking the hit on the daggerblade, holding it along you underarm. Then swing in with your left leg, grab the opponents right elbow with your left arm and punch him in the side of the neck down into his lungs; end of fight. -If you just get the first parry right, you've earned youself a longsword!  ------------------------------------------ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. ------------------------------------------ Get 2 months FREE*. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- 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 From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 17 05:31:54 2003 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:31:54 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic Message-ID: On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:01:48 -0600 J and/or Ellen wrote: > I stick with my original assertion (and that of > RQ1-3's designers): pressing > and fending is a pointless tactic because the > presser will negate the fender > 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, > but so are a million other > tedious details that most players don't use. > I wasn't paying attention last time this came up, but does anybody else remember the section in RQ3 that mentions how under normal circumstances combatants will always maneuver to maintain constant distance but if circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic first strike? These are the kinds of rules I like -- something designed to be ignored 99% of the time but if circumstances arise where it's important you're given simple guidelines how to handle it. I also like Chaosium's latter-day practice (adopted, alas, post-RQ3) of grouping all such special cases together into a couple pages of "Spot Rules." Trent From peter at maranci.net Fri Jan 17 06:27:10 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:27:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Munchkins Strike Back Message-ID: <5027.216.118.190.11.1042745230.squirrel@webmail> *sigh* After several outstanding days for RQ sites on the Die-Roller's Top 50, it looks like the munchkins have exacted a terrible revenge: both Tony Den's site (RuneQuest.ZA.orc) and my own went from being in the top five to being driven completely off the list in a single night. That either means that someone is cheating or that dozens of twits joined up to nuke their competition. That seems to be not uncommon on the Top 50 list, I'm sorry to say. The highest-ranked sites are targets for vote-downs. I suspect that the other RQ sites will soon be hit the same way, since they're still rising in the ranks. Anyway, if you feel like helping out, here are the links for all the RQ sites again. Anything other than a "5" apparently drives the ranking down, incidentally, but please give what you feel is appropriate. You can vote once per day for each site. RuneQuest.ZA.org (http://www.runequest.za.org/) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=6634 Blue Sable altar (http://perso.club-internet.fr/manzato/pagepersocm/runequest/) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=8232 Matti J?rvinen's RuneQuest Page (http://personal.inet.fi/koti/matti.jarvinen/runequest/indexeng.html) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=6329 Ouijas RuneQuest Source (http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/ouija.htm) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=7240 Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! (http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm) Vote: http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/rate.cgi?ID=3611 Sorry to have posted this again; I'll try to refrain from doing it in the futute. It's just that those munchkins are so damned annoying. On another subject, is anyone else here going to the Arisia convention in Boston this weekend? I'll be doing some panels, and will doubtless bring up RQ on at least one of them. Oh, and about Ki skills - I once theorized (probably wrongly) that they were actually Hero skills. They can certainly be used that way. ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Jan 17 07:05:45 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:05:45 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <000501c2bd72$1b4567d0$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> Message-ID: <3E271099.1020005@talmeta.net> Rich Allen wrote: > Has anyone re-formatted this into a more standard format? Or at > least put the table information into readable tables? > I've been meaning to do this for years, but I wasn't in on the > playtest so I'm not sure how some of them *should* be arranged, and I > haven't had much time to experiment. I glommed a copy of the playtest a few years ago, and have used it for ideas; towards the end my game was equal parts RQ3 & RQ4 with smatterings of GURPS & Elric! added in... -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - If you aren't rich you should always look useful. -- Louis-Ferdinand Celine From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jan 17 07:14:38 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:14:38 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Munchkins Strike Back In-Reply-To: <5027.216.118.190.11.1042745230.squirrel@webmail> Message-ID: <000d01c2bd9b$e55ea1c0$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> Why is it that fans of any RPG other than RuneQuest are automatically labeled a munchkin? Do you know what the definition of an RPG munchkin is? An RPG munchkin is a very young person who wants to have the most powerful character regardless of the rules set being used. Rich Allen From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jan 17 07:19:41 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:19:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <3E271099.1020005@talmeta.net> Message-ID: <000e01c2bd9c$9a24dc50$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> Yes, but do you have it in a better format than the one at the website mentioned earlier? Rich Allen > I glommed a copy of the playtest a few years ago, and have > used it for > ideas; towards the end my game was equal parts RQ3 & RQ4 with > smatterings of GURPS & Elric! added in... > > -- > talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Jan 17 07:42:09 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:42:09 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ Message-ID: <172.1512b99a.2b587321@aol.com> I've a hard copy of RQ4 received from one of the play testers a few years back when he decided to cull the heard that is his gaming material. I found several cool things wityhin to graft onto my mostly-RQ3-campaign. In fact the crowd I've been gaming with the late 3 1/2 years uses RQ4 almost undiluted. Very different from the RQ3 I'm used to -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From peter at maranci.net Fri Jan 17 07:54:47 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:54:47 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: The Munchkins Strike Back Message-ID: <3009.216.118.190.11.1042750487.squirrel@webmail> * Rich Allen wrote: > Why is it that fans of any RPG other than RuneQuest are >automatically labeled a munchkin? Do you know what the definition of an >RPG munchkin is? An RPG munchkin is a very young person who wants to >have the most powerful character regardless of the rules set being used. As far as I'm concerned, someone who tries to boost themselves by voting down the competition - sight/site unseen - qualifies for the tag "munchkin" as well. It really doesn't have anything to do with the system they play, and wasn't meant that way. I've talked with other RQ site publishers, and none of us are comfortable with voting against other sites. In fact, I've run across *several* that I'd have rated a "1" on the basis of their annoying flock of pop-ups alone...but chose not to vote at all, instead. Somehow it seems like cheating, even though I'd at least *looked* at their sites - something I'm certain the munchkins do not do. So I either vote a "5" or nothing, and do that on the basis of what I've seen. I wish there were more "5"'s out there, particularly for RQ... Oh well. ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Jan 17 07:58:10 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:58:10 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ References: <000e01c2bd9c$9a24dc50$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> Message-ID: <3E271CE2.2060806@talmeta.net> Rich Allen wrote: > Yes, but do you have it in a better format than the one at the website > mentioned earlier? Except for the b&w cover, and the spiral binding, mine looks ready for the store shelves. :) -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - I washed mud, off of mud. -- Steven Wright From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jan 17 08:02:29 2003 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 14:02:29 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] EGO the psychic analog to SIZ In-Reply-To: <3E271CE2.2060806@talmeta.net> Message-ID: <001001c2bda2$946f7800$df0a0a0a@dohealth.com> Dang. I suppose that means there's no chance of getting an electronic version. Rich Allen > Except for the b&w cover, and the spiral binding, mine looks > ready for the store shelves. :) From jellen at ameritech.net Fri Jan 17 12:24:25 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:24:25 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic References: Message-ID: <010201c2bdc7$2c355730$3410fea9@frkt5> Never noticed that rule before. Love it! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:01:48 -0600 J and/or Ellen wrote: > I stick with my original assertion (and that of > RQ1-3's designers): pressing > and fending is a pointless tactic because the > presser will negate the fender > 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, > but so are a million other > tedious details that most players don't use. > I wasn't paying attention last time this came up, but does anybody else remember the section in RQ3 that mentions how under normal circumstances combatants will always maneuver to maintain constant distance but if circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic first strike? These are the kinds of rules I like -- something designed to be ignored 99% of the time but if circumstances arise where it's important you're given simple guidelines how to handle it. I also like Chaosium's latter-day practice (adopted, alas, post-RQ3) of grouping all such special cases together into a couple pages of "Spot Rules." Trent _______________________________________________ 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 Fri Jan 17 23:04:32 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:04:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Iron equipment Message-ID: <7895663.1042805072875.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> I've always said Iron was effectively priceless - you can't buy it as the only people that mine the stuff are low to the ground and equally close to their technological advantages. Cheers, Ash > from: "Hibbs, Phil" > date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 16:38:22 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Iron equipment > > How do you determine the cost of iron equipment? Iron costs 700p per enc, so > do you just multiply the ENC of the armour by that much and add that to the > basic cost? ENC is not just weight, and a substantial portion of most armour > types, and many weapons, is not metal. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jan 17 23:07:49 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:07:49 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic Message-ID: <4689670.1042805269973.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> "...but if circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic first strike?" Dunno about that (I haven't got my rules available to check) but IIRC the combatant with the long weapon can only attack or parry, not both, while closed down. Cheers, Ash > from: trentfs at ix.netcom.com > date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 18:31:54 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Conserning SR beeing unrealistic > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:01:48 -0600 J and/or Ellen > wrote: > > > I stick with my original assertion (and that of > > RQ1-3's designers): pressing > > and fending is a pointless tactic because the > > presser will negate the fender > > 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, > > but so are a million other > > tedious details that most players don't use. > > > > I wasn't paying attention last time this came up, but does anybody else > remember the section in RQ3 that mentions how under normal circumstances > combatants will always maneuver to maintain constant distance but if > circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this > and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic > first strike? > > These are the kinds of rules I like -- something designed to be ignored 99% of > the time but if circumstances arise where it's important you're given simple > guidelines how to handle it. I also like Chaosium's latter-day practice > (adopted, alas, post-RQ3) of grouping all such special cases together into a > couple pages of "Spot Rules." > > Trent > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From soltakss at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 00:07:31 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:07:31 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour, Iron, Trolls with Pikes In-Reply-To: <20030116181102.C590D4C269@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030117130731.34700.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Bjorn Stolen: > Say a Medieval Knight, wearing full plate and padding under went into a > fight, that would leave an OK dude with -say 7 fategue pts. Say he had > around 28 fategue points to begin with, makes him topple over and faint > from fategue after 35 combat turns, about 6 minutes. I think that made it > quite risky to go into a battle in the medieval times with epic mellees. > This gets even worse in the ancient battles, where several thousands were > locked together in a deadly pushing contest. Yes, but did anyone fight constantly non-stop for long periods of time? I doubt it. Even in fixed battles there are opportunities to stop and rest, or opportunities to stand and face the enemy rather than swinging away with sword/mace/spear all the time. Having said that, I have absolutely no experience of this so I am probably talking out of my hat. Alain: > That's the eternal question about the influence of rolepaying on dice > roll... > > While you are not asked to jump over the game table for a Jump skill, or > juggle with your glass of soda to get a bonus to your character's DEX > roll, you are generally requested to role play your bargaining and other > charisma and talking skills. It's definitely fun (generally the best > moments in the game, with fumbles and critical), but a bit abnormal in my > opinion from a purely rule-oriented point of view. > > Roleplaying a low INT character may be possible, but playing well a genius > is difficult ! At least for me :-)) That's why we tended to strike a balance, if someone had worked out a good line for bargaining, orate or whatever and used it, we gave them a bonus on their Skill. If they didn't bother, then we used the skill without a bonus. So, we used a combination of roleplaying and dice rolling. Of course, some things were simply not rolled if the arguments were persuasive (no point in rolling a Fast Talk for the gate guards to open the gate for you the 20th time). Phil Hibbs: > How do you determine the cost of iron equipment? Iron costs 700p per enc, > so > do you just multiply the ENC of the armour by that much and add that to the > basic cost? ENC is not just weight, and a substantial portion of most > armour > types, and many weapons, is not metal. We used the standard costs, but we never bought or sold iron. We just took it from the still-bleeding bodies of our enemies. When we needed to work out the cost, we divided the cost of armour by the cost of 1 ENC of bronze then multiplied by the cost of 1 ENC of iron. I cannot remember the cost of 1 ENC of bronze. We certainly didn't work out how much of armour/weapons was due to metal and how much was due to other materials as that would be too complex. In a bronze-age, or even iron-age, society, iron is incredibly expensive. I sem to remember an archaeologist saying that an iron sword cost the equivalent of a house in today's economy. So, not many people should be able to afford to buy iron armour and equipment. Don't forget that in RQ2 a Rune Lord was given 1 iron weapon or 1 piece of armour and had to get the rest himself, thus showing how exepnsive it should be, if iron was cheaper then the cults would supply armour and weapons free of charge to their Rune Lords. J: > I stick with my original assertion (and that of RQ1-3's designers): > pressing > and fending is a pointless tactic because the presser will negate the > fender > 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, but so are a million other > tedious details that most players don't use. I still think that "Thwack! Quack! Splat!" sums up Troll with Maul vs Duck with Dagger. A Troll with a Pike (Yelmalian cult weapon, maybe an Argan Argar troll) would be more along the line of a shish-kebab. Anyway, we never used pikes in combat, unless in the open because someone could run against the pike, dodge around it and run to close, it is very difficult to run backwards with a pike in your hands. Trolls with mauls are better. See Ya Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Sat Jan 18 01:03:09 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:03:09 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A42@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Wind Lord, Flight spells, Kite shield strapped to his feet, 2h weapon. He would, of course, have to build up to this level through initiate status, so his Foot Shield Parry skill would only begin to develop once he reached Rune level and got acces to re-usable Divine magic. Ideally, a bound sylph in the shield would be used for faster movement rate. Unfortunately, Wind Lords do not get re-usable Extension :-( and I don't think you can do Rune Lord Priests in RQ3. A Sword of Humakt could do it, using Humakti Extension and one-use Flight from Orlanth initiate membership. This is the current project of my Humakti in Dorastor. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From talmeta at talmeta.net Sat Jan 18 02:18:57 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:18:57 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A42@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <3E281EE1.60801@talmeta.net> Hibbs, Phil wrote: > Ideally, a bound sylph in the shield would be used for faster movement rate. > Unfortunately, Wind Lords do not get re-usable Extension :-( and I don't > think you can do Rune Lord Priests in RQ3. Depends on the cult, methinks. Besides, wasn't Extension one of those 'common' spells that every cult worth the name gave out, but seldom listed because it was a given? > A Sword of Humakt could do it, using Humakti Extension and one-use Flight > from Orlanth initiate membership. This is the current project of my Humakti > in Dorastor. Better yet, have him be a broo. Under all that enchanted mercury armor, who'd know? -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - Would you care to drift aimlessly in my direction? From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Sat Jan 18 02:37:13 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:37:13 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A44@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> >Besides, wasn't Extension one of those 'common' spells >that every cult worth the name gave out, but seldom >listed because it was a given? The RQ3 cult writeup says if they give out common spells, and which ones. In GoG, it says that Wind Lords can sacrifice for common divine magic on a one-use basis. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Sat Jan 18 02:47:37 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:47:37 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745D7FD@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> At least, you won't have to bother about when the Iron Surfer would be abble to regain the extension ;-) Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : Hibbs, Phil [mailto:phil.hibbs at cgey.com] Envoy? : vendredi 17 janvier 2003 16:37 ? : 'rq-rules at crashbox.com' Objet : [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer >Besides, wasn't Extension one of those 'common' spells >that every cult worth the name gave out, but seldom >listed because it was a given? The RQ3 cult writeup says if they give out common spells, and which ones. In GoG, it says that Wind Lords can sacrifice for common divine magic on a one-use basis. Phil Hibbs. **************************************************************************** **************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". **************************************************************************** **************** _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Sat Jan 18 02:48:50 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:48:50 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A45@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Tal Meta: >Better yet, have him be a broo. Best of all: become an Ogre, then go for being a Vampire! Just imagine the STR and CON stats! He'd have to be illuminated - which he is, due to a recent excursion to Dokat. A flying Humakti Ogre Vampire with 2-handed sword and a shield strapped to his feet. Hmmm, this is getting silly. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Sat Jan 18 03:03:34 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:03:34 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Closing and a some lines on fategue Message-ID: Trent wrote: >I wasn't paying attention last time this came up, but does anybody else >remember the section in RQ3 that mentions how under normal circumstances >combatants will always maneuver to maintain constant distance but if >circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this >and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic >first strike? Yep, the discussion is wether this is a nessecary rule or not >Message: 11 Ash wrote: >Dunno about that (I haven't got my rules available to check) but IIRC the combatant with the long weapon can only attack or parry, not both, while closed down. I don't agree. In close quarter, a long weapon still have it's uses. Take the longsword, for instance (My lovechild) at least 50% of the combat teqnices are about closing and then hold one hand on the blade (Called halfswording) and slugging it out nose to nose. The Swordman whoose manuals we work from even state that the sword when facing armoured opponents is merely a tool to get close so you may disable him with f.exs. grappeling tecniqes. Extremely long weapons like a maccedonian pike might be another case... >Bjorn Stolen: > > > Say a Medieval Knight, wearing full plate and padding under went into a > > fight, that would leave an OK dude with -say 7 fategue pts. Say he had > > around 28 fategue points to begin with, makes him topple over and faint > > from fategue after 35 combat turns, about 6 minutes. I think that made it > > quite risky to go into a battle in the medieval times with epic mellees. > > This gets even worse in the ancient battles, where several thousands were > > locked together in a deadly pushing contest. > >Yes, but did anyone fight constantly non-stop for long periods of time? I >doubt it. Even in fixed battles there are opportunities to stop and rest, or >opportunities to stand and face the enemy rather than swinging away with >sword/mace/spear all the time. Having said that, I have absolutely no >experience of this so I am probably talking out of my hat. > >Alain: I don't know; we'll have to ressurect Alexander the Great, Caecar, ore someone like them and ask them... ------------------------------------------ Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and ------------------------------------------ get 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From aescleal at btinternet.com Sat Jan 18 03:42:27 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:42:27 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <6301540.1042821747075.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> MOB promulgated a hack (used in Sun County) in which Runelords could become Acolytes of their own cult to get hold of the reusable rune magic. Dunno if your ref would let you get away with it for a Wind Lord. Cheers, Ash > from: "Hibbs, Phil" > date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:37:13 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Character Concept: The Iron Surfer > > >Besides, wasn't Extension one of those 'common' spells > >that every cult worth the name gave out, but seldom > >listed because it was a given? > > The RQ3 cult writeup says if they give out common spells, and which ones. In > GoG, it says that Wind Lords can sacrifice for common divine magic on a > one-use basis. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jan 18 03:46:56 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:46:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Closing and a some lines on fategue Message-ID: <7134950.1042822016037.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Bjorn made a comment about my statement of the RQ III closing rules for short vs long weapons - I was only stating what I believe the rule was in RQIII, not passing comment on the real world validity of it. ~LOL~ I couldn't really care less either way! Cheers, Ash > from: Bjorn Stolen > date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:03:34 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Closing and a some lines on fategue > > > > > > > Trent wrote: > > >I wasn't paying attention last time this came up, but does anybody else > > >remember the section in RQ3 that mentions how under normal circumstances > > >combatants will always maneuver to maintain constant distance but if > > >circumstances (e.g. being backed against a wall or precipice) preclude this > > >and the combatant with the smaller weapon can close then he gets automatic > > >first strike? > > > > > Yep, the discussion is wether this is a nessecary rule or not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Message: 11 > > > > > Ash wrote: > > >Dunno about that (I haven't got my rules available to check) but IIRC the combatant with the long weapon can only attack or parry, not both, while closed down. > I don't agree. In close quarter, a long weapon still have it's uses. Take the longsword, for instance (My lovechild) at least 50% of the combat teqnices are about closing and then hold one hand on the blade (Called halfswording) and slugging it out nose to nose. The Swordman whoose manuals we work from even state that the sword when facing armoured opponents is merely a tool to get close so you may disable him with f.exs. grappeling tecniqes. Extremely long weapons like a maccedonian pike might be another case... > > > > > > >Bjorn Stolen: > > > > > > > Say a Medieval Knight, wearing full plate and padding under went into a > > > > fight, that would leave an OK dude with -say 7 fategue pts. Say he had > > > > around 28 fategue points to begin with, makes him topple over and faint > > > > from fategue after 35 combat turns, about 6 minutes. I think that made it > > > > quite risky to go into a battle in the medieval times with epic mellees. > > > > This gets even worse in the ancient battles, where several thousands were > > > > locked together in a deadly pushing contest. > > > > > >Yes, but did anyone fight constantly non-stop for long periods of time? I > > >doubt it. Even in fixed battles there are opportunities to stop and rest, or > > >opportunities to stand and face the enemy rather than swinging away with > > >sword/mace/spear all the time. Having said that, I have absolutely no > > >experience of this so I am probably talking out of my hat. > > > > > >Alain: > > > I don't know; we'll have to ressurect Alexander the Great, Caecar, ore someone like them and ask them... > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and > ------------------------------------------ > get 2 months FREE* > ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 From soltakss at yahoo.com Sat Jan 18 08:48:13 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:48:13 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Character Concept: The Iron Surfer In-Reply-To: <20030117141319.725AE4C269@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030117214813.8306.qmail@web9608.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Wind Lord, Flight spells, Kite shield strapped to his feet, 2h weapon. > > He would, of course, have to build up to this level through initiate > status, > so his Foot Shield Parry skill would only begin to develop once he reached > Rune level and got acces to re-usable Divine magic. If he used the bound sylph with the condition that the sylph stays bound and flies where the person standing on the shield directs, then an initiate could still increase in Foot Shield Parry and also in Foot Shield Attack - sweeping down and clobbering someone on the head with the shield, although it might take a DEX roll to stay on board. > Ideally, a bound sylph in the shield would be used for faster movement > rate. > Unfortunately, Wind Lords do not get re-usable Extension :-( and I don't > think you can do Rune Lord Priests in RQ3. They do in my game. A Wind Lord / acolyte of another cult could get around the no RuneLord-Priests in RQ3. In any case, I like the idea of multiple Rune Lord/Priest membership and so I scrapped that restriction. > A Sword of Humakt could do it, using Humakti Extension and one-use Flight > from Orlanth initiate membership. This is the current project of my Humakti > in Dorastor. We used an armour-plated covered wagon pulled by two zombie bison (can go day and night, through rivers and over poison) because none of my players dared fly in Dorastor in case they were spotted by nasty things. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From steve at perrinworlds.com Sat Jan 18 14:33:27 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:33:27 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour, Iron, Trolls with Pikes References: <20030117130731.34700.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006a01c2bea2$5e037720$9865fea9@wizard> A medieval battle frequently went on for hours. While one is not constantly swinging a weapon every second, the opportunities to actually recover energy are fleeting at best. One could spend the entire battle just sitting and watching the other flank wear itself out, but if you got into the fray about the only relief you got was when either (1) you ran for your life or (2) the other guy ran for his life. The cause of running might not have had anything to do with what was happening between the two of you. If one of you died, the chance for rest was slight, since someone else with an obnoxious interest in seeing either your death or your retreating backside would just step in. Of course, ancient and medieval battles were often won by the side that arranged its maneuvers so that one part of the army or another managed to get some rest between flurries of mayhem. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Phipp" To: Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 5:07 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Armour, Iron, Trolls with Pikes > Bjorn Stolen: > > > Say a Medieval Knight, wearing full plate and padding under went into a > > fight, that would leave an OK dude with -say 7 fategue pts. Say he had > > around 28 fategue points to begin with, makes him topple over and faint > > from fategue after 35 combat turns, about 6 minutes. I think that made it > > quite risky to go into a battle in the medieval times with epic mellees. > > This gets even worse in the ancient battles, where several thousands were > > locked together in a deadly pushing contest. > > Yes, but did anyone fight constantly non-stop for long periods of time? I > doubt it. Even in fixed battles there are opportunities to stop and rest, or > opportunities to stand and face the enemy rather than swinging away with > sword/mace/spear all the time. Having said that, I have absolutely no > experience of this so I am probably talking out of my hat. > > Alain: > > > That's the eternal question about the influence of rolepaying on dice > > roll... > > > > While you are not asked to jump over the game table for a Jump skill, or > > juggle with your glass of soda to get a bonus to your character's DEX > > roll, you are generally requested to role play your bargaining and other > > charisma and talking skills. It's definitely fun (generally the best > > moments in the game, with fumbles and critical), but a bit abnormal in my > > opinion from a purely rule-oriented point of view. > > > > Roleplaying a low INT character may be possible, but playing well a genius > > is difficult ! At least for me :-)) > > That's why we tended to strike a balance, if someone had worked out a good > line for bargaining, orate or whatever and used it, we gave them a bonus on > their Skill. If they didn't bother, then we used the skill without a bonus. > So, we used a combination of roleplaying and dice rolling. Of course, some > things were simply not rolled if the arguments were persuasive (no point in > rolling a Fast Talk for the gate guards to open the gate for you the 20th > time). > > Phil Hibbs: > > > How do you determine the cost of iron equipment? Iron costs 700p per enc, > > so > > do you just multiply the ENC of the armour by that much and add that to the > > basic cost? ENC is not just weight, and a substantial portion of most > > armour > > types, and many weapons, is not metal. > > We used the standard costs, but we never bought or sold iron. We just took it > from the still-bleeding bodies of our enemies. > > When we needed to work out the cost, we divided the cost of armour by the > cost of 1 ENC of bronze then multiplied by the cost of 1 ENC of iron. I > cannot remember the cost of 1 ENC of bronze. > > We certainly didn't work out how much of armour/weapons was due to metal and > how much was due to other materials as that would be too complex. > > In a bronze-age, or even iron-age, society, iron is incredibly expensive. I > sem to remember an archaeologist saying that an iron sword cost the > equivalent of a house in today's economy. So, not many people should be able > to afford to buy iron armour and equipment. Don't forget that in RQ2 a Rune > Lord was given 1 iron weapon or 1 piece of armour and had to get the rest > himself, thus showing how exepnsive it should be, if iron was cheaper then > the cults would supply armour and weapons free of charge to their Rune Lords. > > > J: > > I stick with my original assertion (and that of RQ1-3's designers): > > pressing > > and fending is a pointless tactic because the presser will negate the > > fender > > 99% of the time and vice versa. Realistic, yes, but so are a million other > > tedious details that most players don't use. > > I still think that "Thwack! Quack! Splat!" sums up Troll with Maul vs Duck > with Dagger. A Troll with a Pike (Yelmalian cult weapon, maybe an Argan Argar > troll) would be more along the line of a shish-kebab. Anyway, we never used > pikes in combat, unless in the open because someone could run against the > pike, dodge around it and run to close, it is very difficult to run backwards > with a pike in your hands. Trolls with mauls are better. > > See Ya > > Simon > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.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 stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Mon Jan 20 02:59:39 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 15:59:39 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] weapons use Message-ID: On the previos mail list I recieved, someone said that they didn't use pikes, because they were easy to dodge and close against. Yes, it is a valid way of countering a foe with a spear, but I wouldn't say it's easy. I kind of sence a rather rigid wiev of weapons and it's uses. I think we should look stop thinking that weapons (especially the long ones) only could be used in one way (which tends to be the wey they're allways portrayed in pictures), but think of them as weapons are in "Karate" movies and the Quarterstaffduels in Robin hood. In principle there's nothing you can do with a Quarterstaff that you can't do with a spear, and you get the bonus of having one sharp end... Take the longsword, for instance (Oh no, there he goes again!) -is an awsome multitool: It could be used as a warhammer (hold on the blade, and swing the crossguard at the enemy, a spear, a dagger, a jarvelin and as a mace in addition to be used as a tool to wrist weapons out of the hands of the enemy as well as dislocating \ breakin his limbs. I still don't want to advocate the introduction of new, time consuming details about how you wield a weapon in a fight, simply because the way the melee rules are in RQ (Have only played with RQ3), they allready cover theese situations. The rules clearly state that one attack isn't one attack, rather a series of feints, blows and thrusts. My point is that the GM (and the players) should be aware of the stuff I've mentioned above, using it to add colour to the description of what's happening. You can even bring grappling into the explenation of damage as grappling is a very integrated part of longswordfighting. (I asume it is the same way with other weapons, not only the ones I've been using.)  This way, it's easier for the GM to explain how a greatsword attack could do "just" 3 in damage to the head; "You sweep in with your right leg and stikes your broo with the pommel", or lots of damage to a dude in full plate; "You grapple Graf Schnabelhosen's arm, unbalances him, and kicks his knee, making it bend the wrong way". ------------------------------------------ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and ------------------------------------------ 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Mon Jan 20 03:16:17 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 16:16:17 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech Message-ID: I wonder if any of you have ideas on how the magics and technology of the God Learnes was. I'm very fascinated by the tales about them, and the tabu label they've got with allmost all the cultures in Glorantha (one of the things that makes Glorantha one of my favourite fantasy worlds) I percieve the god learnes as a kind of like today; a very "advanced" society with cars, aircraft, nuclear powerplants, etc. And that their magics simply are the physical rules modern science is based on in our world. The info we get on them is strongly flavoured by the people trying to describe them (an analouge would be the cliche indian word for locomotive; "Iron Horse"). I love this; the way the God Learnes are wrapped in mystical\ mythical mist. It allso gives the GM an oppertunity to make artifacts that are completely liberated from the magic rules. (Like the gigantic snailhouse beeing a kind of powerplant, mentioned in ofe of the tales of the reaching moon issues, and the hovercar described in the Dorastor book) Not only that, but completely removed from the setting in general. I could let the characters stumble over a laser rifle with a flat battery, giving them perhaps one or two shots with it, and then of no use. The ultimate fun would of course be to try and describe it an the way it works from an antic point of wiev so that not even the players would realize that it was a weapon for instance from "Mechwarrior" or somthing! Interpetations\ facts about the God Learnes' tech \ magics, anyone? ------------------------------------------ Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and ------------------------------------------ get 2 months FREE* ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From gerall at chromebob.com Mon Jan 20 07:09:56 2003 From: gerall at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:09:56 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech Message-ID: <3E2B0614.6070007@chromebob.com> Bjorn Stolen wrote: [snip] > I love this; the way the God Learnes are wrapped in > mystical\ mythical mist. It allso gives the GM an > oppertunity to make artifacts that are completely > liberated from the magic rules. The only God Learner adventure/plot hook I ever used was to have the PCs find part of an artifact while adventuring underground. It was an adamantine blade, approx. 10cm long, shaped like a modern razor with a couple of bolt-holes in it. This was the edge used in a magic sword machine. The machine would create roughly-sword shaped metal, then there were a couple of stages where details were carved into the new weapons. The bit described above was what sharpened the blades to a magical edge before they left the machine. This adventure was written back in '87, before anything "real" had been published about the GL. It set the mood for all the rest of the PCs encounters with the strange God Learner culture. (Incidentally, a sect of Mostali were down there with the PCs who had discovered the rest of the machine... When they figured out the blade had been found they began harrassing the PCs to no end! I think it was something like 2 seasons later that the dwarves got a hold on the blade and began showing up with these impressive broadswords...) > (Like the gigantic snailhouse beeing a kind of powerplant, > mentioned in ofe of the tales of the reaching moon issues, > and the hovercar described in the Dorastor book) I'll have to look for these references - My God Learners were magicians, but magicians who had taken a lesson from Henry Ford. A magic sword was good, an armory full of magic swords was better! > Not only that, but completely removed from the setting in > general. I could let the characters stumble over a laser > rifle with a flat battery, giving them perhaps one or two > shots with it, and then of no use. The ultimate fun would > of course be to try and describe it an the way it works > from an antic point of wiev so that not even the players > would realize that it was a weapon for instance from > "Mechwarrior" or somthing! My group of players had done a lot of "dimension hopping", and as such the characters were pretty jaded about technology. They quickly figured out that you don't want to engage these wimps at any range but hand-to-hand. They got really good at Stealth skills and Invisibility magics. > Interpetations\ facts about the God Learnes' tech \ > magics, anyone? Again, my implementation of the GL were that they were magicians, but HIGHLY CODIFIED magicians. Instead of thinking, "This healing spell is great, we'll have to teach it to our people," they typically thought, "How can we get the benefits of this spell to the masses without having to teach each of them?" Best regards -- I'm looking forward to other's interpretations! -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Jan 20 10:28:28 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 23:28:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Silver Surfer and Pikes In-Reply-To: <20030119161309.F1BAA4C270@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030119232828.79752.qmail@web9606.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > A flying Humakti Ogre Vampire with 2-handed sword and a shield strapped to > his feet. Hmmm, this is getting silly. He'd have to be Carmanian, being a Humakti Vampire, and would get his flying powers through sorcery rather than Orlanth, because even I would be hard-pressed to justify an Orlanthi Vampire, but he could have sucked a few spells out of some Wind Lords. If he is the Silver Surfer he would probably be Lunar as well (I don't hold with this 'Silver is the metal of Storm' rubbish from RQ3). In that case, he could be in Yanafal Tarnils which allows Vampires without problem. So there we are, an Ogre-Vampire-Sorcerer-Ram of Yanafal Tarnils using a Greatsword and a shield strapped to his feet, wearing full silver plate. Sounds pretty good to me. Give him a Moonsword and he'd be fantastic. Bjorn Stolen: > On the previos mail list I recieved, someone said that they didn't use > pikes, because they were easy to dodge and close against. Yes, it is a > valid way of countering a foe with a spear, but I wouldn't say it's easy. I > kind of sence a rather rigid wiev of weapons and it's uses. I personally had no problems with using a Pike in combat, as one of my PCs was a Yelmalian Centaur and used a Pike, however the GMs in the campaign had difficulty with a regimented battle-field weapon being used in a hand-to-hand situation. They argued that the Pike/Shield combination was god when used in a phalanx, but when the phalanx was broken then combat reverted to spears or short swords. In any case, I used Pikes against charging foes (Set Pike works wonders) and underwater (it imaples - say no more) and used the rest of my arsenal close up. > I think we > should look stop thinking that weapons (especially the long ones) only > could be used in one way (which tends to be the wey they're allways > portrayed in pictures), but think of them as weapons are in "Karate" movies > and the Quarterstaffduels in Robin hood. In principle there's nothing you > can do with a Quarterstaff that you can't do with a spear, and you get the > bonus of having one sharp end... Yes, but a Pike is a lot longer than those weapons (someone made a comment on the Gloranthan Digest arguing how long a Pike was, perhaps it is relevant). I have no problems with halberds being twiddled around heads, but Pikes seem a little clumsier. > Take the longsword, for instance (Oh no, > there he goes again!) -is an awsome multitool: It could be used as a > warhammer (hold on the blade, and swing the crossguard at the enemy, a > spear, a dagger, a jarvelin and as a mace in addition to be used as a tool > to wrist weapons out of the hands of the enemy a > s well as dislocating \ breakin his limbs. I can see a Humakti using a Bastard Sword as a crushing weapon. Maybe an Orlanthi would. In any case, such tactics are probably covered under the non-lethal damage and disarming rules in RQ3. > I still don't want to advocate the introduction of new, time consuming > details about how you wield a weapon in a fight, simply because the way the > melee rules are in RQ (Have only played with RQ3), they allready cover > theese situations. The rules clearly state that one attack isn't one > attack, rather a series of feints, blows and thrusts. My point is that the > GM (and the players) should be aware of the stuff I've mentioned > above, using it to add colour to the description of what's > happening. You can even bring grappling into the explenation of damage > as grappling is a very integrated part of longswordfighting. (I asume > it is the same way with other weapons, not only the ones I've been > using.)  This way, it's easier for the GM to explain how a greatsword > attack could do "just" 3 in damage to the head; "You sweep in with > your right leg and stikes your broo with the pommel", or lots of > damage to a dude in full plate; "You grapple Graf Schnabelh > osen's arm, unbalances him, and kicks his knee, making it bend the wrong > way". Ah, but RQ is good in that you don't have to describe a kick in the knee under sword attack, you can use Kick instead. But I see your point. It seems a bit complicated for simple souls like me, though. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From kahlage at chromebob.com Mon Jan 20 04:51:02 2003 From: kahlage at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:51:02 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3E2AE586.9020009@chromebob.com> Bjorn Stolen wrote: [snip] > I love this; the way the God Learnes are wrapped in > mystical\ mythical mist. It allso gives the GM an > oppertunity to make artifacts that are completely > liberated from the magic rules. The only God Learner adventure/plot hook I ever used was to have the PCs find part of an artifact while adventuring underground. It was an adamantine blade, approx. 10cm long, shaped like a modern razor with a couple of bolt-holes in it. This was the edge used in a magic sword machine. The machine would create roughly-sword shaped metal, then there were a couple of stages where details were carved into the new weapons. The bit described above was what sharpened the blades to a magical edge before they left the machine. This adventure was written back in '87, before anything "real" had been published about the GL. It set the mood for all the rest of the PCs encounters with the strange God Learner culture. (Incidentally, a sect of Mostali were down there with the PCs who had discovered the rest of the machine... When they figured out the blade had been found they began harrassing the PCs to no end! I think it was something like 2 seasons later that the dwarves got a hold on the blade and began showing up with these impressive broadswords...) > (Like the gigantic snailhouse beeing a kind of powerplant, > mentioned in ofe of the tales of the reaching moon issues, > and the hovercar described in the Dorastor book) I'll have to look for these references - My God Learners were magicians, but magicians who had taken a lesson from Henry Ford. A magic sword was good, an armory full of magic swords was better! > Not only that, but completely removed from the setting in > general. I could let the characters stumble over a laser > rifle with a flat battery, giving them perhaps one or two > shots with it, and then of no use. The ultimate fun would > of course be to try and describe it an the way it works > from an antic point of wiev so that not even the players > would realize that it was a weapon for instance from > "Mechwarrior" or somthing! My group of players had done a lot of "dimension hopping", and as such the characters were pretty jaded about technology. They quickly figured out that you don't want to engage these wimps at any range but hand-to-hand. They got really good at Stealth skills and Invisibility magics. > Interpetations\ facts about the God Learnes' tech \ > magics, anyone? Again, my implementation of the GL were that they were magicians, but HIGHLY CODIFIED magicians. Instead of thinking, "This healing spell is great, we'll have to teach it to our people," they typically thought, "How can we get the benefits of this spell to the masses without having to teach each of them?" Best regards -- I'm looking forward to other's interpretations! -- (setq celestial-mechanic "Gerall Kahla") (setq gpg-key "http://chromebob.com/kahlage.gpg") (setq quote "Possunt quia posse videntur") (setq lfs-user-number 3966) From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Mon Jan 20 22:29:21 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:29:21 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A4C@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Simon Phipp: >If he used the bound sylph with the condition that the sylph stays >bound and flies where the person standing on the shield directs, The only way to direct a Sylph is to have a Control/Command/Dominate spell in effect. The sylph cannot interpret vocal commands or gesticulations, it has no INT. I don't like the idea of inventing new abilities just with a condition. The efficient way to do this within the rules is to get a Control Sylph spell from a Kolating shaman. >A Wind Lord / acolyte of another cult could get around the no >RuneLord-Priests in RQ3. In any case, I like the idea of multiple >Rune Lord/Priest membership and so I scrapped that restriction. So which cult requirement do they ignore - the 90% time & money for being Rune Lord, or the 50% for being an Acolyte? I'm starting to understand why the power level of your game seems unattainable to me - you're using substantially different rules. >...none of my players dared fly in Dorastor in >case they were spotted by nasty things. Yes, it does make things interesting. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From aescleal at btinternet.com Tue Jan 21 01:00:21 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:00:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Character Concept: The Iron Surfer Message-ID: <900445.1043071221113.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Simon P. said in response to Phil H: "A Wind Lord / acolyte of another cult could get around the no RuneLord-Priests in RQ3. In any case, I like the idea of multiple Rune Lord/Priest membership and so I scrapped that restriction." To which Phil H. asked: "So which cult requirement do they ignore - the 90% time & money for being Rune Lord, or the 50% for being an Acolyte?" At which point Ashley M. sticks his oar in: From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 21 07:28:22 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:28:22 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech Message-ID: <5847467.1043101704078.JavaMail.nobody@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> LOL! I can envision a group of players finding a GodLearner suit of armor and pounding on it with a dwarven hammer to open it only to find out it's really a warbot that was in a power-saving mode. OOPSIE! David -------Original Message------- From: Bjorn Stolen Sent: 01/19/03 10:16 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech > The ultimate fun would of course be to try and describe it an the way it works from an antic point of wiev so that not even the players would realize that it was a weapon for instance from "Mechwarrior" or somthing! From nikk at cyber-rights.net Thu Jan 23 07:30:40 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 12:30:40 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Webpage Update Message-ID: <200301222030.h0MKUfFf062777@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- After a long hiatus, I've updated my webpage. * Updated the Thunder Rebels/Storm Tribes conversions adding Ernalda and a bundle of other deities to the list * Flying in Glorantha * The Cult of Ensiki, the Demon of Demon Plateau * The Cult of Shalappa Chadelm, a Dara Happan Hero Cult * A few other bits and pieces Comments on the new background would be appreciated, my taste in decor is terrible, Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj4vAAQWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzZ/x AJ9iM0LURVYESeFKa1wZsXIVYb7+EgCgon88IV5d411jxNU2iDHBx75tzd8= =uDbM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From peter at maranci.net Thu Jan 23 08:00:26 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:00:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Webpage Update Message-ID: <1756.216.118.190.11.1043269226.squirrel@webmail> * Nikk wrote: >After a long hiatus, I've updated my webpage. That's good news. It would be helpful if you'd included the URL, though. :D ->Peter, still languishing with Tony Den in Die-Roller's Top 50 Limbo... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Jan 24 00:11:54 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:11:54 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Quiz - Who is a real battlemaster? Message-ID: <17287.196.8.104.31.1043327514.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> I have published a small quiz on my site, specifically aiming at the weapon masters amongst us. Lets see who can get the most questions regarding weapons damage right. Quiz is at http://www.runequest.za.org Good luck Tony -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 24 05:52:27 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:52:27 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #100 - 10 msgs Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A61@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Nikk: >Comments on the new background would be appreciated, >my taste in decor is terrible, It's truly vile. It's too large a pattern, and is too dark. I reckon my web page is about on the limit regarding patterns - anything darker or coarser than that would be bad. http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk BTW, I have a new version of the spreadsheet that does the POW and spirit spell points calculations. I'll upload it soon. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From nikk at cyber-rights.net Fri Jan 24 11:25:24 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:25:24 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Webpage Update Message-ID: <200301240025.h0O0POHC075762@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Ahem, sorry, the current URL is http://www.crashbox.com/nikk/ Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj4wiIoWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzaFB AJ9s4hJzvJ1AQQA2VNLjt9/CPC5HegCeLvcbIuX5L5vyB6fvvUKknIuaK6U= =s/Ii -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 24 21:12:22 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:12:22 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Altering the sacred combat rules a bit Message-ID: I've had this discussion on Tony Den's page, and it has resulted in the following altering of the combatrules on my behafs: 1: Disposing of the impale rules. They make the thrust too deadly. A special \ critical result could illustrate well enough that a weapon get stuck, etc. A cut may allso cause a weapon to get stuck (just try a swing with an axe against a tree...) 2: To simulate the speed a thrust could be delivered with and to get a reason for dividing between thrusting and cutting, you can subtract one from the SR when thrusting. The penalty is that you subtract 1 from the damage done. You could say that if the thrusting weapon had penentrated and done damage with the ordinary rules, it will minimum do 1 damage with this new house rule. (Not for any particular reason; just so people still wants to do cuts.) 3: A thrust won't do damage to parrying objects. It only makes nice little holes in armor and shields, and could get stuck if damage is surpassing AP's, bud the total AP's of the impliment doesn't tack down. In the case of shields or wooden weapons and body parts, the GM should feel free to let the thrust do such damage. -Armor could get damaged from having a spear jerked out of it.   ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From lsnchez at microsoft.com Sat Jan 25 02:55:32 2003 From: lsnchez at microsoft.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Luis_S=E1nchez_G=F3mez_=28Microsoft_Business_Solut?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?ions=29?=) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 16:55:32 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] herbs and potions... Message-ID: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> Hi! I?m completely new to this lists! so please be patient if I make any netiquette mistake....( of course mi written English is awful too...) Does anybody know if exist any rule about how to create and manipulate herbs and potions? any herb list would be a great help too... thanks in advance and good day to erverybody! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Sat Jan 25 21:53:35 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:53:35 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: herbs and potions... Message-ID: >Does anybody know if exist any rule about how to create and manipulate herbs >and potions? any herb list would be a great help too... My impression from some tales of the reaching moon magazines and the troll sourcebooks (on fungi) is that it's up to the GM to design the world of potions in his game. I've been missing rules on this subject too, as one of my players (Amanda De Clarinne) was a herbalist. Had to invent an entire flora, no help from either sourcebooks, or the rulebook. My personal twist to it is to make up names for plants completely silly, though sounding like the names plants have in Norway. (Tjafsegras, Blosmeblom, etc.) -Abit making the evil persons in the plots have German'ish names (all badguys in my games have german names, so all players instantly know who to watch). -like "Walter von Snabelhosen" (snabel = Elephant's nose in Norwegian.) My brother in law have made some cool effects from plants; some giving only good effects, some giving bad effects, and some giving both. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jan 25 23:24:54 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:24:54 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] herbs and potions... References: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> Message-ID: <3E328216.8030606@earthlink.net> Hello! And welcome to this list. Don't worry about your written English or netiquette. We're all here to support, discuss, and enjoy RuneQuest, not point out grammar issues (unless you really want us to). *grin* There are two websites I've found covers all my personal needs for herbs and potions in RuneQuest. They are: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1481/alchemy.html (for RQ-based rules on alchemy & poisons) and http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/8017/frp.htm (THE most comprehensive list of herbs for RPGs I've found yet). On the second website, there are two links labeled "The Guide to Herbs for RPGs (5th edition)". The first link is to a text file while the second link is to a MSWord 6 document. I hope the above websites give you're looking for. David Smart Luis S?nchez G?mez (Microsoft Business Solutions) wrote: >Hi! > >I?m completely new to this lists! so please be patient if I make any >netiquette mistake....( of course mi written English is awful too...) > >Does anybody know if exist any rule about how to create and manipulate herbs >and potions? any herb list would be a great help too... > >thanks in advance and good day to erverybody! > > > > >--- 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 peter at maranci.net Sun Jan 26 14:36:52 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 22:36:52 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Webpage Update Message-ID: About your webpage, Nikk: can't recall if I mentioned it, but all of your links to stuff on my site are out of date - I haven't been on Tiac for a couple of years now. In fact Tiac doesn't exist any more (thank goodness), which is why all of those links are broken. A global replace of http://www.tiac.net/users/maranci/(filename) with http://www.runequest.org/(filename) should fix things. ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 04:35:59 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:35:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] God Learners' magics \ tech In-Reply-To: <20030123190411.C3A174C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030126173559.54588.qmail@web9604.mail.yahoo.com> Bjorn Stolen: > I wonder if any of you have ideas on how the magics and technology of the > God Learnes was. I'm very fascinated by the tales about them, and the tabu > label they've got with allmost all the cultures in Glorantha (one of the > things that makes Glorantha one of my favourite fantasy worlds) I percieve > the god learnes as a kind of like today; a very "advanced" society with > cars, aircraft, nuclear powerplants, etc. And that their magics simply are > the physical rules modern science is based on in our world. The info we get > on them is strongly flavoured by the people trying to describe them (an > analouge would be the cliche indian word for locomotive; "Iron Horse"). > > I love this; the way the God Learnes are wrapped in mystical\ mythical > mist. It allso gives the GM an oppertunity to make artifacts that are > completely liberated from the magic rules. (Like the gigantic snailhouse > beeing a kind of powerplant, mentioned in ofe of the tales of the reaching > moon issues, and the hovercar described in the Dorastor book) Not only > that, but completely removed from the setting in general. I could let the > characters stumble over a laser rifle with a flat battery, giving them > perhaps one or two shots with it, and then of no use. The ultimate fun > would of course be to try and describe it an the way it works from an antic > point of wiev so that not even the players would realize that it was a > weapon for instance from "Mechwarrior" or somthing! > > Interpetations\ facts about the God Learnes' tech \ magics, anyone? Whilst the GodLearners had the Clanking City and certain other mechanical constructs, I personally don't think they were anywhere near as advanced as having nuclear power or anything similar. They did, however, steal a great many secrets from the Mostali, so they could well have had mechanical men or animated statues. They would have had steam power as well, which makes them pretty impressive to a bronze/iron age world. I see the Clanking City as more akin to an Industrial Revolution factory gone horribly wrong, with steam engines, giant hammers clanging all day and night, forges burning like volcanoes and so on. We gave them bionics in our game, so we made them a bit more powerful. Where they had real power was in how they could strip other cultures of their secrets and powers, gaining them for themselves. That gave them magics that are unsurpassed. They were pretty good on the water as well, having defeated the Waertagi Dragonships a few times. I gave out a box that duplicated any key that was put into the box, it only took a minute and produced an exact copy. That was a God Learner item, but the PCs didn't know that. Handy for gaining entry into castles, though. Our party also found a set of bionic legs in the Clanking Ruins that Broze Demon Slayer took. He chopped both legs of and had the legs attached to find he could run fast, jump over small buildings and leap wide rivers. He also realised that this was not Mostali when some dwarves asked him why he had God Learner legs. It took him almost a year to grow his legs back again. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 04:48:44 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:48:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sylphs In-Reply-To: <20030123190411.C3A174C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030126174844.90949.qmail@web9603.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Simon Phipp: > >If he used the bound sylph with the condition that the sylph stays > >bound and flies where the person standing on the shield directs, > > The only way to direct a Sylph is to have a Control/Command/Dominate spell > in effect. The sylph cannot interpret vocal commands or gesticulations, it > has no INT. I don't like the idea of inventing new abilities just with a > condition. > Create a Area Binding enchantment so the sylph is permanently bound to an area and is permanently manifested. The sylph can feel what it is carrying as it is in touch with the shield. Set up conditions so the sylph moves towards the part of the shield that has been stamped on and is vibrating. Set up conditions so that the sylph will hover under certain conditions and will move quickly under other conditions. This gives a reasonable way of commanding the sylph without using spells. It costs a lot of POW, though. If a sylph has no INT then how can it obey simple conditions like "Attack anyone not wearing tin armour who comes through the Storm Door"? I always give unintelligent creatures some credit for being able to recognise certain things around them. OK, so sylphs are not the cleverest of creatures, but they can understand "Move this way, move that way, move quickly, move slowly, hover" and they can tell if a shield has been stamped on or if a tin arrow has been dropped to show which way to go. If a dog can do it, a syplh can do it. > The efficient way to do this within the rules is to get a Control Sylph > spell from a Kolating shaman. If we are talking "within the rules" then a Foot Shield Parry is a little beyond the published rules set. Why think rigidly "within the rules"? Why not be flexible and use the rules for what they were intended - to make the game interesting and fun to play. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 05:20:25 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 18:20:25 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Using substantially different rules In-Reply-To: <20030123190411.C3A174C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030126182025.93849.qmail@web9603.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > >A Wind Lord / acolyte of another cult could get around the no > >RuneLord-Priests in RQ3. In any case, I like the idea of multiple > >Rune Lord/Priest membership and so I scrapped that restriction. > > So which cult requirement do they ignore - the 90% time & money for being > Rune Lord, or the 50% for being an Acolyte? > > I'm starting to understand why the power level of your game seems > unattainable to me - you're using substantially different rules. 1. This being the RQ-Rules Digest, I would expect most people to be using variations on the rules. 2. We used a combination of RQ2, RQ3, some RQ4 and some house rules to make the game flow better. 3. We converted characters from RQ2 which had the concept of "Associate Cult Membership" which meant that a Rune Priest of one cult could join associate or friendly cults as Associate Priests. This gave them access to most of the magics that a normal priest would have but did not give them an ally, rune metals, a ransom or any major cult support. When we converted to RQ3 we decided, perhaps foolishly, that we wanted to keep the cult memberships in RQ3 that we had in RQ2, even though they contradicted the RQ3 time and income rules. We took the view that changing the rules system to a new version should not change the nature of the PCs. Perhaps this was the wrong view to take, perhaps we should have dropped the 5 years of PC history we had to fit in with the new rules. We decided at first that the Associate Priest status was the equivalent to Acolyte Status so we converted to Acolytes. Since certain cults in RQ did not have Acolytes, we decided that those cults could have Associate Priest status as before, but would retain the new form. So someone who was a Rune Lord Priest of Orlanth Adventurous/Associate Priest of Storm Bull would become a Wind Lord/Storm Khan combination. Associate Priests of Humakt became Daggers, then someone pointed out the imbalance that we could have Wind Lord/Storm Khans but not have Wind Lords/Swords, so we decided not to make a distinction between Associate membership and full membership of the cult. This meant that someone becoming a priest of more than one cult had to sacrifice a lot of POW to satisfy the 10 points of divine magic rule. We also played that Priests had to have Spell Teaching (Deity), Worship (Deity) and Divination 5 to be considered fully priests, so that meant a vast expenditure of POW. 4. We decide that the 10%/50%/90% rules could be interpreted as "10%/50%/90% of time/income must be given to the cults", so we split the time on a pro-rata basis amongst the relevant cults. So, a Wind Lord/Storm Khan had to spend 45% of his time serving Storm Bull and 45% serving Orlanth, with the same income split. We allocated 9 points to a Rune Level, 5 points to an acolyte and 1 point to an initiate and calculated the time allocation as a percentage of the total. Since Storm Khans and Wind Lords spent most of their time fighting chaos or Lunars, it was fairly easy to justify this. The flipside was that the PCs could be pulled by the cults to act in certain ways or to dangerousamgerous cult missions that were not given to the established single-cult members. The PCs were thought expendable and outside the normal cult hierarchy. This was not always a good thing. 5. Something I was told a long time ago was "if you aim low and fail you achieve less than if you aim high and fail". You have to think in a Heroic mode to achieve high power levels in RuneQuest. You have to think about the long term goals and make them big ones. You have to HeroQuest. You have to push the rules boundaries until they stretch and become flexible. You have to ignore the rules when they don't work and make new ones when they break. Greg Stafford was quoted as saying that PCs should be retired when they become Rune Level, which shows the game level that RQ seems to have been aimed at. We thought that the game became interesting at Rune Level and could be expanded on to become a truly heroic game. We seem to have succeeded and we are not the only ones. 6. I am sorry if this is too long, boring and rambling, but I sometimes feel that I have to justify why our campaign went along the lines it did. We could have stuck to the RQ3 rulebook, but that would have spoiled our game. Ashley: > At which point Ashley M. sticks his oar in: > > From Sun County it looks like if you're a runemaster of a cult you can > become an associate initiate or priest (acolyte) of another cult. However, > all you get for your associate membership is access to the second cult's > spells - you don't have any of the other advantages / disadvantages (POW > gain, free spirit magic, duty or tithing) of the second cult. Thus bringing back the Associate Priest status to RQ3. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From serazh at bellsouth.net Mon Jan 27 05:29:55 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 13:29:55 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sylphs Message-ID: <20030126182955.DNMK14813.imf24bis.bellsouth.net@localhost> We have elementals in our game a lot, because of characters getting runic abilities tied to specific elements. And here is some house rules we use. First any elemental in a binding can be told to come out and do one action without having a control spell. Another thing we do, is the summoner has the option of putting Int into a elemental when he summons, ie I tie up one point of free Int in a elemental, at which point I need no spells to control him, because he is a extension of me. You still have to take the time to direct it, it isnt going to automatically attack your target or pick you up if your following. One side effect is anyone trying to take control of the elemental because of the Int you have tied up into him has to overcome both the magic points of the elemental and the summoner. One last effect we have, is you can make a binding that will hold one with Int as well as normal stats, but you have to add the power for the extra stat. Serazh > > From: Simon Phipp > Date: 2003/01/26 Sun PM 12:48:44 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sylphs > > Phil Hibbs: > > > Simon Phipp: > > >If he used the bound sylph with the condition that the sylph stays > > >bound and flies where the person standing on the shield directs, > > > > The only way to direct a Sylph is to have a Control/Command/Dominate spell > > in effect. The sylph cannot interpret vocal commands or gesticulations, it > > has no INT. I don't like the idea of inventing new abilities just with a > > condition. > > > > Create a Area Binding enchantment so the sylph is permanently bound to an > area and is permanently manifested. > The sylph can feel what it is carrying as it is in touch with the shield. > Set up conditions so the sylph moves towards the part of the shield that has > been stamped on and is vibrating. > Set up conditions so that the sylph will hover under certain conditions and > will move quickly under other conditions. > This gives a reasonable way of commanding the sylph without using spells. It > costs a lot of POW, though. > > If a sylph has no INT then how can it obey simple conditions like "Attack > anyone not wearing tin armour who comes through the Storm Door"? I always > give unintelligent creatures some credit for being able to recognise certain > things around them. OK, so sylphs are not the cleverest of creatures, but > they can understand "Move this way, move that way, move quickly, move slowly, > hover" and they can tell if a shield has been stamped on or if a tin arrow > has been dropped to show which way to go. If a dog can do it, a syplh can do > it. > > > The efficient way to do this within the rules is to get a Control Sylph > > spell from a Kolating shaman. > > If we are talking "within the rules" then a Foot Shield Parry is a little > beyond the published rules set. Why think rigidly "within the rules"? Why not > be flexible and use the rules for what they were intended - to make the game > interesting and fun to play. > > Simon > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.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 MurfNMurf at aol.com Mon Jan 27 06:13:27 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 14:13:27 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sylphs Message-ID: Hey Todd, I'm reading over this post about Sylphs and such, not really paying attention to the author; and I notice "Hey, that sounds like Ruth's game." Then I look at the author and its you! How long you been a member? lol! -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 09:35:20 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 14:35:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] herbs and potions... In-Reply-To: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> Message-ID: <20030126223520.75190.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> You can also check this out. I use this fro my campaigns. Rules: http://onview.comtecnet.com/RQ/Alchemy/rules.asp Recepies: http://onview.comtecnet.com/RQ/Alchemy/default.asp Leon --- Luis_S?nchez_G?mez_(Microsoft_Business_Solutions) wrote: > Hi! > > I?m completely new to this lists! so please be > patient if I make any > netiquette mistake....( of course mi written English > is awful too...) > > Does anybody know if exist any rule about how to > create and manipulate herbs > and potions? any herb list would be a great help > too... > > thanks in advance and good day to erverybody! > > > > > --- 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 ===== Leon Kirshtein (201) 785-9135 __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Jan 27 20:21:32 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:21:32 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] herbs and potions... References: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> <3E328216.8030606@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <002301c2c5e5$7bfbfe10$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello > > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1481/alchemy.html (for RQ-based > rules on alchemy & poisons) > This looks really impressive! If you're looking for a simpler system, though, you may want to check the following: http://www.basicrps.com/bazar/ (Beware, it's in French) Bye Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Mon Jan 27 21:59:19 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:59:19 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Sylphs Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A66@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Simon Phipp: >Create a Area Binding enchantment so the sylph is permanently >bound to an area and is permanently manifested... This gives a >reasonable way of commanding the sylph without using spells. It >costs a lot of POW, though. And is limited to the area that you have bound the sylph to. >If a sylph has no INT then how can it obey simple conditions like "Attack >anyone not wearing tin armour who comes through the Storm Door"? To use a Control spell, you form a mental image of the action to be performed. Language is not involved. The spell provides the link for the mental image to be transmitted. >If we are talking "within the rules" then a Foot Shield Parry is a little >beyond the published rules set. Why think rigidly "within the rules"? Where the rules are there to provide balance and prevent abuse, I don't like to achieve something interesting and impressive by breaking them. I find it much more satisfying to work within them. Inventing new magic rules shouldn't be necessary for a character such as The Iron Surfer. There's a world of difference between a skill that is not listed, and a new magic power. >We took the view that changing the rules system to a new version >should not change the nature of the PCs. Fair enough. >I am sorry if this is too long, boring and rambling, but I sometimes feel >that I have to justify why our campaign went along the lines it did. Sure, I don't think anyone needs to justify their game, I'm just explaining why it seems unachievable to me, as I've only really played subtantially within the RQ3 rules. Characters just die too easily to make Rune Lord achievable. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From nikk at cyber-rights.net Tue Jan 28 02:49:33 2003 From: nikk at cyber-rights.net (nikk at cyber-rights.net) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 07:49:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Associate Priests Message-ID: <200301271549.h0RFnY7o097730@mailserver1.hushmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- IIRC correctly canon rules state that a priest or rune lord can become a member of another cult as an acolyte. Now, as there is little difference between being an acolyte and being a rune priest (the only appreciable difference in game terms being an allied spirit, which you can choose to deny to assoicate priests if you so wish) I don't think associate priesthood makes much difference to the game mechanics. Assoicate rune lordship is a slightly different kettle of fish. But if you can be an associate priest of another cult, then having reusable rune magic isn't much of a game mechanical problem, and since a rune lord in one cult will already have 1d10 DI then having 1d10 DI from another cult isn't really a big deal. I suppose there are only two breaks with the canon rules that Simon proposes. The first is that you can have a Rune Lord-Priest, but as most cults with Rune Lords are Rune Priests anyway, we only need worry about the cults with seperate Rune Lord and Rune Priest positions. But those cults virtually always have an acolyte position anyway, and so you can have a Rune Lord-Acolyte which is mechanically identical to a Rune Lord-Priest so that isn't a big deal. The only real difference is that allowing in Associate Priests allows one to join cults, and gain reusable rune magic from them, when they don't have an acolyte position, and only have an initiate/priest position. That is not a big deal IMO. For starters becoming an associate priest requires you to get another batch of skills up, and sacrifice more of your precious POW to this other cult (I, like Simon, demand that Priests have certain spells, namely Worship, Sanctify, Initiation, Excommunication, Spellteaching and Divinatio n). You have limited POW to go around, so joining other cults isn't as big a bonus as you might imagine. I like the idea of ancient Uzuz in multiple cults, or an Argrath esque figure who is honoured by so many cults and so many in his society that he can be a member of so many cults. IMG it's so difficult anyhow, as you have to convince both cults that it's okay, be on good terms with both and specific to my campaign you're still limited by the Caste restrictions for the Henotheistic Church. Certainly, if you want RQ to allow playing past Rune Level and onwards to mimic the heroic high magic of Glorantha you haev to break the rules, and remake them. It does cause problems later down the line, for instance my tinkering has effected the combat system adversly, but in the end if I hadn't tinkered my campaign would've ended years ago. As for links, I hope to trawl through my webpage at some point and fix them all. I'm certainly going to rewrite some of the older pieces, such as Ragnaglar and Gloomshark's cult, as I'm convinced I can do a better job the second time around. Nikk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Hush 2.2 (Java) Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wl0EARECAB0FAj41VQsWHG5pa2tAY3liZXItcmlnaHRzLm5ldAAKCRCzzg9aP/unzVL7 AJ9snlO7NdSk0PcbcML3Jt/aySqMaACeIg8Zj0m2tcKBLH0eXwplUjTdFD0= =pJTM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Tue Jan 28 05:01:21 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:01:21 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A6A@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Has anyone considered the outrageous possibilities presented by abusing the Triolina spells of Meld Form and Proteus (RQ3, Gods of Glorantha)? Meld FOrm allows you to gain a new creature form that you can become, Proteus allows you to switch shape back and forth for the duration. All you need to do is get the creature to sit still for 8 hours, and then at the end of the ritual it disappears. Firstly, this means you can become all kinds of fun creatures - a giant, a sky bull, or maybe a walktapus. Secondly, it's a convenient way of getting rid of some pesky creature that you can't kill in any other way - sneak up to the giant gorp of Slimestone, maybe. This has the added benefit that you can just wander into any enemy city and instantly transform into a two-mile-wide gorp. It might be handy to be able to change shape into something that can fly very quickly over long distances, such as a swallow, so that you can migrate back to the sea once a year to get a few new points of Proteus. Triolina has full access to common divine as well, and several points of Proteus can be stacked up and extended. I think we're going to do a game with a Triolinan monster-collector, a Path of Immanent Mastery dragon, and a Trickster with an invisible flying companion carrying an anvil. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 28 03:22:07 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:22:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina Message-ID: <6123861.1043691728574.JavaMail.nobody@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> As you said, "All you need to do is get the creature to sit still for 8 hours..." David From esoteric at crashbox.com Tue Jan 28 06:05:58 2003 From: esoteric at crashbox.com (Brad Furst) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:05:58 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] spell-casting from a matrix In-Reply-To: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> References: <4F1AC04C48B4D21196CA0008C7B9A6A0049DD7CB@NSES_EXCH_SRV1> Message-ID: I am wondering about spell-casting from a matrix. In RQ, casting a spell usually requires that the spell be memorized, in memory, occupying some portion of INTelligence, and that the caster uses a material focus and speaks words or sounds and behaves with specific motions of the body. A matrix allows some external access to a magic spell as if the knowledge were in the memory of the caster. I believe the rules (RQ2, RQ3, RQ4) state that if the caster is in physical contact with the matrix, then the caster can use the magic as if the spell were in the caster's own memory by expending Magic Points or temporary POWer. Here is does not mention use of a material focus and speaking words or sounds and behaving with specific motions of the body? The question is this: When spell-casting from a matrix, does the caster use a material focus and speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of the body? Can a character who is Harmonized/paralyzed/fascinated/frozen in place, for example by a Jack-O-Bear, cast a spell from a matrix by simply expending Magic Points or temporary POWer? Or, is the character prevented, due to inability to use a material focus and speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of the body? -- Brad Furst esoteric at crashbox.com From serazh at bellsouth.net Tue Jan 28 06:19:46 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:19:46 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] spell-casting from a matrix Message-ID: <20030127191946.GMEE10692.imf26bis.bellsouth.net@localhost> The way we play it, the matrix itself is the foci, but you do still have to say a few words and make a few finger gestures. In our game you cannot cast if you are magically held or paralyzed in any way since you have to be able to speak and move your fingers to cast whether from matrix, int spirit or your own mind. Now if you are worried about being magically held, then get a magic spirit with dispel and give it instructions to cast when you are so held, since you are mentally commanding it at that point. Serazh > > From: Brad Furst > Date: 2003/01/27 Mon PM 02:05:58 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] spell-casting from a matrix > > I am wondering about spell-casting from a matrix. > > In RQ, casting a spell usually requires that the spell be memorized, > in memory, occupying some portion of INTelligence, and that the > caster uses a material focus and speaks words or sounds and behaves > with specific motions of the body. > > A matrix allows some external access to a magic spell as if the > knowledge were in the memory of the caster. I believe the rules (RQ2, > RQ3, RQ4) state that if the caster is in physical contact with the > matrix, then the caster can use the magic as if the spell were in the > caster's own memory by expending Magic Points or temporary POWer. > Here is does not mention use of a material focus and speaking words > or sounds and behaving with specific motions of the body? > > The question is this: > When spell-casting from a matrix, does the caster use a material > focus and speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of > the body? > > Can a character who is Harmonized/paralyzed/fascinated/frozen in > place, for example by a Jack-O-Bear, cast a spell from a matrix by > simply expending Magic Points or temporary POWer? Or, is the > character prevented, due to inability to use a material focus and > speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of the body? > > > > > > -- > > Brad Furst > esoteric at crashbox.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 talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Jan 28 08:08:47 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:08:47 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A6A@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <3E359FDF.2070202@talmeta.net> Hibbs, Phil wrote: > I think we're going to do a game with a Triolinan monster-collector, a Path > of Immanent Mastery dragon, and a Trickster with an invisible flying > companion carrying an anvil. Is the anvil invisible, too? -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - let's go dancing on the backs of the bruised From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Jan 28 10:40:52 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:40:52 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] spell-casting from a matrix Message-ID: ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Jan 28 10:43:22 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:43:22 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina Message-ID: >> and a Trickster with an invisible >>flying companion carrying an anvil. > >Is the anvil invisible, too? Could be fun with an invisible anvil striking home -on the Moonson, for instance... "Argh, I feel as if hit by an anvil!" ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Jan 28 12:23:44 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:23:44 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina Message-ID: <158.1af9d3b6.2b6735a0@aol.com> Hey gang, Wow, an invisible helper with an anvil---how very Tricksteresque! As my primary character, Yevgainni the Satyr, is a worshiper of the Trickster, I think I'll try to talk my GM into giving Yev something similar :) Maybe it could be a Trickster Runespell instead. Keeping my fingers crossed :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 29 02:45:49 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" Message-ID: Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up to hellebard, both parrying and attacking. Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. My houserulesuggestion is as follows: Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? WHAT DO YOU THINK? ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From serazh at bellsouth.net Wed Jan 29 04:53:54 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:53:54 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" Message-ID: <20030128175354.GGPB1264.imf24bis.bellsouth.net@localhost> I think this is a good reason for learning another weapon skill or natural weapon skill. Being a master swordsman should not automatically give you a higher base in fist attack. And at least according to RQ3 you have a base fist attack of 25% plus modifier, so you should already be around 40% unless your stats are really bad. In my opinion nobody should get to be that good a warrior without learning some natural weapon skill, or other weapon skill. Unless you follow Humakt or some other geas giving god. Serazh > > From: "Bjorn Stolen" > Date: 2003/01/28 Tue AM 10:45:49 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up t > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > MSN Messenger > ------------------------------------------ > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 > From aescleal at btinternet.com Wed Jan 29 04:57:54 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 17:57:54 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" Message-ID: <7049932.1043776674232.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with a weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use? So if you've got 125% in a one handed sword, you've got 62% in other one handed slashing weapons like axes. Mauls would still be still right out though. No reason why you couldn't give 'em quarter skill with any weapon to represent combat savvy. As an aside I can't say I got the impression that RQ martial arts skill was chop socky style. I always assumed that it was anything from making like the praying mantis down to a swift punt in the family jewels with the mark one winkle picker. Cheers, Ash > from: Bjorn Stolen > date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up t > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > MSN Messenger > ------------------------------------------ > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Wed Jan 29 05:17:38 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:17:38 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina & Trickster Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A75@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> > I think we're going to do a game with a Triolinan monster-collector, a Path > of Immanent Mastery dragon, and a Trickster with an invisible flying > companion carrying an anvil. Tal Meta: > Is the anvil invisible, too? Until it is dropped, yes. Just like anything else that you are carrying is invisible, such as clothes, weapons, etc. Actually, I think the best option is an Allied Spirit with two spells: Become Housefly, and Become Anvil. It's expensive, though, and takes a lot of re-praying. Considering that all Trickster initiates are also Acolytes, does that mean that their Allied Spirits are Acolytes as well? Philip Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From bick10 at attbi.com Wed Jan 29 05:46:19 2003 From: bick10 at attbi.com (bick10 at attbi.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:46:19 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina & Trickster Message-ID: <20030128185552.D433F4C265@thinbits.com> > Philip Hibbs. > Considering that all Trickster initiates are also Acolytes, does that mean > that their Allied Spirits are Acolytes as well? I seem to recall reading somewhere that Allied Spirits can not gain status in a cult. So they can not become a Rune Lord, Priest, Acolyte, Initiate, Lay Member. That is because they are a special case. They are from the God in question. I dealt with them as having the same spell abilities as their companion. So if they are allied to a priest they regain spells like a priest of their cult. A Rune Lord? the same restrictions. Also they can not perform the functions of their allied. Such as lead worship, excommunicate... I did have a player complain that I was too restrictive. My reply: "Playing the Avatar for your God, I will take the allied spirit back and present it to another who will fully appreciate it." Several hands shot up around the table. The player later realized what a good thing he had. Jim Bickmeyer From serazh at bellsouth.net Wed Jan 29 08:41:39 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:41:39 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina & Trickster Message-ID: <20030128214140.GJKD19997.imf21bis.bellsouth.net@[192.168.2.31]> We must do if different then from the book, allied spirits are guides and advisores for priests and acolytes. They are treated as priests for purposes of divine spells, regaining them when they are taken to a temple to pray. Serazh > > From: bick10 at attbi.com > Date: 2003/01/28 Tue PM 01:46:19 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Triolina & Trickster > > > Philip Hibbs. > > Considering that all Trickster initiates are also Acolytes, does that mean > > that their Allied Spirits are Acolytes as well? > > I seem to recall reading somewhere that Allied Spirits can not gain status in a > cult. So they can not become a Rune Lord, Priest, Acolyte, Initiate, Lay > Member. That is because they are a special case. They are from the God in > question. > > I dealt with them as having the same spell abilities as their companion. So if > they are allied to a priest they regain spells like a priest of their cult. A > Rune Lord? the same restrictions. Also they can not perform the functions of > their allied. Such as lead worship, excommunicate... > > I did have a player complain that I was too restrictive. My reply: "Playing > the Avatar for your God, I will take the allied spirit back and present it to > another who will fully appreciate it." Several hands shot up around the > table. The player later realized what a good thing he had. > > Jim Bickmeyer > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Jan 29 09:37:02 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:37:02 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" Message-ID: Serazh wrote: >I think this is a good reason for learning another weapon skill or natural weapon skill. Being >a master swordsman should not automatically give you a higher base in fist attack. >And at least according to RQ3 you have a base fist attack of 25% plus modifier, so you >should already be around 40% unless your stats are really bad. In my opinion nobody >should get to be that good a warrior without learning some natural weapon skill, or other >weapon skill. Well as far as I know, you don't learn just sword attack, just grappeling, just punching or just axe, because they are an integrated thing; at least -to my knowledge -it doesn't seem to be the way they did it acourding to medieval manuals. (Then again you might say that when learning from one mentor, he teaches you in both grappeling and swordfighting.) My point is that when training any style of fighting, you get a certain feel for fighting that is kind of fundamental, and separated from any physical attributes. Take my mentor; Colin, for instance. He is a fat, clumsy and lazy reenacter aged 43 who picked up longsword only 2 years ago. (I hope he doesn't read this!) I started only 6 months later, but he is still far superior to me, because he have 20 years to lean on conserning previous experience. And if you think the skills are enough, you should allso state that the martial arts skill is unnessecary, as they are there in addition to punch or kicking. Ash wrote: "I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with a weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use?" I don't think the rules state this, but if I'm wrong here, the rules still prove that my point is a valid one. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 29 07:48:14 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:48:14 -0600 (CST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" Message-ID: <2307735.1043794096601.JavaMail.nobody@waldorf.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Same here. To me, RQ's Martial Arts was more of a character's skill in truly effective fighting. Give me a pugilist with 100% Fist over a street fighter with 70% Fist/70% MA any day. The first may beat me to death eventually but the latter will tear off ears, gouge eyes, and do anything else to leave me a quivering, crippled mass of sobbing, bloody meat. David Smart -------Original Message------- From: aescleal at btinternet.com Sent: 01/28/03 11:57 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com, rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with a weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use? So if you've got 125% in a one handed sword, you've got 62% in other one handed slashing weapons like axes. Mauls would still be still right out though. No reason why you couldn't give 'em quarter skill with any weapon to represent combat savvy. As an aside I can't say I got the impression that RQ martial arts skill was chop socky style. I always assumed that it was anything from making like the praying mantis down to a swift punt in the family jewels with the mark one winkle picker. Cheers, Ash > from: Bjorn Stolen > date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up t > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > MSN Messenger > ------------------------------------------ > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > ------------------------------------------ > > > --- 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 _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Jan 29 13:50:20 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 18:50:20 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" References: <7049932.1043776674232.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <004801c2c741$2a6db630$9865fea9@wizard> Correct. Lots of people hear the term martial art and think karate/king fu. But for any game I've had anything to do with, including RQ3, it means just what it says. The character has studied the martial arts. Boxing, karate, fencing, kendo, French kick boxing (name just went flying out of my head), etc. Savate! That's it. It just means the character has actually put some thought into fighting as an art form and learned something from it. It should apply to any kind of fighting the character does. It certainly does in SPQR. Successful MA rolls give the character added defense chances, or additional damage (the default RQ result) and a few other things. Whenever I get the skill chapter written up for SPQR, I'll go into this in some detail. Martial Arts. Two English words. Applies to any kind of fighting. Steve Perrin, always glad for the chance for another plug www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with a weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use? So if you've got 125% in a one handed sword, you've got 62% in other one handed slashing weapons like axes. Mauls would still be still right out though. No reason why you couldn't give 'em quarter skill with any weapon to represent combat savvy. > > As an aside I can't say I got the impression that RQ martial arts skill was chop socky style. I always assumed that it was anything from making like the praying mantis down to a swift punt in the family jewels with the mark one winkle picker. > > Cheers, > > Ash > > > from: Bjorn Stolen > > date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 > > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up > t > > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > MSN Messenger > > ------------------------------------------ > > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > --- 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jan 29 19:19:08 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:19:08 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina & Trickster Message-ID: <8278950.1043828348803.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> > > Philip Hibbs. > > Considering that all Trickster initiates are also Acolytes, does that mean > > that their Allied Spirits are Acolytes as well? Nope, according to GoG they're initiates only. Unless you want to invoke the RQ2 precedent of allies with POW 18 being eqivalent to priests. Cheers, Ash From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Jan 29 21:35:08 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 11:35:08 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" References: <7049932.1043776674232.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <004801c2c741$2a6db630$9865fea9@wizard> Message-ID: <004b01c2c782$18bf47a0$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello all Most cultures in the world have martial artists, i.e., people who specialise in particular blows, with or without a weapon. After all, the three musketeers were martial artists, with all their secret thrusts and blows using a rapier (we call 'em "bottes secr?tes" in French). According to the legend, Chinese martial arts (that includes the Japanese ones since the latter were introduced to Japan by martial artists from Okinawa who had learnt them from Chinese masters) were born from the teachings of Bodhidharma, the Indian monk from whose wisdom the chan (a.k.a. zen) Buddhist sect originated. So even Chinese martial arts are actually from India and, some scholars say, originally from Greece since the vajramushti (Indian boxing) was introduced by Alexabnder the Great's Greek soldiers when they tried to invade India. Yet there is a difference between the Chinese martial arts and the ones from other parts of the world: the Chinese did believe (and some still do today) that one's martial prowess would benefit not only from daily training but also from mastering the qi, the mystic essence that permeates everything in the mundane world. Since fantasy rolegames have 'fantasy' in their background, I think it's OK for a GM to have special schools of mystic or semi-magic martial artists. The Japanese ninja, for instance, were thought to possess those incredible skills not through painstaking daily practice, but through their being initiates of Mikky?, the Japanese version of tantric Buddhism. Bye Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From gianni at basicrps.com Thu Jan 30 00:23:01 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 14:23:01 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan Classics References: <12a.200510b1.2b54cc01@aol.com> Message-ID: <000501c2c799$8c476c90$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello Rick > As a special offer to the RQ Rules Crowd, I'll sell the softcover versions > for $25 each, which includes US postage. Overseas airmail postage > is $15 extra per book. What about European members of the RQ Rules list? Do we get a special price too? Cheers, Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From alanchambers at attbi.com Thu Jan 30 07:36:34 2003 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:36:34 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" References: <7049932.1043776674232.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <004801c2c741$2a6db630$9865fea9@wizard> Message-ID: <015301c2c7d6$1da6e1c0$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> Forgive me if I'm wrong, but my copy of RQ3 says it only works with "natural weapons". I always took that to mean fist, foot, head-butt or grappling. Using it with Swords, staffs or other man-made weapons didn't seem to be covered. Alan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Perrin" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:50 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > Correct. > > Lots of people hear the term martial art and think karate/king fu. But for > any game I've had anything to do with, including RQ3, it means just what it > says. The character has studied the martial arts. Boxing, karate, fencing, > kendo, French kick boxing (name just went flying out of my head), etc. > Savate! That's it. > It just means the character has actually put some thought into fighting > as an art form and learned something from it. It should apply to any kind of > fighting the character does. It certainly does in SPQR. Successful MA rolls > give the character added defense chances, or additional damage (the default > RQ result) and a few other things. Whenever I get the skill chapter written > up for SPQR, I'll go into this in some detail. > > Martial Arts. Two English words. Applies to any kind of fighting. > > Steve Perrin, always glad for the chance for another plug > www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: ; > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:57 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with a > weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use? So if you've got > 125% in a one handed sword, you've got 62% in other one handed slashing > weapons like axes. Mauls would still be still right out though. No reason > why you couldn't give 'em quarter skill with any weapon to represent combat > savvy. > > > > As an aside I can't say I got the impression that RQ martial arts skill > was chop socky style. I always assumed that it was anything from making like > the praying mantis down to a swift punt in the family jewels with the mark > one winkle picker. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ash > > > > > from: Bjorn Stolen > > > date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 > > > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill > separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses if > you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. > Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how > the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's > allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that you > know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an > armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The > fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been > missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for > roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to eastern > martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that > matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from > wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up > > t > > > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > > > > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev > (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with > eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained in > Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > > > > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have > to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by > someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with smashing > 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say a > maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that > combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > > > > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > > > > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso > have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and > parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > > > > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > > > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack for > fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts > skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you > still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether you > should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your skills > (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye > getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > > > > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > MSN Messenger > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > --- 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jan 30 07:58:17 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:58:17 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] "martial arts" and "Ki" Message-ID: Very interesting readeng! Acording to my mentor, the infamous -and allmost patethical Hollywood-worshiped mysterious(kicking in the side of a tank, headbutting the twin towers to smoldering ruins)-"Ki" is nothing more than simply having body coordination. (He doesn't sound as bombastic as me when preaching it, though.) I think that he's right, though. It's amazing what the humanly body can achieve when it's superbly trained, and my theory (probably not worth that much, but I like venting my ideas anyway) is that ki is just beeing very good at somthing. Look at circus artists, for instance; despite you see them pulling incredible stunts, they don't shout about ki, do they? And take Michael Shoemacher (formula 1) and similar drivers, they can go for hours where we could not last one minute theese drivers don't either talk about their ki. I admit that gurus and holy men in the east can pull off incredible things, but I'll explain it whith control of the body, exceptional perfected genes, or whatever, but not magics, that only exists in the roleplaygames. But this was about reality. I have no problem with using the hollywoodcliche's in the RPG's, and I actually think the Ki magic rules in the "land of Ninja" box for RQ is very good, I just refuse to settle with such abilities beeing restricted to eastern cultures. >Yet there is a difference between the Chinese martial arts and the ones from >other parts of the world: the Chinese did believe (and some still do today) >that one's martial prowess would benefit not only from daily training but >also from mastering the qi, the mystic essence that permeates everything in >the mundane world. Since fantasy rolegames have 'fantasy' in their >background, I think it's OK for a GM to have special schools of mystic or >semi-magic martial artists. The Japanese ninja, for instance, were thought >to possess those incredible skills not through painstaking daily practice, >but through their being initiates of Mikky?, the Japanese version of tantric >Buddhism. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jan 30 07:56:51 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:56:51 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] "martial arts" and "Ki" Message-ID: Very interesting readeng! Acording to my mentor, the infamous -and allmost patethical Hollywood-worshiped mysterious(kicking in the side of a tank, headbutting the twin towers to smoldering ruins)-"Ki" is nothing more than simply having body coordination. (He doesn't sound as bombastic as me when preaching it, though.) I think that he's right, though. It's amazing what the humanly body can achieve when it's superbly trained, and my theory (probably not worth that much, but I like venting my ideas anyway) is that ki is just beeing very good at somthing. Look at circus artists, for instance; despite you see them pulling incredible stunts, they don't shout about ki, do they? And take Michael Shoemacher (formula 1) and similar drivers, they can go for hours where we could not last one minute theese drivers don't either talk about their ki. I admit that gurus and holy men in the east can pull off incredible things, but I'll explain it whith control of the body, exceptional perfected genes, or whatever, but not magics, that only exists in the roleplaygames. But this was about reality. I have no problem with using the hollywoodcliche's in the RPG's, and I actually think the Ki magic rules in the "land of Ninja" box for RQ is very good, I just refuse to settle with such abilities beeing restricted to eastern cultures. >Yet there is a difference between the Chinese martial arts and the ones from >other parts of the world: the Chinese did believe (and some still do today) >that one's martial prowess would benefit not only from daily training but >also from mastering the qi, the mystic essence that permeates everything in >the mundane world. Since fantasy rolegames have 'fantasy' in their >background, I think it's OK for a GM to have special schools of mystic or >semi-magic martial artists. The Japanese ninja, for instance, were thought >to possess those incredible skills not through painstaking daily practice, >but through their being initiates of Mikky?, the Japanese version of tantric >Buddhism. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 08:20:52 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:20:52 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound Sylphs In-Reply-To: <20030128180409.7CBD14C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030129212052.88131.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Simon Phipp: > >Create a Area Binding enchantment so the sylph is permanently > >bound to an area and is permanently manifested... This gives a > >reasonable way of commanding the sylph without using spells. It > >costs a lot of POW, though. > > And is limited to the area that you have bound the sylph to. Ah, but the clever bit is to define the area as "the area beneath the shield, the area around the shield" or some such definition. Basically, the enchantment is on the shield itself and is centered on the shield. That way, it can move and carry its area enchantment with it. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 08:31:13 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:31:13 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Associate Priests In-Reply-To: <20030128180409.7CBD14C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030129213113.90276.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Nikk: > Assoicate rune lordship is a slightly different kettle of fish. But if you > can be an associate priest of another cult, then having reusable rune magic > isn't much of a game mechanical problem, and since a rune lord in one cult > will already have 1d10 DI then having 1d10 DI from another cult isn't > really a big deal. Just double the chance of losing POW - a big benefit :-) > I suppose there are only two breaks with the canon rules that Simon > proposes. The first is that you can have a Rune Lord-Priest, but as most > cults with Rune Lords are Rune Priests anyway, we only need worry about the > cults with seperate Rune Lord and Rune Priest positions. But those cults > virtually always have an acolyte position anyway, and so you can have a > Rune Lord-Acolyte which is mechanically identical to a Rune Lord-Priest so > that isn't a big deal. I was using the RQ2 rules which specifically allow Rune Lord-Priests of any cult. The problem happens when the characters are converted to RQ3. If I ran another game, I would keep the RQ2 Associate Priest rules but use them as acolytes, even if the cult has not acolytes. > I like the idea of ancient Uzuz in multiple cults, or an Argrath esque > figure who is honoured by so many cults and so many in his society that he > can be a member of so many cults. IMG it's so difficult anyhow, as you have > to convince both cults that it's okay, be on good terms with both and > specific to my campaign you're still limited by the Caste restrictions for > the Henotheistic Church. Uzuz are fantastically powerful as they can, in theory, be Adepts of Arkat, Shamans of Kyger Litor and Rune Lords of Zorak Zoran (there are no restrictions on what cults an UzUz can join, except for the usual no Chaos and no enemies). NOt every UzUz will be in all these cults, but I find the idea of Shaman Sorcerers very interesting. Membership of certain combinations can be difficult, but others are so easy. Orlanth and Storm Bull or Orlanth and Humakt are fairly easy. Orlanth and Chalana Arroy or Humakt and Chalana Arroy should be impossible. Orlanth and Lhankor Mhy is possible, but then you become like the Sword Sages of Pavis. And so the list could go on and on. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 08:39:00 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:39:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Triolina In-Reply-To: <20030128180409.7CBD14C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030129213900.79781.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Has anyone considered the outrageous possibilities presented by abusing the > Triolina spells of Meld Form and Proteus (RQ3, Gods of Glorantha)? When I first saw the spells, I decided that they were far too powerful to be used as written. Fortunately, my PCs would never join the cult of Triolina and I played that mermen rarely traded their spells, so they would probably never gain access to the spells. As NPC spells, however, they are quite useful, especially when they are used for assassination. Imagine the PCs travelling to a fairground and doing the usual playing of games and going on rides. They come out with a few bottles containing goldfish and take them home. Later that night, the goldfish change form into Wachaza assassins who stab the sleeping PCs. I also played that Triolina frowned on her worshippers using the spells on non-aquatic creatures, this not being a taboo but something that controlled its use. Sea birds are OK, though, as are creatures that can swim and live on the land, such as crocodiles. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 08:58:16 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:58:16 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: spell-casting from a matrix In-Reply-To: <20030128180409.7CBD14C26E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030129215816.82911.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Brad Furst: > The question is this: > When spell-casting from a matrix, does the caster use a material > focus and speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of > the body? > > Can a character who is Harmonized/paralyzed/fascinated/frozen in > place, for example by a Jack-O-Bear, cast a spell from a matrix by > simply expending Magic Points or temporary POWer? Or, is the > character prevented, due to inability to use a material focus and > speak words or sounds and behave with specific motions of the body? Serazh: > The way we play it, the matrix itself is the foci, but you do still have to > say a few words and make a few finger gestures. In our game you cannot cast > if you are magically held or paralyzed in any way since you have to be able > to speak and move your fingers to cast whether from matrix, int spirit or > your own mind. > > Now if you are worried about being magically held, then get a magic spirit > with dispel and give it instructions to cast when you are so held, since > you are mentally commanding it at that point. We played it in a very similar way. The matrix acts as a focus, so the caster has no need to have a separate focus. If it is in contact with the caster's body or aura (in contact with worn clothing, for instance) then the caster can use the focus. We also played that the matrix has already prepared the spell, so casting it costs no SRs for MP gathering, so it goes of at DEX SR only. This can be useful when casting a large spell from a matrix. The caster still has to cast the spell, but he may be able to do this by speaking the words in his mind and making small gestures. This means that he can cast the spell covertly rather than being obvious. We played that a Harmonized/paralyzed/fascinated/frozen character could do absolutley nothing himself, including casting any kind of spell. However, if he has an allied spirit then the ally could cast spells from his mind or from shared resources that the ally has access to. Magic Spirits could also be bound with a Condition that it casts its Dispel Magic against any spell that Harmonizes/paralyzes/fascinates/freezes the character. Of course, some Harmonizing/paralyzing/fascinating/freezing effects can go through the Mindlink and affect allied spirits, which is pretty nasty when it happens as the only way out is through a Magic Spirit, if you have one, or a friend. By the way, there is a retelling of a session that uses a Jack o'Bear's Harmonize in an unusual way on my web site at . Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jan 30 09:08:28 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:08:28 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Allied Spirits In-Reply-To: <20030129104606.0012D4C267@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030129220828.97346.qmail@web9602.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Actually, I think the best option is an Allied Spirit with two spells: > Become Housefly, and Become Anvil. It's expensive, though, and takes a lot > of re-praying. > > Considering that all Trickster initiates are also Acolytes, does that mean > that their Allied Spirits are Acolytes as well? We always played that Allied Spirits could sacrifice for reusable spells as if they were Priests. They could use initiate DI as well, but did not get any other benefits such as POW gains on Holy Days. Simon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com From alanchambers at attbi.com Thu Jan 30 14:29:31 2003 From: alanchambers at attbi.com (Alan Chambers) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:29:31 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Message-ID: <00fd01c2c80f$cda1e8c0$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> Here's an interesting question. If an Undead creature has been created using magic, can it be dispelled using something like Dismiss Magic? Alan "In democracy its your vote that counts. In feudalism its your Count that votes." -Mogens Jallberg From lance at dyasdesigns.com Thu Jan 30 15:53:03 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 22:53:03 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Art... Message-ID: <3E38AFAF.20507@dyasdesigns.com> I like the style of the art from RQ2 check this out.... http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/runequest/rqversusdnd.jpg OK not completely original... the Dragons all mine..... and being developed for a tattoo. From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:04 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:57:04 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" References: <7049932.1043776674232.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> <004801c2c741$2a6db630$9865fea9@wizard> <015301c2c7d6$1da6e1c0$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> Message-ID: <00eb01c2c81c$088b94c0$9865fea9@wizard> I fixed that in SPQR... Steve, always happy for another chance to plug www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Chambers" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:36 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > Forgive me if I'm wrong, but my copy of RQ3 says it only works with "natural > weapons". I always took that to mean fist, foot, head-butt or grappling. > Using it with Swords, staffs or other man-made weapons didn't seem to be > covered. > Alan > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Perrin" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:50 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > Correct. > > > > Lots of people hear the term martial art and think karate/king fu. But for > > any game I've had anything to do with, including RQ3, it means just what > it > > says. The character has studied the martial arts. Boxing, karate, fencing, > > kendo, French kick boxing (name just went flying out of my head), etc. > > Savate! That's it. > > It just means the character has actually put some thought into > fighting > > as an art form and learned something from it. It should apply to any kind > of > > fighting the character does. It certainly does in SPQR. Successful MA > rolls > > give the character added defense chances, or additional damage (the > default > > RQ result) and a few other things. Whenever I get the skill chapter > written > > up for SPQR, I'll go into this in some detail. > > > > Martial Arts. Two English words. Applies to any kind of fighting. > > > > Steve Perrin, always glad for the chance for another plug > > www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: ; > > Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:57 AM > > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > > > > I may be mistaken, but don't you get half your chance to hit/parry with > a > > weapon in the same category as the one you know how to use? So if you've > got > > 125% in a one handed sword, you've got 62% in other one handed slashing > > weapons like axes. Mauls would still be still right out though. No reason > > why you couldn't give 'em quarter skill with any weapon to represent > combat > > savvy. > > > > > > As an aside I can't say I got the impression that RQ martial arts skill > > was chop socky style. I always assumed that it was anything from making > like > > the praying mantis down to a swift punt in the family jewels with the mark > > one winkle picker. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Ash > > > > > > > from: Bjorn Stolen > > > > date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:45:49 > > > > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > > > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Broadening the use for "martial arts" > > > > > > > > Have you noticed how "Martial Arts" is listed as an unice skill > > separated from fist, kick, etc? The way it works, you get special bonuses > if > > you roll lower than both the martial art skill and the appropriate attack. > > Martial arts isn't only happening in the east. I'm really pissed about how > > the west worships the eastern fighting styles and are convinced that it's > > allmost supernatural (the "Ki" for once). If you tell a 11 year old that > you > > know that really, really good karate gurus can kick trough the side of an > > armoured fighting vehicle, he'll probably concur whith noe hesitation. The > > fact that the western culture allso have martial arts seems to have been > > missed by most people, at least people designing combatrules for > > roleplaygames. So in my oppinion, this skill shouldn't only apply to > eastern > > martial arts, but allso western martial arts or any martial arts for that > > matter, a name for all combatstyles covering the whole spectre from > > wrestling, through dagger, axe, sword up > > > t > > > > o hellebard, both parrying and attacking. > > > > > > > > Now, I wasn't really going to only sob about how others wiev > > (eastern)martial arts, and I want to stress that I have no problems with > > eastern martial arts themselves! -Just the magical shroud it has attained > in > > Hollywood and the minds of most westerners. > > > > > > > > My point for bothering you lies in the great potential this skill have > > to solve a flaw with the combatrules that was brought to my attention by > > someone not long time ago.The problem is basically that a dude with > smashing > > 125% in sword attack goes down to base chanses if using a new weapon -say > a > > maul. This doesn't seem fair to me; he should get some credit for all that > > combatexperience he obviously would have had to have in order to get 125%. > > > > > > > > My houserulesuggestion is as follows: > > > > > > > > Say you have 125% in sword attack, and 111% in sword parry. You allso > > have 44% in Martial arts (gained only on all forms of critical attacks and > > parries, or studyed \ trained with a mentor, perhaps? ) > > > > > > > > Now, during a melee your sword breaks, and you desperately > > > > have to resort to your bare fists to save the day. Your base attack > for > > fists is lousy 27% and parry even worse!(25%) But since your matrial arts > > skill is om impressive 44% (Have been fighting for a very long time), you > > still hit and block (sorry; parry...) on 01% - 44%. I don't know wether > you > > should have some additional bonus if rolling lower than both of your > skills > > (could be either if using the sword (125%\44%) or fist (27%\44%)). Mabye > > getting +1 damage, or adding 1d6 dam? > > > > > > > > WHAT DO YOU THINK? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > MSN Messenger > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > --- 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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 jellen at ameritech.net Thu Jan 30 18:14:01 2003 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 01:14:01 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead References: <00fd01c2c80f$cda1e8c0$84446218@se1.client2.attbi.com> Message-ID: <01c501c2c82f$2a5029f0$3410fea9@frkt5> On one hand, I say no--once the spell is cast, you're stuck with the critter. On the other hand, such a gross violation of natural Law might require some sort of runic tattoos, amulet, or whatever to maintain its existence--trash the "lock" and the critter goes bye-bye. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Chambers" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:29 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Here's an interesting question. If an Undead creature has been created using magic, can it be dispelled using something like Dismiss Magic? Alan "In democracy its your vote that counts. In feudalism its your Count that votes." -Mogens Jallberg _______________________________________________ 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 Thu Jan 30 19:23:40 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (Tony Den) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:23:40 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Art... Message-ID: <49355.196.8.104.31.1043915020.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Lance Dyas posted alink to a picture: I think it is excellent, looks really nice. Hope the tat goes well and looks as good. Tony -- Orcs are great, but the empire is eternal! From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Thu Jan 30 20:28:09 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:09 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: I think there are too many skills associated to language in Glorantha This is due to its very rich background, and I don't want to change that. But from a game play stand point, this lead to a multiplicity of skills (speak and read/write for each language). So I am considering simplifying a bit this as follows : Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now called "Language [name]" And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the symbol associated to language, at a level equal to the lower of the Calligraphy skill or the relevant Language skill (or may be twice iti, if we want somebody better at expressing ideas through writing rather than at speaking ?). I used the "Calligraphy" name on purpose, because I think most of the alphabet or other writings in Glorantha may be very different (close to Chinese, Arabic, Western Europe alphabet, Eastern Europe alphabet, ancient egyptian, phonetics...), not just plain western alphabet. Communication skills (Orate, Fast talk,...) would also be limited by the Language skill so used (let say a maximum of twice the Language used). Even Listen could be so limited to understand a conversation. To go further, maybe this new Language skill could even not be used by itself, but only in association (within the above limits) with skill of Orate/Fast talk for speaking, and Calligraphy for writing, or Listen for understanding ? This concept could be used for other skills which are too numerous per cat?gory (Ride [animal], Combat [weapon]... ? Alain. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Thu Jan 30 20:28:33 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 03:28:33 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745DD0B@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> According to the rules, Creating an undead creature like Zombies is an enchantment process which means permanent not dispellable effect. Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : J and/or Ellen [mailto:jellen at ameritech.net] Envoy? : jeudi 30 janvier 2003 08:14 ? : rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet : Re: [RQ-Rules] Undead On one hand, I say no--once the spell is cast, you're stuck with the critter. On the other hand, such a gross violation of natural Law might require some sort of runic tattoos, amulet, or whatever to maintain its existence--trash the "lock" and the critter goes bye-bye. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Chambers" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:29 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Here's an interesting question. If an Undead creature has been created using magic, can it be dispelled using something like Dismiss Magic? Alan "In democracy its your vote that counts. In feudalism its your Count that votes." -Mogens Jallberg _______________________________________________ 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 phil.hibbs at cgey.com Thu Jan 30 21:16:08 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:16:08 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A78@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Simon Phipp: >Ah, but the clever bit is to define the area as "the area beneath >the shield, the area around the shield" or some such definition. You're basically saying "Ah, but the clever bit is that you ignore the rules and make up something more useful". Area enchantments aren't movable. You enchant the area, not an item. If you move an item that is integral to the enchantment, then the area that you enchanted is no longer near the item, so you break it. I had exactly the same problem with Detect Truth, it isn't movable. It's as abusive as having mobile Sanctify, Warding, or Homing Circles. If a ghost was bound to a castle's battlements, could I just dismantle the castle and scatter the stones all across the Lunar Empire, and extend the area that the ghost is bound to? Equally no. >Orlanth and Chalana Arroy ... should be impossible. Orlanth Adventurous, true. There are other Orlanths. >We always played that Allied Spirits could sacrifice for >reusable spells as if they were Priests. That's the rule in RQ2, Rune Lords don't have access to priests' spells, but their Allied Spirits do. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jan 30 21:28:04 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:04 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: >I think there are too many skills associated to language in Glorantha This >is due to its very rich background, and I don't want to change that. But >from a game play stand point, this lead to a multiplicity of skills (speak >and read/write for each language). I totally disagree; I think the vast range of dialects and languages adds flavor to Glorantha, and the roleplaying aspect (say you want to alarm a comunity that a chaos monster approaches, and they dont have the faintest idea what you're talking about). That allso makes the "tradetalk" very fascinating (though mabyer unrealistic) I wiev it as a mishmach of most languages, and that it have very strong dialects in different parts of the world, so talking tradetalk with someone in Fronela is very different from then travelling to Kralorela and speak it there. But for those that share your wiev, I think your houserulesuggestion is fine. I could agree on the ride skill. Actually I would go further; stating that if you can ride a horse, you can ride a Tusker. A friend of mine introduced mood rolls everytime we as players came across a new animal, 1d100. The roll was a one time, and was an indication on the spesiffic animals temper. Very low made for a very peaceful creature (rather like Ferdinand the bull), and very high sinister and allmost chaotic. Rolling high on a Storm Bull would make worse consiquenses than rolling high on a Hamster, though. My character; Gjermund, Humakt initiate was allmost kicked to death when walking past a rather evil Donky outside an inn. The owner had to throw in very good arguments to save his riding companion afterwards... ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From lance at dyasdesigns.com Fri Jan 31 00:23:35 2003 From: lance at dyasdesigns.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:23:35 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ Art... In-Reply-To: <49355.196.8.104.31.1043915020.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> References: <49355.196.8.104.31.1043915020.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Message-ID: <3E392757.5070205@dyasdesigns.com> Tony Den wrote: >Lance Dyas posted alink to a picture: > >I think it is excellent, looks really nice. Hope the tat goes well and >looks as good. >Tony > > Thank you, Just a clerification... the tat is for someone else ;-), body art is too permanent for my blood, (I like the freedom to change personal style and taste, tattoos are a damn serious commitment) and this is the first tattoo I worked on the design of... Lance From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Fri Jan 31 00:50:36 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:50:36 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745DD35@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> Alain, In the french add-on "Genertela" , there is chapter which describe the different languages used on the continent along with the affinity which exists between them. IIRC, it state 2 things : First : your communication skills are limited by your language skills when you are not using your natural language (I think it says something like 2x your speak language skill) Secondly: Some languages are related to each other in a certain way (like Italian and French). Which means that (taking Italian and French as examples) if you know French, you can understand up to a certain limit somebody speaking Italian and eventually speak some Italian. [For Italian you also get a special bonus if you use your hands too ;-)] I think the book also gives you a table with the different modificators to apply depending on how the languages are related to each others. (I don't have it here but I can take a look if you want). Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : RAMEAU Alain [mailto:Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com] Envoy? : jeudi 30 janvier 2003 10:28 ? : rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet : [RQ-Rules] Languages I think there are too many skills associated to language in Glorantha This is due to its very rich background, and I don't want to change that. But from a game play stand point, this lead to a multiplicity of skills (speak and read/write for each language). So I am considering simplifying a bit this as follows : Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now called "Language [name]" And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the symbol associated to language, at a level equal to the lower of the Calligraphy skill or the relevant Language skill (or may be twice iti, if we want somebody better at expressing ideas through writing rather than at speaking ?). I used the "Calligraphy" name on purpose, because I think most of the alphabet or other writings in Glorantha may be very different (close to Chinese, Arabic, Western Europe alphabet, Eastern Europe alphabet, ancient egyptian, phonetics...), not just plain western alphabet. Communication skills (Orate, Fast talk,...) would also be limited by the Language skill so used (let say a maximum of twice the Language used). Even Listen could be so limited to understand a conversation. To go further, maybe this new Language skill could even not be used by itself, but only in association (within the above limits) with skill of Orate/Fast talk for speaking, and Calligraphy for writing, or Listen for understanding ? This concept could be used for other skills which are too numerous per cat?gory (Ride [animal], Combat [weapon]... ? Alain. --- 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 serazh at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 31 01:52:53 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 9:52:53 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead Message-ID: <20030130145254.ICMB1242.imf38bis.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> I would say no, normally it takes ritual enchantments to make undead, and enchantments cannot be dispelled, although if you find the foci and destroy it, that will disrupt a enchantment. Serazh > > From: "Alan Chambers" > Date: 2003/01/29 Wed PM 10:29:31 EST > To: > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Undead > > Here's an interesting question. If an Undead creature has been created using > magic, can it be dispelled using something like Dismiss Magic? > Alan > "In democracy its your vote that counts. In feudalism its > your Count that votes." > -Mogens Jallberg > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 talmeta.net Fri Jan 31 02:03:21 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:03:21 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A78@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <3E393EB9.4040008@talmeta.net> Hibbs, Phil wrote: > Simon Phipp: > and make up something more useful". Area enchantments aren't movable. You > enchant the area, not an item. If you move an item that is integral to the > enchantment, then the area that you enchanted is no longer near the item, so > you break it. I had exactly the same problem with Detect Truth, it isn't > movable. It's as abusive as having mobile Sanctify, Warding, or Homing > Circles. IIRC, everyone is thinking of Protective Circle, which gives an example in the book where it can be placed on the bed of a cart, which moves with the cart... -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - "Stimpy! Move your butt! It's a higher mammal!" From serazh at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 31 02:13:38 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:13:38 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: <20030130151338.FDGW21240.imf12bis.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> I disagree, the main reason most of our group plays RQ over other systems is the skill break down. And the different languages with R/W and Speak has given us a lot of unique and fun role playing situations. Our Runic Quests envolved being teleported around the world and traveling, and part of that was meeting new cultures and communicating with them. We did not use Orate of Fast Talk for this, we simply tried to communicate. Also some of the player characters we have picked up since then aren't as fluent in languages that we normally use. So in the middle of combat if someone hollers something in one language people roll Speak (Whatever) to understand them, which can be a hassle sometimes, but can also be funny as well. But in the end, you have to do what makes you feel comfortable with the game, so if multiple languages are giving you fits, then by all means change it. Sometimes it is a pain keeping up with them, but its worth it to us for the roleplaying. Serazh > > From: RAMEAU Alain > Date: 2003/01/30 Thu AM 04:28:09 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages > > I think there are too many skills associated to language in Glorantha This > is due to its very rich background, and I don't want to change that. But > from a game play stand point, this lead to a multiplicity of skills (speak > and read/write for each language). > > So I am considering simplifying a bit this as follows : > Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now > called "Language [name]" > And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the > languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the symbol > associated to language, at a level equal to the lower of the Calligraphy > skill or the relevant Language skill (or may be twice iti, if we want > somebody better at expressing ideas through writing rather than at > speaking ?). > I used the "Calligraphy" name on purpose, because I think most of the > alphabet or other writings in Glorantha may be very different (close to > Chinese, Arabic, Western Europe alphabet, Eastern Europe alphabet, ancient > egyptian, phonetics...), not just plain western alphabet. > Communication skills (Orate, Fast talk,...) would also be limited by the > Language skill so used (let say a maximum of twice the Language used). > Even Listen could be so limited to understand a conversation. > > To go further, maybe this new Language skill could even not be used by > itself, but only in association (within the above limits) with skill of > Orate/Fast talk for speaking, and Calligraphy for writing, or Listen for > understanding ? > This concept could be used for other skills which are too numerous per > cat?gory (Ride [animal], Combat [weapon]... ? > > Alain. > > > --- 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 serazh at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 31 02:20:32 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:20:32 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs Message-ID: <20030130152032.JKQA1242.imf38bis.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Also two other examples are Homing Circle and Ward. In our game there is a race of gypsys who worship the moon goddess and travel around in large wagons, they do put warding in some of them for shrines to thier goddess. And as far as homing circle, we have a sorceror in our group who has about 3 set up in different areas. But he also has one woven into a 2 meter by 2 meter rug, that can be left at places while he travels or teleports to one of the other circles, so that he can get back quickly. The warding is reasonable and should be allowed in cultures such as the gypsys, the homing circle can be overdone, but if the sorceror is willing to give up power and put it in a item that can be stolen or destroyed, more power to him. Serazh > > From: Tal Meta > Date: 2003/01/30 Thu AM 10:03:21 EST > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs > > Hibbs, Phil wrote: > > Simon Phipp: > > and make up something more useful". Area enchantments aren't movable. You > > enchant the area, not an item. If you move an item that is integral to the > > enchantment, then the area that you enchanted is no longer near the item, so > > you break it. I had exactly the same problem with Detect Truth, it isn't > > movable. It's as abusive as having mobile Sanctify, Warding, or Homing > > Circles. > > IIRC, everyone is thinking of Protective Circle, which gives an example > in the book where it can be placed on the bed of a cart, which moves > with the cart... > > -- > talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > "Stimpy! Move your butt! It's a higher mammal!" > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jan 31 02:32:58 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:32:58 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages References: Message-ID: <002101c2c874$de4ac9c0$9002600a@otvfrap043> Bonsoir Alain [Alain] Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now called "Language [name]" And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the symbol associated to language [/Alain] I have to strongly disagree here. You may know how to write the Roman alphabet if you are a Frenchman, it won't help you the least if you are trying to write Croatian or Turkish, yet both of them use the same script! And what about people who learn Chinese calligraphy just for fun; it does not make them knowledgeable in writing Chinese! One option is to have a skill "speak language 'L'" and a skill "Write script 'S'". Then if language L is written using script S, the character must use the skill "Write script 'S'" limited by the skill "speak language 'L'". That's (more or less) what I use in my Imperial China games. ? plus, Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 31 02:42:40 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:42:40 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Many languages Message-ID: Maybe I was not clear enough. Sorry for that. I didn't intend to reduce the flavour of Glorantha. I was just wondering if it was useful to have a double list of skills (read/write + speak) for each language ? So keeping all the existing anguages, but avoiding the related multiplication of skills. Message: 7 From: "Bjorn Stolen" To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Languages Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:04 +0000 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com I totally disagree; I think the vast range of dialects and languages adds flavor to Glorantha, and the roleplaying aspect (say you want to alarm a comunity that a chaos monster approaches, and they dont have the faintest idea what you're talking about). I know those rules (my web page contains such language list and related skills as well), but I find this a bit complicated, and not necesserily true : As a French, I can read reasonably well Spanish/Portuguese, but depending on the region of origin of the speaker, it is definitely another matter to understand him. So the relation which is true for the written side, is not necessarily true from a listening point of view. Message: 9 From: "Dury, Pascal" To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" Subject: RE : [RQ-Rules] Languages Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:50:36 -0600 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.comAlain, In the french add-on "Genertela" , there is chapter which describe the different languages used on the continent along with the affinity which exists between them. IIRC, it state 2 things : First : your communication skills are limited by your language skills = when you are not using your natural language (I think it says something like = 2x your speak language skill) Secondly: Some languages are related to each other in a certain way = (like Italian and French). Which means that (taking Italian and French as examples) if you know French, you can understand up to a certain limit somebody speaking Italian and eventually speak some Italian. [For = Italian you also get a special bonus if you use your hands too ;-)] I think the book also gives you a table with the different modificators = --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From soltakss at yahoo.com Fri Jan 31 03:18:15 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 16:18:15 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs/Languages In-Reply-To: <20030130151609.AD17D4C1DC@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20030130161815.93321.qmail@web9608.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > You're basically saying "Ah, but the clever bit is that you ignore the > rules > and make up something more useful". Area enchantments aren't movable. You > enchant the area, not an item. If you move an item that is integral to the > enchantment, then the area that you enchanted is no longer near the item, > so > you break it. I had exactly the same problem with Detect Truth, it isn't > movable. It's as abusive as having mobile Sanctify, Warding, or Homing > Circles. Hmm, we actually had a Homing Circle that was enchanted into the pattern on a rug. It could be rolled up and moved somewhere else, unrolled and someone could then return to the Homing Circle. We have also had a Warding spell that was cast on a cart, the wards themselves being built into the corners of the cart, so the Warding spell travelled with the cart. Derak bound a couple of wraiths into his bones (don't ask) and put a 1m area enchantment on them so they could pop out and moan, scaring people, but that's a bit silly, I suppose. From memory, didn't Gondo Holst have Warding in his cart? Maybe not, my new copy of Griffin Mountain is somewhere on the oceans at the moment. I thought that Area Enchantments were bound to the area around the Enchantment itself, so if the enchantment is on a movable object then the area enchanted moves with it. Otherwise, if I make an Area enchantment on the floor of a cart and put a ghost into the area enchantment, then I drive the cart away, what happens to the ghost? The enchanted item (the cart) has moved, so does the ghost stay where it is or is it dragged along with the cart? > If a ghost was bound to a castle's battlements, could I just dismantle the > castle and scatter the stones all across the Lunar Empire, and extend the > area that the ghost is bound to? Equally no. If a ghost is bound to the whole of a castle, the boundaries being marked out and being part of the enchantment, then if those enchanted boundaries are destroyed then the enchantment ends. However, if the ghost is bound to within 100m of an enchanted stone in the castle keep, then destroying the castle does not itself destroy the enchantment, but destroying the enchanted stone does destroy the enchantment. > >Orlanth and Chalana Arroy ... should be impossible. > > Orlanth Adventurous, true. There are other Orlanths. But unless the other Orlanths are completely pacifist then they are incompatible with Chalana Arroy. Alain Rameau: > I think there are too many skills associated to language in Glorantha = This is not a Gloranthan problem, imagine having the same in Alternate Earth and having a Speak/RW Language for Latin, Frankish, Gaulish, Visigoth, Saxon, Basque etc., and that is just for Gaul after the Romans were conquered. > This=20 > is due to its very rich background, and I don't want to change that. = > But=20 > from a game play stand point, this lead to a multiplicity of skills = > (speak=20 > and read/write for each language). > > So I am considering simplifying a bit this as follows : > Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now=20 > called "Language [name]" > And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the = > > languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the = > symbol=20 > associated to language, at a level equal to the lower of the = > Calligraphy=20 > skill or the relevant Language skill (or may be twice iti, if we want=20 > somebody better at expressing ideas through writing rather than at=20 > speaking ?). > I used the "Calligraphy" name on purpose, because I think most of the=20 > alphabet or other writings in Glorantha may be very different (close to = > > Chinese, Arabic, Western Europe alphabet, Eastern Europe alphabet, = > ancient=20 > egyptian, phonetics...), not just plain western alphabet. From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Fri Jan 31 03:30:10 2003 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael Christian) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:30:10 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Associate Priests Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927404AC988D@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> Simon Phipp - "Uzuz are fantastically powerful as they can, in theory, be Adepts of Arkat, Shamans of Kyger Litor and Rune Lords of Zorak Zoran (there are no restrictions on what cults an UzUz can join, except for the usual no Chaos and no enemies). NOt every UzUz will be in all these cults, but I find the idea of Shaman Sorcerers very interesting." Isn't one of the conditions to becoming a Shaman forgetting all sorcery that one had previously learned? Due to opposing world views and all that. Or is there some exception that I'm unaware of? Michael From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Fri Jan 31 04:00:54 2003 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:00:54 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Many languages Message-ID: <5FA5BB3B120AD3119D5C00105A16403D0745DD74@FR-DEF-EXCH-1> IMHO, you should keep separate reading/writing from speaking skills. Considering (My) Glorantha from an ethnological and sociological point of view, most cultures don't have a written language. They don't have the "requirements" for it (mostly because they don't need it). Only Civilized cultures, big cities as well as the priests have the necessary cultural level/need to develop this type of expertise, and they usually have reach some kind of standardization. Besides, it seems to me that the perception of the link between read, write and speak skills is distorted by our way to learn the languages in our world. I agree with you that the way we learn them actually, if you know both the correct alphabet and the language, you know all three skills to some degree(speak is > than read which is > than write most of the time), however, IMHO it is not because of the link between the scripts and the languages, but more because the way we actually learn it. When I remember my 1st english lesson, the first thing we did was openning a book... Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : RAMEAU Alain [mailto:Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com] Envoy? : jeudi 30 janvier 2003 16:43 ? : rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet : [RQ-Rules] Many languages Maybe I was not clear enough. Sorry for that. I didn't intend to reduce the flavour of Glorantha. I was just wondering if it was useful to have a double list of skills (read/write + speak) for each language ? So keeping all the existing anguages, but avoiding the related multiplication of skills. Message: 7 From: "Bjorn Stolen" To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Languages Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:04 +0000 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com I totally disagree; I think the vast range of dialects and languages adds flavor to Glorantha, and the roleplaying aspect (say you want to alarm a comunity that a chaos monster approaches, and they dont have the faintest idea what you're talking about). I know those rules (my web page contains such language list and related skills as well), but I find this a bit complicated, and not necesserily true : As a French, I can read reasonably well Spanish/Portuguese, but depending on the region of origin of the speaker, it is definitely another matter to understand him. So the relation which is true for the written side, is not necessarily true from a listening point of view. Message: 9 From: "Dury, Pascal" To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" Subject: RE : [RQ-Rules] Languages Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:50:36 -0600 Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.comAlain, In the french add-on "Genertela" , there is chapter which describe the different languages used on the continent along with the affinity which exists between them. IIRC, it state 2 things : First : your communication skills are limited by your language skills = when you are not using your natural language (I think it says something like = 2x your speak language skill) Secondly: Some languages are related to each other in a certain way = (like Italian and French). Which means that (taking Italian and French as examples) if you know French, you can understand up to a certain limit somebody speaking Italian and eventually speak some Italian. [For = Italian you also get a special bonus if you use your hands too ;-)] I think the book also gives you a table with the different modificators = --- 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 phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 31 04:20:15 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:20:15 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs/Languages Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A7D@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Simon Phipp: >From memory, didn't Gondo Holst have Warding in his cart? Maybe not, >my new copy of Griffin Mountain is somewhere on the oceans at the moment. Maybe, but that doesn't mean that it is possible with the normal version of the spell that everyone has access to. A mistake by a scenario designer isn't going to persuade me to change the rules. Serazh: >In our game there is a race of gypsys who worship the moon goddess >and travel around in large wagons, they do put warding in some of them I agree that certain cultures, such as gypsys, might have portable warding, but I'd prefer just to have bound spirits perform the same function. Warding specifically states that the sticks need to be put in the ground, but I'm sure there can be variants. Simon Phipp: >if I make an Area enchantment on the floor of a cart and >put a ghost into the area enchantment, then I drive the >cart away, what happens to the ghost? The enchantment is broken, IMO. Special circumstances might lead to this being possible, but as a general rule, it isn't. There may be a kind of binding enchantment that is portable like an object, and allows the creature freedom to move around like an area enchantment, but one that provides both simultaneously should at least be rare and expensive. Limits are there for a reason. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From serazh at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 31 05:46:11 2003 From: serazh at bellsouth.net (serazh at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:46:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs/Languages Message-ID: <20030130184611.YAQT15990.imf14bis.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> And what version are you playing with were spirits can mimic warding and sanctify? These spells are used to tie you to the god plane and your god, allied spirits can't do that, neither can any other spirits I have seen. As far as binding a spirit to a area, as long as the area doesn't change, I don't see where it would matter. If he is carrying things in a wagon all the time and wants to bind a spirit to the bed of the wagon to attack anyone entering it but him, then that is a valid binding and command IMO. Serazh > > From: "Hibbs, Phil" > Date: 2003/01/30 Thu PM 12:20:15 EST > To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" > Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs/Languages > > Simon Phipp: > >From memory, didn't Gondo Holst have Warding in his cart? Maybe not, > >my new copy of Griffin Mountain is somewhere on the oceans at the moment. > > Maybe, but that doesn't mean that it is possible with the normal version of > the spell that everyone has access to. A mistake by a scenario designer > isn't going to persuade me to change the rules. > > Serazh: > >In our game there is a race of gypsys who worship the moon goddess > >and travel around in large wagons, they do put warding in some of them > > I agree that certain cultures, such as gypsys, might have portable warding, > but I'd prefer just to have bound spirits perform the same function. Warding > specifically states that the sticks need to be put in the ground, but I'm > sure there can be variants. > > Simon Phipp: > >if I make an Area enchantment on the floor of a cart and > >put a ghost into the area enchantment, then I drive the > >cart away, what happens to the ghost? > > The enchantment is broken, IMO. Special circumstances might lead to this > being possible, but as a general rule, it isn't. There may be a kind of > binding enchantment that is portable like an object, and allows the creature > freedom to move around like an area enchantment, but one that provides both > simultaneously should at least be rare and expensive. Limits are there for a > reason. > > Phil Hibbs. > > > ******************************************************************************************** > " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and > is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for > the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you > are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use > this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". > ******************************************************************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 31 06:18:00 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 19:18:00 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Many languages Message-ID: >Maybe I was not clear enough. Sorry for that. I didn't intend to reduce >the flavour of Glorantha. I was just wondering if it was useful to have a >double list of skills (read/write + speak) for each language ? >So keeping all the existing anguages, but avoiding the related >multiplication of skills. Sorry if I misunderstood you; I thought you meant that you ...I don't know what you meant... What do you really mean? I thought the rules stated that you have one reading\writing + speaking skill for every language; that's how I play the game anyway : ) ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 31 06:57:27 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 19:57:27 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Priests and cult combinations Message-ID: >Isn't one of the conditions to becoming a Shaman forgetting all sorcery that >one had previously learned? Due to opposing world views and all that. Or is >there some exception that I'm unaware of? I think (based on my brother in law's practice) that illuminates can fool the gods; hide the fact that they're chaotic even! Extreme case: A Charlana Arroy priest illuminated and allso a Malia priest... I allso have the principle that there are no rules without exception; if there is good enough arguments, any combination should be allowed. The Scorpion Queen in Cults of terror that allso is a sword of humakt is a good exsample. ------------------------------------------ Hotmail rett i lomma ------------------------------------------ Hotmail SMS ------------------------------------------ Hotmail rett i lomma ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 31 07:05:46 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:05:46 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:liberal magic rules interpetations Message-ID:   >A mistake by a scenario designer >isn't going to persuade me to change the rules. >Serazh: > >In our game there is a race of gypsys who worship the moon goddess > >and travel around in large wagons, they do put warding in some of them >I agree that certain cultures, such as gypsys, might have portable warding, >but I'd prefer just to have bound spirits perform the same function. Warding >specifically states that the sticks need to be put in the ground, but I'm >sure there can be variants. In general, I'm for very strict interpetation of magic rules, but slightly less strict on my own NPC's than on the playing characters. And the players think that is just fine, because this way the rules is easier hidden and the setting and mood comes into the foreground, where it should be. ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From Rjmeints at aol.com Fri Jan 31 12:27:51 2003 From: Rjmeints at aol.com (Rjmeints at aol.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:27:51 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics Message-ID: For Europeans, the offer isn't quite as good because of the postage costs. It costs almost $8 US to post one to Europe. Airmail is often more than $15. Thus, $25 each for any of the softcovers, plus $5 per book for surface shipping, or plus $15 per book for airmail is the offer. Sorry if that puts non-US buyers at a disadvantage. Rick --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 31 19:06:44 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 08:06:44 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics -discount Message-ID: >For Europeans, the offer isn't quite as good because >of the postage costs. It costs almost $8 US to post >one to Europe. Airmail is often more than $15. >Sorry if that puts non-US buyers at a disadvantage. You could offer us a discount, and everyone is happy; You get to sell to more people, and we get stuff for an attractive price ------------------------------------------ Hotmail rett i lomma ------------------------------------------ Hotmail SMS ------------------------------------------ Hotmail rett i lomma ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) --- From peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se Fri Jan 31 19:15:14 2003 From: peter.johansson at padrigu.gu.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:15:14 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Many languages References: Message-ID: <3E3A3092.7030308@padrigu.gu.se> Hi Alain! I agree with what most of the others have written in their replies to you on the difference between the written and the spoken language for instance or in the cases of a cuture not having any written language at all. However, if you feel that it would be good for your game to only have one language skill just go ahead and do it. The important thing is that you're having fun gaming and that the rules work for you. :-) Cheers, /Peter Johansson RAMEAU Alain wrote: >Maybe I was not clear enough. Sorry for that. I didn't intend to reduce >the flavour of Glorantha. I was just wondering if it was useful to have a >double list of skills (read/write + speak) for each language ? >So keeping all the existing anguages, but avoiding the related >multiplication of skills. > >Message: 7 >From: "Bjorn Stolen" >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Languages >Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:28:04 +0000 >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >I totally disagree; I think the vast range of dialects and languages adds >flavor to Glorantha, and the roleplaying aspect (say you want to alarm a >comunity that a chaos monster approaches, and they dont have the faintest >idea what you're talking about). > > > >I know those rules (my web page contains such language list and related >skills as well), but I find this a bit complicated, and not necesserily >true : As a French, I can read reasonably well Spanish/Portuguese, but >depending on the region of origin of the speaker, it is definitely another >matter to understand him. So the relation which is true for the written >side, is not necessarily true from a listening point of view. > >Message: 9 >From: "Dury, Pascal" >To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" >Subject: RE : [RQ-Rules] Languages >Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 07:50:36 -0600 >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.comAlain, > >In the french add-on "Genertela" , there is chapter which describe the >different languages used on the continent along with the affinity which >exists between them. >IIRC, it state 2 things : >First : your communication skills are limited by your language skills = >when >you are not using your natural language (I think it says something like = >2x >your speak language skill) > >Secondly: Some languages are related to each other in a certain way = >(like >Italian and French). Which means that (taking Italian and French as >examples) if you know French, you can understand up to a certain limit >somebody speaking Italian and eventually speak some Italian. [For = >Italian >you also get a special bonus if you use your hands too ;-)] > >I think the book also gives you a table with the different modificators = > >--- 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 > > > -- Peter Johansson Institutionen f?r freds- och utvecklingsforskning/Department of Peace and Development Research G?teborgs universitet/G?teborg University Postal address: Box 700, SE-405 30 G?teborg, SWEDEN tel: +46-31-773 1335 fax: + 46-31-773 4910 From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jan 31 20:14:31 2003 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:14:31 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: >>[Alain] >>Only "know" language would be maintained, one for each language, now >>called "Language [name]" >>And a unique Calligraphy skill would be created. It would work with the >>languages known by the character allowing him to read or write the symbol >>associated to language> >>[/Alain] > >I have to strongly disagree here. You may know how to write the Roman >alphabet if you are a Frenchman, it won't help you the least if you are >trying to write Croatian or Turkish, yet both of them use the same script! >And what about people who learn Chinese calligraphy just for fun; it does >not make them knowledgeable in writing Chinese! > >One option is to have a skill "speak language 'L'" and a skill "Write script >'S'". Then if language L is written using script S, the character must use >the skill "Write script 'S'" limited by the skill "speak language 'L'". >That's (more or less) what I use in my Imperial China games. > Erm, I may have got the wrong end of the stick but I thought the suggestion was One Skill for knowing (speaking) each Language and a single universal Calligraphy Skill, _that could only be applied to languages the character_ "KNOWS" (i.e. has a separate skill)? So the total number of language skills drops from 2 x (No. of Languages), to (No of Languages) +1. I like it: it copes with specific scripts (if you "know" a language, you know the symbol system used), it copes with linguists (if you have Calligraphy, i.e. are literate, you will learn the written form of a language as well as the spoken form). An Example (NB This is what I _think_ Alain meant, any idiocies or mistakes are purely mine!): Know French 80% Calligraphy 75% Turkish 25%. The character is reasonably fluent in French, and has a solid basic grasp of Turkish. His handwriting is elegant and clear. He can write letters in both French and Turkish. But not in Croatian (Doesn't Know the Language, even though he knows the script, because it's the same as used for French), nor Chinese (Doesn't know the language _at all_). Kind Referee's might allow him some chance to puzzle out writing in Languages related to ones he speaks that use the same script or symbol system, but that's an optional detail. The obscure 1980's RPG Dragon Warriors (written by Dave Morris, the author of the excellent White Dwarf articles on Demonology for RQII waaaaay back) had an excellent section on languages and scripts in Book 6 (an Acrobat version of which is, WITH THE AUTHORS PERMISSION, available at from the files section of http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dragwars). This includes the neat idea of a family tree of languages, the branches of the tree giving the Referee and rule of thumb of how great a degree of similarity or difference there was between languages. I suppose it depends on the degree of congruence you want between your game world and reality... Cheers, Nick Middleton From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jan 31 20:36:19 2003 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (aescleal at btinternet.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:36:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics Message-ID: <3196128.1044005779404.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1> Conversely, most UK gameshops I've been into recently will sell you a copy of any of the softbacks for ~?30. Dunno about the rest of the continent though! Cheers, Ash > from: Rjmeints at aol.com > date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 01:27:51 > to: rq-rules at crashbox.com > subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics > > For Europeans, the offer isn't quite as good because > of the postage costs. It costs almost $8 US to post > one to Europe. Airmail is often more than $15. > > Thus, $25 each for any of the softcovers, plus $5 > per book for surface shipping, or plus $15 per book > for airmail is the offer. > > Sorry if that puts non-US buyers at a disadvantage. > > Rick > > > --- 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 phil.hibbs at cgey.com Fri Jan 31 20:39:45 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:39:45 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Bound Sylphs Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97A7E@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Serazh: >And what version are you playing with were >spirits can mimic warding and sanctify? Magic Spirits with Disruption or Demopralize and Mindspeech spells. Going back to the ghost bound into a cart, I think maybe it is possible to bind a spirit into a movable area, but you can't have a nebulous definition such as "the area under this object", because you can't put runes in thin air. With a cart, you can enchant the entire cart so that the ghost can haunt the interior, but a sylph bound to the area inside a cart couldn't get out and push it along. Phil Hibbs. ******************************************************************************************** " This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ". ******************************************************************************************** From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jan 31 20:44:20 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:44:20 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics References: Message-ID: <002b01c2c90d$54db2100$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello Rick > For Europeans, the offer isn't quite as good because > of the postage costs. It costs almost $8 US to post > one to Europe. Airmail is often more than $15. I thought you were based in the UK.... Gianni From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jan 31 20:52:49 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:52:49 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages References: Message-ID: <003d01c2c90e$83f01670$9002600a@otvfrap043> Hello all > >I have to strongly disagree here. You may know how to write the Roman > >alphabet if you are a Frenchman, it won't help you the least if you are > >trying to write Croatian or Turkish, yet both of them use the same script! > >And what about people who learn Chinese calligraphy just for fun; it does > >not make them knowledgeable in writing Chinese! > <...> > > An Example (NB This is what I _think_ Alain meant, any idiocies or mistakes > are purely mine!): Know French 80% Calligraphy 75% Turkish 25%. The > character is reasonably fluent in French, and has a solid basic grasp of > Turkish. His handwriting is elegant and clear. He can write letters in both > French and Turkish. No. You may have picked up spoken Turkish if you spent a reasonable amount of time in the company of Turks (Midnight Express, anyone?); this does not mean (especially as a Frenchman) that you know how to spell the sounds /sh/ or /ch/ in Turkish! That is just an example. The use of a given alphabet depends so much on each specific language it was adapted to that the system simply does not work. On the other hand, Gloranthan languages may have very similar sound patterns, hence the use of the various scripts differs little from one language to the other. The referee's word is final, unless there is some official reference wrt this subject that I may be unaware of. > The obscure 1980's RPG Dragon Warriors (written by Dave Morris, the author > of the excellent White Dwarf articles on Demonology for RQII waaaaay back) > had an excellent section on languages and scripts in Book 6 (an Acrobat > version of which is, WITH THE AUTHORS PERMISSION, available at from the > files section of http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dragwars). This includes the > neat idea of a family tree of languages, the branches of the tree giving > the Referee and rule of thumb of how great a degree of similarity or > difference there was between languages. That's exactly the idea behind my language rules for my Imperial China game. BTW I could not access the files you mentioned. Cheers, Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jan 31 21:02:29 2003 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:02:29 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Gloranthan Classics Message-ID: >Conversely, most UK gameshops I've been into recently will sell you a copy of any of the softbacks for ~?30. Dunno >about the rest of the continent though! > >Cheers, > >Ash Aarghh! Don' torment me! ;-) I keep having to be strong when in my FLGS; succumbing top Pavis was OK (didn't have any version of the material at the time, but I subsequently got Sun Dome County) but I have Griffin island (box) and much of the RQIII cults stuff and it would just be nostalgia and I haven't got the money and... sob... I know I'm weak, it's just a matter of time *sigh* Although I may try and hold out for number four... Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jan 31 21:11:19 2003 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:11:19 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Languages Message-ID: >> The obscure 1980's RPG Dragon Warriors (written by Dave Morris, the author >> of the excellent White Dwarf articles on Demonology for RQII waaaaay back) >> had an excellent section on languages and scripts in Book 6 (an Acrobat >> version of which is, WITH THE AUTHORS PERMISSION, available at from the >> files section of http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dragwars). This includes >>the >> neat idea of a family tree of languages, the branches of the tree giving >> the Referee and rule of thumb of how great a degree of similarity or >> difference there was between languages. > >That's exactly the idea behind my language rules for my Imperial China game. >BTW I could not access the files you mentioned. Actually, you probably have to be a member of the group to access the file area. I think there is a version on an open website some where... I'm at work at present, but I'll try and find another location at lunch time... Cheers, Nick Middleton From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 31 21:40:10 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 11:40:10 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] end of languages thread ? Message-ID: Yesssss ! At last somebody understands what I meant. I read again my messages, and indeed it was not that clear, so everybody's excused :-) Thanks Nick for translating my Auld Wirmish thinking in Tradetalk :-) What about using this system may also for other skills, may be : [Weapon] : to be used with Combat, Armoring, specific maneuvers [Animal] : to be used with Ride, Train, Care, ... [Culture] : to be used with Dance, Tell, Play [Cult] : to be used with ? Alain ____________________________________________________________________________ Message from Nick Erm, I may have got the wrong end of the stick but I thought the suggestion was One Skill for knowing (speaking) each Language and a single universal Calligraphy Skill, _that could only be applied to languages the character_ "KNOWS" (i.e. has a separate skill)? So the total number of language skills drops from 2 x (No. of Languages), to (No of Languages) +1. I like it: it copes with specific scripts (if you "know" a language, you know the symbol system used), it copes with linguists (if you have Calligraphy, i.e. are literate, you will learn the written form of a language as well as the spoken form). An Example (NB This is what I _think_ Alain meant, any idiocies or mistakes are purely mine!): Know French 80% Calligraphy 75% Turkish 25%. The character is reasonably fluent in French, and has a solid basic grasp of Turkish. His handwriting is elegant and clear. He can write letters in both French and Turkish. But not in Croatian (Doesn't Know the Language, even though he knows the script, because it's the same as used for French), nor Chinese (Doesn't know the language _at all_). Kind Referee's might allow him some chance to puzzle out writing in Languages related to ones he speaks that use the same script or symbol system, but that's an optional detail. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Fri Jan 31 21:48:36 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 11:48:36 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] French writing Turkish ? Message-ID: But in the exemple, the guy has only 25% in writing Turkish (the lower between Calligraphy end the language used), so there will be plenty of typos and grammar mistakes, but at least 25% understandable for a 100% Turkish reader (if the Turkish reader is only 50%, the chance to understand would fall to 50% of 25%, ie 12.5%, as a rule of thumb). For French, he gets 75% writing (lower between calligraphy and French). Alain _____________________________________ Gianni wrote > An Example (NB This is what I _think_ Alain meant, any idiocies or mistakes > are purely mine!): Know French 80% Calligraphy 75% Turkish 25%. The > character is reasonably fluent in French, and has a solid basic grasp of > Turkish. His handwriting is elegant and clear. He can write letters in both > French and Turkish. No. You may have picked up spoken Turkish if you spent a reasonable amount of time in the company of Turks (Midnight Express, anyone?); this does not mean (especially as a Frenchman) that you know how to spell the sounds /sh/ or /ch/ in Turkish! That is just an example. The use of a given alphabet depends so much on each specific language it was adapted to that the system simply does not work. On the other hand, Gloranthan languages may have very similar sound patterns, hence the use of the various scripts differs little from one language to the other. The referee's word is final, unless there is some official reference wrt this subject that I may be unaware of. --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Jan 31 22:29:26 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 11:29:26 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: [Not the] end of languages thread ? Message-ID: >Yesssss ! At last somebody understands what I meant. I read again my >messages, and indeed it was not that clear, so everybody's excused :-) >Thanks Nick for translating my Auld Wirmish thinking in Tradetalk :-) It's a bit daft of me to argue with someone, when I'm not sure if I'm getting the grasp of the discussion. First of all, I want to stress that any critics from my point of wiev isn't peronally meant. I'd hate if people stopped telling about their ideas about rules because they'd become afraid of the response. I totally respect your wiev and right to use your houserules. But. I still think that this rule don't reflect reality particulary well. If all languages were constructed over the same principles; -mabye. But languages are not just different agreements on which sounds to use on which things \ verbs, etc. Languages are for one divided on a analytical - syntetical axis. Chinese, Vietnamese and Thai languages are extreme analytical languages (congrugating words allmost never appear) whereas Latin, Turkish and Finnish\Ungarian languages are extreme syntetical languages. Arabic sentence construction is fairly liberal when it comes to the use of verbs, where it's sakrelige to skip the verb in Norwegian. In arabic, you could write "Me angry", and it would be OK, whereas in Norwegian \ English, you'd have to add the verb (Jeg er sint \ I'm angry) Further, there's a different practise between languages conserning how close the spelling is to pronounciation. English is horrible in this aspect, whereas serbocroatic and Albanian is very similar, and Norwegian is somewhere in between. (Exs. saying ?rf, spelling earth, versus (Norwegian: saying jor, spelling jor) I could go on, but I'll stop here. My point is that if I'm very good at writing and reading a perticular alphabet, I could still not use it. I can read italian, spannish, french, portugese, mabye even pronounce it fairly correct -but I could still not understand it. Those of you that know how to speak english, would probably be able to read fairly correct norwegian; we norwegians'd understand it, but not you lot. >What about using this system may also for other skills, may be : >[Weapon] : to be used with Combat, Armoring, specific maneuvers >[Animal] : to be used with Ride, Train, Care, ... >[Culture] : to be used with Dance, Tell, Play >[Cult] : to be used with ? > >Alain I'm afraid you have to elaborate a bit; I don't get your point. We allways have the skills modifiers (agility, manipulate, etc.) don't that cover some of this allready? ------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------ MSN Messenger ------------------------------------------ - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner ------------------------------------------ --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- text/html (html body -- converted) ---