From ZanosAndeo at netscape.net Thu Oct 2 07:16:41 2003 From: ZanosAndeo at netscape.net (ZanosAndeo at netscape.net) Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:16:41 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Effects of Critical Hits with Enchanted Weapons Message-ID: <22875290.21C96471.0D605462@netscape.net> I thoroughly concur with Bjorn an his view of critical successes. This is part of the fun of the game, finding the weaknesses. Also one of the reasons I switched from AD&D for my campaign: I found it impossible to run a campaign where high-level characters could wade through low-level monsters with impunity. At least in RQ, the characters are in a fair amount of peril regardless of the opposition, enough so to make them think twice about wading willy-nilly into combat. Just to add a humorous note to the whole discussion, those of you who may remember Dave Allen; (Irish comedian, had a couple of television programs run by the BBC, some of which were in syndication in the states); had a sketch where he was an arms-master educating the king's son in swordplay. He remonstrates the prince for his sloppy parrying, to which the prince replies that he doesn't need to parry; his armour will save him. The arms-master replies that everything has a weakness, and says, if the prince was to raise his arm thus (raising the prince's arm), and an opponent was to get his sword under it in this joint (placing his sword into the joint), then the armour would be breached, and the prince would be dead. The King comes over to see how his son is doing at this point, and, slapping the arms-master on the back, unintentionally drives the sword home. John Bateman > From: Bjorn Stolen=20 > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com=20 > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 1:41 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Effects of Critical Hits with Enchanted = >Weapons > > > Ignore Armor (but not magical protection) Damage rolled +5 Full = >Possible Damage Specific Hit Location Disarm Knockback=20 > The equivalents of Impale, Slash, and Bash take two extra successes. =20 > > > > OK if i rip this idea from you and use it in my games? (I liked this!) > > Apart from this I have never ended up in the dilema that is brought up = >here (critical succ. ignore all armour) because my campagins never let = >either the enemy NPC's or the gamesrs reach theese levels in magical = >equipment. One have to remember that parries still are valid, even = >simple parries (I had to look it up very carefully after a dwarf with = >chainmail had had a critical success inflicted on him from the broo band = >leader with a hellebard -from the "Monster Book"; part of a Glorantha = >supplement. If the mostal hadn't been allowed to have his successful = >parry count, he would have been so dead, even with a total of 15 AP's = >over his abdomen. > > I like games that makes it truely dangerous for everybody to fight, = >and that includes even Conan and his like -yes even dangerous for = >playing characters! (The critical success inflicted on Achilles in the = >Illiad(?) epic beeing the best example. There's allways a weak spot! __________________________________________________________________ McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network. Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397 Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now! http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455 From peter at maranci.net Fri Oct 3 00:12:24 2003 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 10:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Top 50, AD&D Message-ID: <1354.216.118.190.11.1065103944.squirrel@webmail> Voting on the Die-Roller's Top 50 has been reset, and for the first time in a long time there are NO RuneQuest sites on the list. Here's a link to all RQ sites that participate, along with handy "Rate It" links. If you do vote for any site, please remember that "5" is the best rating possible, and that anything else is effectively a vote against. http://www.rpggateway.com/cgi-bin/wyrm/search.cgi?query=RuneQuest&mh=25&type=keyword&bool=and In fairness I must admit that my own site is one of the seven on the list. On a different tack, I'm going to go to my first roleplaying session in YEARS tonight - a new game group. They play AD&D, but beggers can't be choosers. :D I'm kind of nervous. Can anyone tell me if AD&D 3.5 much like RQ? ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Oct 3 00:31:47 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 10:31:47 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Top 50, AD&D References: <1354.216.118.190.11.1065103944.squirrel@webmail> Message-ID: <3F7C36D3.2000206@talmeta.net> Peter Maranci wrote: > I'm kind of nervous. Can anyone tell me if AD&D 3.5 much like RQ? It is alot more like RQ than any other version. I have t straight from one of the designers that RQ was indeed an influence on the design (one of many, but still). -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - 668: The Neighbor of the Beast From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Oct 3 00:37:00 2003 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 15:37:00 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Top 50, AD&D Message-ID: >On a different tack, I'm going to go to my first roleplaying session in >YEARS tonight - a new game group. They play AD&D, but beggers can't be >choosers. :D 'tis for this very reason that the two weekly games I'm in are both 3e - although I have cunning plans to seduce my Tuesday group (whom I'm GMing in Greyhawk) to Classic Traveller and to lure the Wednesday group (I'm playing in a Kingdoms of Kalamar game) to a Dark Sun-esque setting using RQIII... But then I always have about five game ideas I'd like to run... >I'm kind of nervous. Can anyone tell me if AD&D 3.5 much like RQ? Depends on the groups style. The core essentials of D&D remain in 3e (and I believe in 3.5); that is generic BAB and Hit Points by level, Armour setting the difficulty of hitting and character abilities fairly rigidly defined by levels bought with points earned for previous actions. The core mechanics are much improved however: there is now only one. Pretty much everything that isn't a purely random distribution (assign percentage probabilities and roll d100) or a quantity (chose dice to suit eg stats are 3d6, a Longsword does d8) is roll d20 and add modifiers in an attempt to exceed a target so d20+BAB and other bonus must exceed AC to hit, d20 + Reflex save bonus must exceed a target (called a Difficulty Class or DC) to succeed. The skill system is solid, and depending on the emphasis the GM and players pace on it, can dominate the game as much if not more than combat. It's still at its heart a skirmish wargame with pretensions, but at least the core mechanics don't trip up those pretensions constantly... Put it this way, I sold my AD&D collection over twenty years ago because of how awful I found it, and checked in every few years on D&D only to leave again sniggering, until I was stranded without a game nearly two years ago and decided to try D&D 3e. And I'm happily playing it twice a week. I'd _rather_ be playing RQ (or CoC or Stormbringer or Traveller or Jorune...), but until I can persuade one of the groups to swap, I'm stuck playing D&D; and to be fair, I and one other member got six months of Pendragon out of the Wednesday group, so I shouldn't complain... Good luck, hope it goes well. Cheers, Nick Middleton From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 7 02:30:14 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 11:30:14 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <8620279.1065457814315.JavaMail.root@ernie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> If a spirit (like a magic spirit or ghost) is bound into an item that is also a spell matrix, can the bound spirit cast the spell(s) the matrix provides knowledge of? The RQIII rules state anyone using the matrix must be in physical contact of it and spirits don't have SIZ but a player in my group was wondering if adding a usage condition would allow the spirit to use the spell matrix. David Smart From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 7 02:57:51 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:57:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <8620279.1065457814315.JavaMail.root@ernie.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20031006165751.53420.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> I allow this if there is a link between the 2 matricies. That is if a point of power was sacrificed to link the 2 matricies when they were created. Leon --- David Smart wrote: > If a spirit (like a magic spirit or ghost) is bound > into an item that is also a spell matrix, can the > bound spirit cast the spell(s) the matrix provides > knowledge of? > > The RQIII rules state anyone using the matrix must > be in physical contact of it and spirits don't have > SIZ but a player in my group was wondering if adding > a usage condition would allow the spirit to use the > spell matrix. > > David Smart __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 7 03:44:17 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:44:17 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <17919428.1065462257161.JavaMail.root@scooter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Thank you, Leon. Although I prefer to stay with the published rules as much as possible, I was thinking of doing the same thing. Nice to know someone else has already implemented it. David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Oct 6, 2003 11:57 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits I allow this if there is a link between the 2 matricies. That is if a point of power was sacrificed to link the 2 matricies when they were created. Leon --- David Smart wrote: > If a spirit (like a magic spirit or ghost) is bound > into an item that is also a spell matrix, can the > bound spirit cast the spell(s) the matrix provides > knowledge of? > > The RQIII rules state anyone using the matrix must > be in physical contact of it and spirits don't have > SIZ but a player in my group was wondering if adding > a usage condition would allow the spirit to use the > spell matrix. > > David Smart __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.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 leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 7 05:07:31 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 12:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <17919428.1065462257161.JavaMail.root@scooter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20031006190731.25248.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> I believe it is part of the published rules in RQ III. It says you can put additional conditions by adding a point per condition. I would argue that without that magical link a spirit could not use a matrix of any type, since it could not touch it. Leon --- David Smart wrote: > Thank you, Leon. Although I prefer to stay with the > published > rules as much as possible, I was thinking of doing > the same > thing. Nice to know someone else has already > implemented it. > > David __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 7 07:22:54 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 16:22:54 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <30789403.1065475374409.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Heh. That _was_ my argument as GM. So technically, one could bind a ghost and, using such links, allow the ghost to cast spirit magic/sorcery it didn't know when it was bound. Assuming, of course, the ghost was given the time to learn to cast the matrixed sorcery spells. Hmmm. I see possibilities for my NPCs here. David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Oct 6, 2003 2:07 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits I believe it is part of the published rules in RQ III. It says you can put additional conditions by adding a point per condition. I would argue that without that magical link a spirit could not use a matrix of any type, since it could not touch it. Leon --- David Smart wrote: > Thank you, Leon. Although I prefer to stay with the > published > rules as much as possible, I was thinking of doing > the same > thing. Nice to know someone else has already > implemented it. > > David __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.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 leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 7 08:20:47 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 15:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <30789403.1065475374409.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20031006222047.65497.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> The other problem I see in the situation like this is the rule that you have to be able to target something (yes I ahve been playing MTG too much) to cast a spell on it. If for example you had a ghost in a matrix with another linked matrix for a Bladesharp, I would only allow the ghost to cast this Bladesharp on the item where the matrix resides. Leon --- David Smart wrote: > Heh. That _was_ my argument as GM. > > So technically, one could bind a ghost and, using > such links, allow the ghost to cast spirit > magic/sorcery it didn't know when it was bound. > Assuming, of course, the ghost was given the time to > learn to cast the matrixed sorcery spells. > > Hmmm. I see possibilities for my NPCs here. > > David __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Oct 7 10:55:19 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 17:55:19 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits References: <20031006222047.65497.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00c301c38c6d$bef2c150$f4407442@wizard> This is an interesting question. Can a bound spirit still sense its surroundings? I forget (and don't want to hunt it up) if we covered this in RuneQuest III or any of the others. Just because a spirit has to stay with the object it is bound into doesn't necessarily mean it is unaware of its surroundings. It could probably (assuming it can sense its surroundings) sense the POW of others just fine, and direct spells against them if so ordered. After all, a fetch or other shaman-bound spirit isn't using eyes to see things. It is using its innate ability to detect other POW sources. If it can detect a POW, it should probably be able to magically attack that POW, assuming it has access to attack spells and has permission to so do. Back into the pool for discussion. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 3:20 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits > The other problem I see in the situation like this is > the rule that you have to be able to target something > (yes I ahve been playing MTG too much) to cast a spell > on it. > > If for example you had a ghost in a matrix with > another linked matrix for a Bladesharp, I would only > allow the ghost to cast this Bladesharp on the item > where the matrix resides. > > Leon > > --- David Smart wrote: > > Heh. That _was_ my argument as GM. > > > > So technically, one could bind a ghost and, using > > such links, allow the ghost to cast spirit > > magic/sorcery it didn't know when it was bound. > > Assuming, of course, the ghost was given the time to > > learn to cast the matrixed sorcery spells. > > > > Hmmm. I see possibilities for my NPCs here. > > > > David > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search > http://shopping.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 Aldanata at wmconnect.com Tue Oct 7 11:00:15 2003 From: Aldanata at wmconnect.com (Aldanata at wmconnect.com) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 21:00:15 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <15.19fe7b90.2cb36a1f@wmconnect.com> In our own house rules we allow a spirit to sense anything the owner can sense. It could target someone in front of the owner but not behind him. If the owner is in melee combat, the field of view becomes very narrow due to the owners concentration on no getting hit. Also, if a magic spirit is bound into an item that also has a POW spirit in it, then the magic spirit can draw on the mp of the POW spirit. I like the idea of using a pt of POW to link the two. That makes them useful but not so free. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031006/a7df5fe7/attachment.html From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 7 11:53:00 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 18:53:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <15.19fe7b90.2cb36a1f@wmconnect.com> Message-ID: <20031007015300.23276.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> --- Aldanata at wmconnect.com wrote: > In our own house rules we allow a spirit to sense > anything the owner can > sense. It could target someone in front of the > owner but not behind him. If the > owner is in melee combat, the field of view becomes > very narrow due to the > owners concentration on no getting hit. I do not really see the justification for this. Are you playing that the spirit and the owner are in constant Mindlink? > Also, if a magic spirit is bound into an > item that also has a POW spirit in it, then the > magic spirit can draw on the mp of the POW spirit. As a carry over from RQII, we do not allow spirits to have other spirits bound to them, the exception being a fetch which can bind spirits to it. Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 7 13:05:02 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 22:05:02 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits References: <20031007015300.23276.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3F822D5E.9080608@earthlink.net> Steve Perrin wrote: Just because a spirit has to stay with the object it is bound into doesn't necessarily mean it is unaware of its surroundings. It could probably (assuming it can sense its surroundings) sense the POW of others just fine, and direct spells against them if so ordered. After all, a fetch or other shaman-bound spirit isn't using eyes to see things. It is using its innate ability to detect other POW sources. If it can detect a POW, it should probably be able to magically attack that POW, assuming it has access to attack spells and has permission to so do. And Leon Kirshtein wrote: >--- Aldanata at wmconnect.com wrote: > > >>In our own house rules we allow a spirit to sense >>anything the owner can >>sense. It could target someone in front of the >>owner but not behind him. If the >>owner is in melee combat, the field of view becomes >>very narrow due to the >>owners concentration on no getting hit. >> >> > >I do not really see the justification for this. Are >you playing that the spirit and the owner are in >constant Mindlink? > > > >>Also, if a magic spirit is bound into an >>item that also has a POW spirit in it, then the >>magic spirit can draw on the mp of the POW spirit. >> >> > >As a carry over from RQII, we do not allow spirits to >have other spirits bound to them, the exception being >a fetch which can bind spirits to it. > Excellent thoughts! Thank you all for them. After reviewing everyone's posts and thinking about it for a bit, here's what I've decided. Please let me know if you think it allows for easy abuse by players. 1) A condition can be used to link matrices together at the cost of 1 POW per link. Ex. A Magic Spirit Binding enchantment is linked to a spell matrix of, say, Spirit Screen 3 so any magic spirit bound into the binding enchantment can cast Spirit Screen 3 onto a target upon command. 2) A bound spirit can cast spells only on those targets it can detect. A bound spirit can cast only on those entities in physical contact with its binding object unless the spirit has some way (such as Second Sight) of detecting targets at a range greater than contact. Steve, I thought quite a bit about your post. Based on what I've read in the RQIII rules, a fetch is more like an allied spirit which exists partially on the Spirit Plane.Because of that, I feel fetches are different from bound spirits in that a bound spirit is being forced into an unnatural state (explicitly stated in RQIII) whereas a fetch is not. In my mind, a bound spirit loses its link with the Spirit Plane and, hence, its natural ability to view the POW of others. A magical vision spell helps its senses get through the "firewall", so to speak, of the physical binding object. (Yeah, I'm a computer nerd. *grin*) 3) Bound spirits cannot use the capabilities/assets of other bound spirits; only the original controller can. I want to avoid players have spirits do most of the work. Otherwise, the PCs could too easily become just a transport system for items/bound spirits; something that really turned me off of D&D. By the way, I'm also playtesting the following. 4) While giving instructions to a bound spirit normally takes 1 full round (stated somewhere in RQIII rules), a bound spirit with INT 7+ can be trained to perform the same action when the controller thinks a certain command. Giving such a trained spirit such a one-word command takes half a round. For example, Bacchus the Bard had two bound spirits capable of casting Strength 2 and Mobility 3, respectively. He trains both to cast their spells on him when he gives the command "Booster". So in the middle of Round 1, he'll have Strength 2 cast on him and at the beginning of Round 2, Mobility 3. David Smart From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Oct 7 18:00:21 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 01:00:21 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits References: <20031007015300.23276.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> <3F822D5E.9080608@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <00ca01c38ca9$1f172cc0$f4407442@wizard> ----- Original Message ----- From: "D. Smart" To: Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 8:05 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits > Excellent thoughts! Thank you all for them. After reviewing everyone's posts > and thinking about it for a bit, here's what I've decided. Please let me > know > if you think it allows for easy abuse by players. > > 1) A condition can be used to link matrices together at the cost of 1 POW > per link. Ex. A Magic Spirit Binding enchantment is linked to a spell > matrix of, > say, Spirit Screen 3 so any magic spirit bound into the binding > enchantment can > cast Spirit Screen 3 onto a target upon command. > > 2) A bound spirit can cast spells only on those targets it can detect. A > bound > spirit can cast only on those entities in physical contact with its > binding object > unless the spirit has some way (such as Second Sight) of detecting > targets at > a range greater than contact. > > Steve, I thought quite a bit about your post. Based on what I've read in > the > RQIII rules, a fetch is more like an allied spirit which exists > partially on the > Spirit Plane.Because of that, I feel fetches are different from bound > spirits in > that a bound spirit is being forced into an unnatural state (explicitly > stated in > RQIII) whereas a fetch is not. In my mind, a bound spirit loses its link > with > the Spirit Plane and, hence, its natural ability to view the POW of > others. A > magical vision spell helps its senses get through the "firewall", so to > speak, > of the physical binding object. (Yeah, I'm a computer nerd. *grin*) As I said, I didn't check out RQIII before responding. You may have the right idea based on that quote. I have been playing (using SPQR, which is a bit scant on the subject) that binding a spirit doesn't necessarily place it in an object. It can just be hovering around waiting for the next command. In that case, I would think his senses would work as normal. But what do I know? > 3) Bound spirits cannot use the capabilities/assets of other bound spirits; > only the original controller can. > > I want to avoid players have spirits do most of the work. Otherwise, the PCs > could too easily become just a transport system for items/bound spirits; > something that really turned me off of D&D. > > By the way, I'm also playtesting the following. > > 4) While giving instructions to a bound spirit normally takes 1 full > round (stated > somewhere in RQIII rules), a bound spirit with INT 7+ can be trained to > perform the same action when the controller thinks a certain command. > Giving such a trained spirit such a one-word command takes half a round. > > For example, Bacchus the Bard had two bound spirits capable of casting > Strength 2 and Mobility 3, respectively. He trains both to cast their spells > on him when he gives the command "Booster". So in the middle of Round 1, > he'll have Strength 2 cast on him and at the beginning of Round 2, > Mobility 3. So you are playing that commanding an individual Bound Spirit takes concentration and directed information to the one spirit? Otherwise I would think that Bacchus could just generally broadcast "Booster" to both spirits at the same time and he would get hit with both spells. What would the dialog be like if you were writing it in a story? "Asamar, Booster" "Aye, Master" "Kevlen, Booster" "Aye, Master" Or something more complex? Steve Perrin > David Smart > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Oct 7 21:56:02 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:56:02 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031007/e1811343/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 8 00:42:40 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:42:40 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <7329120.1065537765374.JavaMail.root@bert.psp.pas.earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Perrin > Sent: Oct 7, 2003 3:00 AM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits > > As I said, I didn't check out RQIII before responding. You may have the > right idea based on that quote. I have been playing (using SPQR, which is a > bit scant on the subject) that binding a spirit doesn't necessarily place it > in an object. It can just be hovering around waiting for the next command. > In that case, I would think his senses would work as normal. But what do I > know? Given that you're one of the authors of the game my group and I are playing, I'd say you know quite a bit! *grin* I agree with your assessment of spirit capabilities if binding a spirit doesn't necessarily place it in an object. For my campaigns, I like to force the players put more work into their spirit controlling. It's one of the ways I keep their personal capabilities down to what I consider a manageable level. Our gaming time is so limited it's easy for the player group to become unbalanced when some of them can't make it to a critical session due to real life committments. Also, I'm trying to keep the campaign interesting to my players and they really enjoy the level of detail that my version of spirit binding gives them. A bit strange actually; they normally don't want too much detail in terms of magic use but they love setting up networks of bound spirits and spell matrices. It must have something to do with them all being 30-year-old+ telecom professionals. ;-) Hey, whatever keeps 'em happy... > So you are playing that commanding an individual Bound Spirit takes > concentration and directed information to the one spirit? Otherwise I would > think that Bacchus could just generally broadcast "Booster" to both spirits > at the same time and he would get hit with both spells. What would the > dialog be like if you were writing it in a story? "Asamar, Booster" "Aye, > Master" "Kevlen, Booster" "Aye, Master" Or something more complex? Actually, yes. However, despite the requirement of one round for giving spirits instructions (tated somewhere in either the RQII or RQIII rules), I've already about 90% changed my mind to your version. It makes more sense since, being bound spirits, they're automatically linked to anyone in physical contact with their binding object. If the controller comes up with a word or phrase he/she doesn't normally use, I can't think of a reason why the mental statement of that trigger shouldn't act as a broadcast. Spirits intelligent enough to be trained should, IMO, also be intelligent enough to understand "intent". That is, they'll know when the boss is only casually thinking about the command versus actually wanting them to implement the command. It's only with an INT of 6 or less that a controller needs to watch his/her thoughts. Or if the controller is under the effects of a Fanaticism or similar spell. You know..this discussion just took care of that last 10% of hesitation. I'll tell my players tonight that the mental command is indeed a broadcast. Thank you for the excellent idea, Steve. Man alive! I wish this list and Web access had been available to me back in the early '80s! David Smart From talmeta at talmeta.net Wed Oct 8 00:49:03 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 10:49:03 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits References: <7329120.1065537765374.JavaMail.root@bert.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3F82D25F.5070002@talmeta.net> David Smart wrote: > Man alive! I wish this list and Web access had been available to me > back in the early '80s! Actually, IIRC, it was, except that it was hosted in the Netherlands (?).... The RQR list, in it's various incarnations, goes back quite awhile... I have a fair amount of the old archives available, below, as well. Not terribly well indexed in some cases, but available. -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - You will live a long, healthy, happy life and make bags of money. From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 8 00:49:37 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:49:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <30144187.1065538177863.JavaMail.root@bert.psp.pas.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031007/d1ecd130/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 8 01:59:01 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 10:59:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <27684092.1065542341419.JavaMail.root@waldorf.psp.pas.earthlink.net> LOL. No, no, I said available to _me_. Back then, I was paying for University myself and helping support my mother by working two to three part-time jobs. I almost couldn't afford to eat, let alone buy a PC that could get me Web/bulletinboard access. RQ II was my only affordable form of entertainment then and it helped keep me sane and make some enduring friendships during that time. *tips hat to Steve Perrin and the rest of the RQ gang in thanks* David Smart -----Original Message----- From: Tal Meta Sent: Oct 7, 2003 9:49 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits David Smart wrote: > Man alive! I wish this list and Web access had been available to me > back in the early '80s! Actually, IIRC, it was, except that it was hosted in the Netherlands (?).... The RQR list, in it's various incarnations, goes back quite awhile... I have a fair amount of the old archives available, below, as well. Not terribly well indexed in some cases, but available. -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - You will live a long, healthy, happy life and make bags of money. _______________________________________________ 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 Oct 9 22:15:48 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:15:48 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97BA8@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> David Smart: >... a bound spirit with INT 7+ can be trained to perform >the same action when the controller thinks a certain command. I disagree with this, the spirit will do what it is commanded to under the binding contract, 'training' like this requires the spirit's co-operation. Also, they cannot read minds. Leon: >I would argue that without that magical link a spirit >could not use a matrix of any type, since it could not >touch it. I think this is reading too much into the rules. The rules are aimed at corporeal mortals, so inferences like this should be treated with caution. I would, however, say that a spirit can only access another bound spirit's abilities by use of a control spell as usual. Whether it needs an extra point of POW to create a link, I'm not sure. I don't think it's a balance-breaking decision. 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 Fri Oct 10 00:02:21 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:02:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <33262723.1065708141123.JavaMail.root@statler.psp.pas.earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- > From: "Hibbs, Phil" > Sent: Oct 9, 2003 7:15 AM > To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits > > > ... a bound spirit with INT 7+ can be trained to perform > > the same action when the controller thinks a certain command. > > I disagree with this, the spirit will do what it is commanded to under the > binding contract, 'training' like this requires the spirit's co-operation. Where does RQIII mention the establishment of terms in a binding "contract"? *sigh* This sounds like something else I've missed while relearning the rules, blast it. I've always thought a controlled/bound spirit is forced to be cooperative by the very nature of the control/binding spell. > Also, they cannot read minds. Not innately perhaps but the control/binding spell must establish some kind of mindlink between the controller and spirit. Otherwise, how do non-physical (i.e. no SIZ) spirits with none of the mundate senses (sight, sound, taste, touch, smell) receive commands ? David Smart From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Oct 10 21:04:05 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:04:05 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Site Update Message-ID: <8677.196.8.104.31.1065783845.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Added a new poll to my site (hoody hoo). Still, reckon it has some relavance. I will elaborate on the elf reproductive cycle question if anyone is keen. I also see Paul has started a RQ web ring. Details are on his and my homepages. www.runequest.za.org Ciao Tony -- Vacca Foeda! From MurfNMurf at aol.com Sat Oct 11 01:49:20 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 11:49:20 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry Message-ID: <7e.3f6f5cf2.2cb82f00@aol.com> Hi gang, I have a photocopy of what is supposed to be the first part of at *least* a two part article (duh! Pretty safe assumtion, if you ask me) from an old "Different Worlds" magazine, by Katherine Shapiro on Gems and Jewelry values in frp games (which *might* actually be the title--I'm unbsure, as I don't have my copy handy right here). Anyways, what I'm wondering is: Is there indeed a second part to this article, does anyone have access to it, and could I get a copy? Thanks in asdvance for any assistance. Best. -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031010/de36b53a/attachment.html From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Oct 13 05:24:07 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (basicrps.com) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 21:24:07 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh Message-ID: <003601c390f6$688be8e0$ae4c24d5@PC00218> Hello all I bought the HeroQuest supplement titled 'Tarsh in Flames', and I would like to use it to run a RQ2 campaign. I have two questions for you fellow RQ players: 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that would help me figure out those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? 2/ There is a chapter about the Gods of Tarsh in the supplement. Some of them are described in Cults of Prax or in various other RQ sources, but there are some others I've never heard of: * Andrin * Barntar * Dar * Desemborth * Destor * Drogarsi * Durev * Orane * Orendana * Orstan * Pella * Rigsdal * Skovara * Starkval Any clues? Cheers, Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From steve at perrinworlds.com Mon Oct 13 06:41:06 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 13:41:06 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh References: <003601c390f6$688be8e0$ae4c24d5@PC00218> Message-ID: <007401c39101$3a116840$f4407442@wizard> Sorry, I have yet to look at HeroQuest. I believe I saw Barntar mentioned in the excellent Dragon Pass computer game, but that's the only one that looks at all familiar. I belive Barntar was some kind of agricultural god associated with the Orlanth pantheon. But don't quote me. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "basicrps.com" To: Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 12:24 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh > Hello all > > I bought the HeroQuest supplement titled 'Tarsh in Flames', and I would like > to use it to run a RQ2 campaign. > > I have two questions for you fellow RQ players: > > 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that would help me figure out > those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? > > 2/ There is a chapter about the Gods of Tarsh in the supplement. Some of > them are described in Cults of Prax or in various other RQ sources, but > there are some others I've never heard of: > * Andrin > * Barntar > * Dar > * Desemborth > * Destor > * Drogarsi > * Durev > * Orane > * Orendana > * Orstan > * Pella > * Rigsdal > * Skovara > * Starkval > Any clues? > > Cheers, > > Gianni > webmaster of basicrps.com > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From DevinC at aol.com Mon Oct 13 13:16:46 2003 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 23:16:46 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh Message-ID: <180.20e300ed.2cbb731e@aol.com> Bartnar is known as "The Plowman" and is an agricultural god in the Orlanthi pantheon. Devin From aelarsen at mac.com Mon Oct 13 14:14:25 2003 From: aelarsen at mac.com (Andrew Larsen) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 23:14:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #199 - 13 msgs In-Reply-To: <20031013033100.25323.67595.Mailman@thinbits.com> Message-ID: On 10/12/03 10:31 PM, "rq-rules-request at crashbox.com" wrote: > From: "basicrps.com" > To: > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 21:24:07 +0200 > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh > Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > Hello all > > I bought the HeroQuest supplement titled 'Tarsh in Flames', and I would like > to use it to run a RQ2 campaign. > > I have two questions for you fellow RQ players: > > 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that would help me figure out > those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? > > 2/ There is a chapter about the Gods of Tarsh in the supplement. Some of > them are described in Cults of Prax or in various other RQ sources, but > there are some others I've never heard of: > * Andrin One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's the lawspeaker. > * Barntar He's one of the sons of Orlanth (the Thunder Brothers)--he's the god of plowing and agricultural activity. He's really strong > * Dar One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's Orlanth the leader > * Desemborth One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's Orlanth the thief > * Destor One of the subcults of Orlanth. He's one of Orlanth's grandsons and god of explorers > * Drogarsi The god of skalds and heroic poets--one of the three brothers/subcults of Donandar > * Durev One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's Orlanth the farmer/worker. > * Orane Durev's wife and one of Ernalda's handmaidens. She's the steadwife. > * Orendana One of the subcults/aspects of Ernalda. She's Ernalda the Queen. > * Orstan One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's Orlanth the carpenter. > * Pella One of the handmaidens/subcults of Ernalda. She's the goddess of pottery and similar things. > * Rigsdal He's the Orlanthi version of Polestar, the Star Captain and Night Watchman. > * Skovara She is the wife of Skovari, one of the brothers/subcults of Donandar. She and her husband are the gods of entertainment (as opposed to music, poetry, or dance). > * Starkval One of the subcults/aspects of Orlanth. He's Orlanth the weaponthane. You may notice that this is a lot more complicated than the Orlanthi pantheon used to be. A lot of these gods/subcults duplicate things that other gods also do, like Andrin, who duplicates one of the functions of Lhankor Mhy. Personally, I don't see the need for most of this, but for some reason, the people at Issaries decided that instead of just including all of these functions under Orlanth, it was necessary to divide Orlanth up into a wide array of functions. They seem to want to emphasize the worship of Orlanth and Ernalda over all the other gods. For more information on them, take a look at Thunder Rebels. Andrew E. Larsen From stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk Mon Oct 13 19:36:04 2003 From: stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk (stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:36:04 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules digest, Vol 1 #199 - 13 msgs Message-ID: <185975719C549A4B9961C0D59A48027302508350@ECOWV04M.Telewest.Internal> Andrew Larsen wrote: You may notice that this is a lot more complicated than the Orlanthi pantheon used to be. A lot of these gods/subcults duplicate things that other gods also do, like Andrin, who duplicates one of the functions of Lhankor Mhy. Personally, I don't see the need for most of this, but for some reason, the people at Issaries decided that instead of just including all of these functions under Orlanth, it was necessary to divide Orlanth up into a wide array of functions. They seem to want to emphasize the worship of Orlanth and Ernalda over all the other gods. The idea of the cults in Hero Wars are that all Orlanthis worship either Orlanth or Ernalda, depending on their gender. All is in the sense of the 'Orlanthi all' - that is around 80% of people. Both Orlanth and Ernalda have aspects that relate to the various things that Orlanthi do and thus these Greater Gods have a variety of aspects that people worship. It works well within the game in that magic is based on affinities - based on their runes - and feats within those magical affinities. Two affinities come from the central worship of Orlanth while a third comes from the particular aspect you worship. I don't have the books in front of me or I'd give you an example but it means that you can have 'everyone' worshipping Orlanth or Ernalda but still have a diversity of magic and priorities within the community. It also means that characters worshipping alternative gods stand out. A Lankhor Mhy worshipper would have far more detailed magic relating to truth than would someone worshipping the Andrin aspect of Orlanth. It does allow for more characterisation within Orlanthi society. For example, if a hero is looking for information he might try the Adrin worshipper within his own clan and if he gets no joy then he goes to the tribal Lankhor Mhy lawspeaker. Of course you could easily ignore the added detail, but like everything else it is there is you want it. I think it makes it easy to play a low level campaign where everyone is Orlanthi and people speak of these strange gods that other people worship in Boldhome. > For more information on them, take a look at Thunder Rebels. It's a good resource. I enjoyed reading through it almost as much as I enjoyed Cults of Prax when I first bought it. Much better than Gods of Glorantha!!! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 5810 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031013/19486f47/attachment.bin From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Mon Oct 13 23:18:11 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:18:11 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another spiritual question Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031013/51be8652/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 14 01:07:36 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:07:36 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Another spiritual question Message-ID: <28641126.1066057656235.JavaMail.root@scooter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031013/fe931f6b/attachment.html From phil.hibbs at cgey.com Tue Oct 14 02:04:33 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 17:04:33 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97BC3@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> >Where does RQIII mention the establishment of terms in a binding >"contract"? *sigh* This sounds like something else I've missed while >relearning the rules, blast it. No, that isn't an RQIII term. What I mean is, the binding enchantment spell writeup says what you can do, and it doesn't say that you can train them to respond to mental thinking. It's bound to do what it does by it's nature; INT spirits store spells, POW spirits give access to their MPs, Spell spirits cast a spell when commanded to (and I imagine there is a specific form to the commandment). >...the control/binding spell must establish some kind of mindlink >between the controller and spirit. Very limited, I would say. Also the nature of the commanding process will probably differ between cultures - sorcerors may tend to use verbal commands, Shamans might shake their fetishes in a particular way, Orlanthi probably shout or jump up and down, etc. I imagine that the nature of the command is pretty much determined, and you can't decide what it is just by training the spirit. Sorcerors are probably more likely to be able to manipulate the process, however, due to their "It's just another energy node" philosophy, but that's also what led to the downfall of the God Learners. I play in Glorantha, so my answers are biased towards that setting. 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 Tue Oct 14 02:14:21 2003 From: phil.hibbs at cgey.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 17:14:21 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E97BC4@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> * Andrin Andrin the Lawspeaker, aspect of Orlanth Allfather * Barntar Barntar the Ploughman (or Plowman over the pond) * Dar Dar the Leader, aspect of Orlanth Allfather * Desemborth Desemborth the Thief, aspect of Orlanth Adventurous * Destor Destor the Adventurous, aspect of Orlanth Adventurous * Drogarsi Drogarsi the Skald, aspect of Orlanth Adventurous and also of Donandar * Durev Durev the Householde, aspect of Orlanth Allfather * Orane Orane the Steadwife, aspect of Ernalda Allmother * Orendana Orendana the Queen, aspect of Ernalda the Queen * Orstan Orstan the Carpenter, aspect of Orlanth Allfather * Pella Pella the Potter, aspect of Ernalda Allmother * Rigsdal Subcult of Elmal and of Humakt (Polaris?) * Skovara Skovara the Entertainer, aspect of Ernalda Allmother * Starkval Starkval the Weaponthan, aspect of , aspect of Orlanth Allfather http://www.kerofin.demon.co.uk/hw/cults.htm 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 Oct 14 05:16:38 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:16:38 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits Message-ID: <10075898.1066072598526.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Ah! I see what you mean now. Thank you for the added detail, Phil; it makes sense. I think someone may indeed be able get around the limitation but I'm of the mind that it could be done only by finding, and binding, a ghost who knows sorcery in the first place. Most ghosts have the "experience" of intelligent thought and decision-making at some point in their existence and RQIII does state ghosts who know sorcery are a possibility. This would provide a way for PCs who really, REALLY want to do something like this but they would definitely have to work at it. David -----Original Message----- From: "Hibbs, Phil" Sent: Oct 13, 2003 11:04 AM To: "'rq-rules at crashbox.com'" Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Spell Matrices and Bound Spirits >Where does RQIII mention the establishment of terms in a binding >"contract"? *sigh* This sounds like something else I've missed while >relearning the rules, blast it. No, that isn't an RQIII term. What I mean is, the binding enchantment spell writeup says what you can do, and it doesn't say that you can train them to respond to mental thinking. It's bound to do what it does by it's nature; INT spirits store spells, POW spirits give access to their MPs, Spell spirits cast a spell when commanded to (and I imagine there is a specific form to the commandment). >...the control/binding spell must establish some kind of mindlink >between the controller and spirit. Very limited, I would say. Also the nature of the commanding process will probably differ between cultures - sorcerors may tend to use verbal commands, Shamans might shake their fetishes in a particular way, Orlanthi probably shout or jump up and down, etc. I imagine that the nature of the command is pretty much determined, and you can't decide what it is just by training the spirit. Sorcerors are probably more likely to be able to manipulate the process, however, due to their "It's just another energy node" philosophy, but that's also what led to the downfall of the God Learners. I play in Glorantha, so my answers are biased towards that setting. Phil Hibbs From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Oct 14 06:23:57 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (basicrps.com) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:23:57 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh References: <003601c390f6$688be8e0$ae4c24d5@PC00218> Message-ID: <005101c391c7$eebb7d50$324224d5@PC00218> Hello all Thank you all for the information about the various Tarshite gods and about the distinction between 'Orlanthi all' religion and more specific gods worship. However, nobody answered this one question: > 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that would help me figure out > those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? (maybe it's not something I'm supposed to ask but yes I still play RQ2) cheers Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 14 08:17:49 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:17:49 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: HW --> RQ Conversion In-Reply-To: <20031013203600.5450.91872.Mailman@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20031013221749.71013.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Gianni: > Thank you all for the information about the various Tarshite gods and about > the distinction between 'Orlanthi all' religion and more specific gods > worship. > > However, nobody answered this one question: > > 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that would help me figure > out > > those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? I put some sample rules on converting stats, characters, creatures and cults from HW to RQ on the RQAddicts Yahoo group. I'm not sure if they are any good though. After they have been torn to pieces and rewritten they'll end up on my website. If you're interested they are probably on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv01.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv02.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv03.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv04.html Apologies if the links are wrong, go to the RQAddicts group and have a look in the files section. > (maybe it's not something I'm supposed to ask but yes I still play RQ2) A few people have asked me about how to understand HW (fat lot I know, I am almost entirely into RQ) so you are not the only one. By the way, RQ3 is better from a rules point of view, but RQ2 is better from a feeling point of view. Once I got in to RQ3 I found it was easier to play, as long as you ignored some of the really stupid conversion rules (for instance dropping Trap Set/Disarm, Pick Locks etc for Devise) and used variants for sorcery and shamans. IN other words, it is OK if you change most of the rules :-) See Ya Simon ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 14 08:41:37 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:41:37 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <20031013033100.25323.67595.Mailman@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20031013224137.51695.qmail@web9608.mail.yahoo.com> I've been reading the ideas on Bound Spirits and many of them echoed things that we had bounced around in our campaign when it was still running. Here's what we played, memory permitting: RQ2: 1. Spirits could be bound into crystals, enchanted rune metal items and familiars. 2. Allied Spirits could cast spells through the senses of their master or through their own senses if bound into a familar. 3. Allied Spirits could cast spells on their master without needing to see him or sense him, simply through the mindlink that was in operation between them. 4. Allied Spirits could use matrices if the matrix was in contact with them. If they were bound in a familiar the matrix had to be in contact with the familiar, if bound into an item the matrix had to be in contact with the item. 5. We used "Aura Contact" so items did not be in direct skin to object contact, they could be on a belt worn over clothing, for instance. Shadow cats often had collars with matrices enchanted into them. 6. Allied Spirits could use POW Crystals as long as they were in contact with the Allied Spirit. 7. Fetches counted as super allied spirits that were not bound into an object but floated around the shaman. They could use items that were in contact with the shaman. RQ3: 1. Magic Spirits almost count as cheap allied spirits, so we made them less skilled. 2. Magic Spirits could not use matrices except if the matrix was for a spell the spirit already knew. So, a magic spirit with Bladesharp 2 could use a Bladesharp 4 matrix but not a Parry 2 matrix. 3. Magic Spirits cannot cast the spells in their master's mind, but allied spirits can. 4. Magic Spirits could only use POW Storage Crystals, Magic Point Storage or POW Spirits if they were linked to the Magic Spirit through enchantments. 5. Allied Spirits could use matrices and MP storage in the same way as in RQ2. 6. Allied Spirits could cast spells in the same way as in RQ2. 7. Fetches were the spirit self of the shaman and could not cast spells independantly. 8. Magic Spirits can see through the senses of the person they are bound to. 9. Awakened Creatures (Allies/Familiars) can cast spells through their own senses or their master's senses. Generally: 1. Awakened Familiars had all the skills of the original creature. 2. Spirits bound into an unfamiliar spirit could use most of the creatures skills without any problems - although we had one GM who maintained that any non-bird spirit bound into a flying bird could not fly as it had no flying experience. 3. Magic/Allied Spirits cannot cast spells through the senses of another familiar linked to their master unless they had Mindlink cast. So Stormpuss, Soltak's Awakened Shadow Cat Allied Spirit cannot cast spells through Windfoot, his flying Shadow Cat familiar's eyes. Soltak can cast spells through Stormpuss' or Windfoot's senses. 4. All bound/allied spirits/familars are in Mindlink with their master with a 5km range. If the spirits go out of range, they are still bound but cannot interact with their master. If they come back into range they are immediately in contact again unless taken over by someone else. This means that mind affecting spells can affect the master and his allied/bound spirits by going through the mindlink. I think that's about it, but it's all a bit cloudy. See Ya Simon ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 14 08:52:13 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tarsh In-Reply-To: <005101c391c7$eebb7d50$324224d5@PC00218> Message-ID: <20031013225213.38899.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com> --- "basicrps.com" wrote: > However, nobody answered this one question: > > 1/ Is there any 'conversion engine' somewhere that > would help me figure > out > > those HQ statistics in RQ2 game terms? I have skill conversions at www.d2g.godlearner.com/conversion.htm I took it from Ian Thomson's website so you may want to check there as well. Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 14 08:54:46 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:54:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: HW --> RQ Conversion In-Reply-To: <20031013221749.71013.qmail@web9601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20031013225446.58156.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv04.html > Apologies if the links are wrong, go to the > RQAddicts group and have a look > in the files section. I think we need to be members of this group before we can look at the files. Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Oct 14 09:05:39 2003 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound Spirits In-Reply-To: <20031013224137.51695.qmail@web9608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20031013230539.61534.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: > RQ3: > 1. Magic Spirits almost count as cheap allied > spirits, so we made them less skilled. No where near as good. Can not make a DI, can not learn new spells, must be commanded to cast a spell, and so on. > 8. Magic Spirits can see through the senses of the > person they are bound to. This makes them too powerful, IMO. > Generally: > 2. Spirits bound into an unfamiliar spirit could use > most of the creatures > skills without any problems - although we had one GM > who maintained that any > non-bird spirit bound into a flying bird could not > fly as it had no flying experience. I would go along with that. Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 14 09:54:09 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:54:09 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound Spirits References: <20031013224137.51695.qmail@web9608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3F8B3B21.3040409@earthlink.net> GREAT stuff, Simon. Thank you! David Smart Simon Phipp wrote: >I've been reading the ideas on Bound Spirits and many of them echoed things >that we had bounced around in our campaign when it was still running. > >Here's what we played, memory permitting: > >RQ2: >1. Spirits could be bound into crystals, enchanted rune metal items and >familiars. >2. Allied Spirits could cast spells through the senses of their master or >through their own senses if bound into a familar. >3. Allied Spirits could cast spells on their master without needing to see >him or sense him, simply through the mindlink that was in operation between >them. >4. Allied Spirits could use matrices if the matrix was in contact with them. >If they were bound in a familiar the matrix had to be in contact with the >familiar, if bound into an item the matrix had to be in contact with the >item. >5. We used "Aura Contact" so items did not be in direct skin to object >contact, they could be on a belt worn over clothing, for instance. Shadow >cats often had collars with matrices enchanted into them. >6. Allied Spirits could use POW Crystals as long as they were in contact with >the Allied Spirit. >7. Fetches counted as super allied spirits that were not bound into an object >but floated around the shaman. They could use items that were in contact with >the shaman. > >RQ3: >1. Magic Spirits almost count as cheap allied spirits, so we made them less >skilled. >2. Magic Spirits could not use matrices except if the matrix was for a spell >the spirit already knew. So, a magic spirit with Bladesharp 2 could use a >Bladesharp 4 matrix but not a Parry 2 matrix. >3. Magic Spirits cannot cast the spells in their master's mind, but allied >spirits can. >4. Magic Spirits could only use POW Storage Crystals, Magic Point Storage or >POW Spirits if they were linked to the Magic Spirit through enchantments. >5. Allied Spirits could use matrices and MP storage in the same way as in >RQ2. >6. Allied Spirits could cast spells in the same way as in RQ2. >7. Fetches were the spirit self of the shaman and could not cast spells >independantly. >8. Magic Spirits can see through the senses of the person they are bound to. >9. Awakened Creatures (Allies/Familiars) can cast spells through their own >senses or their master's senses. > >Generally: >1. Awakened Familiars had all the skills of the original creature. >2. Spirits bound into an unfamiliar spirit could use most of the creatures >skills without any problems - although we had one GM who maintained that any >non-bird spirit bound into a flying bird could not fly as it had no flying >experience. >3. Magic/Allied Spirits cannot cast spells through the senses of another >familiar linked to their master unless they had Mindlink cast. So Stormpuss, >Soltak's Awakened Shadow Cat Allied Spirit cannot cast spells through >Windfoot, his flying Shadow Cat familiar's eyes. Soltak can cast spells >through Stormpuss' or Windfoot's senses. >4. All bound/allied spirits/familars are in Mindlink with their master with a >5km range. If the spirits go out of range, they are still bound but cannot >interact with their master. If they come back into range they are immediately >in contact again unless taken over by someone else. This means that mind >affecting spells can affect the master and his allied/bound spirits by going >through the mindlink. > >I think that's about it, but it's all a bit cloudy. > >See Ya > >Simon > > > >________________________________________________________________________ >Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! >Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.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 jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 14 09:55:09 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:55:09 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound Spirits References: <20031013230539.61534.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3F8B3B5D.7010802@earthlink.net> *sounds of mail posts being sucked down to a hard drive* Thank you! David Smart Leon Kirshtein wrote: >--- Simon Phipp wrote: > > >>RQ3: >>1. Magic Spirits almost count as cheap allied >>spirits, so we made them less skilled. >> >> > >No where near as good. Can not make a DI, can not >learn new spells, must be commanded to cast a spell, >and so on. > > > >>8. Magic Spirits can see through the senses of the >>person they are bound to. >> >> > >This makes them too powerful, IMO. > > > >>Generally: >>2. Spirits bound into an unfamiliar spirit could use >>most of the creatures >>skills without any problems - although we had one GM >>who maintained that any >>non-bird spirit bound into a flying bird could not >>fly as it had no flying experience. >> >> > >I would go along with that. > >Leon > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search >http://shopping.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 gianni at basicrps.com Tue Oct 14 16:32:39 2003 From: gianni at basicrps.com (gianni at basicrps.com) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:32:39 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: HW --> RQ Conversion In-Reply-To: <20031013225446.58156.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20031013225446.58156.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1066113159.3f8b98876d5fd@imp.webhuset.no> Hello all > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rqaddicts/files/hwconv04.html > I think we need to be members of this group before we > can look at the files. It's OK, I joined the list. Thanks for the link... and there are many more interesting files. Wow! Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From slposey at concentric.net Wed Oct 15 04:34:46 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:34:46 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry In-Reply-To: <7e.3f6f5cf2.2cb82f00@aol.com> References: <7e.3f6f5cf2.2cb82f00@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F8C41C6.3030205@concentric.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Hi gang, > I have a photocopy of what is supposed to be the first part of at > *least* a two part article (duh! Pretty safe assumtion, if you ask > me) from an old "Different Worlds" magazine, by Katherine Shapiro on > Gems and Jewelry values in frp games (which *might* actually be the > title--I'm unbsure, as I don't have my copy handy right here). > Anyways, what I'm wondering is: Is there indeed a second part to this > article, does anyone have access to it, and could I get a copy? > Thanks in asdvance for any assistance. > Best. > -Ken Murphy- I think I recall the article you're talking about and my recollection is also that it was a two-parter. I'll check my DW collection this evening and get back to you. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Oct 15 04:54:21 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:54:21 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry Message-ID: <57.2369ebb9.2cbda05d@aol.com> In a message dated 10/14/2003, Stephen Posey writes about the DW article I was wondering about: I think I recall the article you're talking about and my recollection is also that it was a two-parter. I'll check my DW collection this evening and get back to you. Thanks Stephen, that'd be great :) Best. -Ken- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031014/6e75990a/attachment.html From slposey at concentric.net Thu Oct 16 03:20:56 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 11:20:56 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry In-Reply-To: <57.2369ebb9.2cbda05d@aol.com> References: <57.2369ebb9.2cbda05d@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F8D81F8.9030200@concentric.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/14/2003, Stephen Posey writes about the DW article > I was wondering about: > > I think I recall the article you're talking about and my > recollection is also that it was a two-parter. > > I'll check my DW collection this evening and get back to you. > > Thanks Stephen, that'd be great :) Found 'em (I think): DW #10 "Gems & Gaming Part One: Gem Types & Values" by Kathryn E. Shapero This consisists mostly of a large random roll table of gem types, descriptions, and values. DW #11 "Gems & Gaming Part Two: Gems & Magic" by Stephen R. Marsh and Margaret R. Gemignani This consists of a description of the supposed magical properties of various gems and minerals with a list of common ones. Since you mention Ms. Shapero's name, I'm guessing you've got the first one, I can scan the second for you if you like. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Oct 16 06:39:34 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:39:34 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry Message-ID: <93.345f608a.2cbf0a86@aol.com> In a message dated 10/15/2003 12:21:59 PM Central Standard Time, slposey at concentric.net writes: Since you mention Ms. Shapero's name, I'm guessing you've got the first one, I can scan the second for you if you like. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net Why yes, Stephen I do inded have that *first* part (the Shapero article with a drawing of a skull at the top of the first page), but would *certainly* appreciate a scan of the 2nd article :) Now if you'd planned on posting said info to your website as you did that *very* cool CoC-Ghost article, might I suggest you scan the first part as well, as I think there's likely some other information-hungry referees who might be interested :) Best. -Ken- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031015/e65076a0/attachment.html From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Oct 16 07:09:18 2003 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:09:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry In-Reply-To: <93.345f608a.2cbf0a86@aol.com> Message-ID: <20031015210918.24829.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> Yes please. Greg --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/15/2003 12:21:59 PM Central > Standard Time, > slposey at concentric.net writes: > Since you mention Ms. Shapero's name, I'm guessing > you've got the > first one, I can scan the second for you if you > like. > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > Why yes, Stephen I do inded have that *first* > part (the Shapero article > with a drawing of a skull at the top of the first > page), but would *certainly* > appreciate a scan of the 2nd article :) > Now if you'd planned on posting said info to your > website as you did that > *very* cool CoC-Ghost article, might I suggest you > scan the first part as > well, as I think there's likely some other > information-hungry referees who might > be interested :) > Best. > -Ken- > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Oct 16 15:58:42 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 01:58:42 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mysterious RQ Weaponry Message-ID: <9d.3fb7a75e.2cbf8d92@aol.com> Hi gang, While looking for weapon stats for RQ online, I ran across a weapons table at http://hjem.get2net.dk/royalpanto/weapons.pdf. Wedged down between the Mauls and the Morningstars are an odd pair of weapons; the *Moolie, Common* and *Moolie, Great*... I tried looking moolie, but aside from the use of the name on the RQ weapon sheet I'd found, all the references seemed to be some sort of racial slur). The stats are below(though the Great version didn't have all of its stats listed). Anyone have any idea as to just what these things are *supposed* to be? The table unfortunately didn't provide any definitions for the *Moolies* (or several other odd-sounding weapons). Maybe the term means something else entirely in the table-maker's native language? Maybe everyone but *me* knows what this thing is?.... Weapon STR/DEX Damage AP Base% SR Enc Cost in "Silvers" Moolie, Common 09/09 1D10 8 05% 2 4 140 Moolie, Great 16/12 1D12 20 05% --- --- --- Best. -Ken Murphy- "One of his tricks of persuasion was to cut open the breast of a victim, pull out the still beating heart, and gnaw upon it with great relish while the next menu object looked on in stark terror. No wonder few withheld information from L'Olonais" Blackbeard AH Games -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031016/da5a0cf5/attachment.html From slposey at concentric.net Fri Oct 17 02:05:36 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:05:36 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry In-Reply-To: <20031015210918.24829.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20031015210918.24829.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3F8EC1D0.6010606@concentric.net> grogthing wrote: > Yes please. > > Greg > > --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > >>In a message dated 10/15/2003 12:21:59 PM Central >>Standard Time, >>slposey at concentric.net writes: >>Since you mention Ms. Shapero's name, I'm guessing >>you've got the >>first one, I can scan the second for you if you >>like. >> >>Stephen Posey >>slposey at concentric.net >> Why yes, Stephen I do inded have that *first* >>part (the Shapero article >>with a drawing of a skull at the top of the first >>page), but would *certainly* >>appreciate a scan of the 2nd article :) >> Now if you'd planned on posting said info to your >>website as you did that >>*very* cool CoC-Ghost article, might I suggest you >>scan the first part as >>well, as I think there's likely some other >>information-hungry referees who might >>be interested :) >> Best. >> -Ken- I've posted scans of the two Different Worlds Gem articles and the article on Hypnotism in CoC to my web space: http://www.concentric.net/~slposey/Gamelinks.htm Enjoy... Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Oct 17 02:28:10 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:28:10 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry Message-ID: <149.1a774413.2cc0211a@aol.com> In a message dated 10/16/2003 11:07:17 AM Central Standard Time, slposey at concentric.net writes: I've posted scans of the two Different Worlds Gem articles and the article on Hypnotism in CoC to my web space: http://www.concentric.net/~slposey/Gamelinks.htm Enjoy... Stephen Posey Thanks very much Stephen. I owe you :) -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031016/b4fe0449/attachment.html From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Oct 17 03:21:31 2003 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:21:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gems and Jewelry In-Reply-To: <3F8EC1D0.6010606@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20031016172131.54428.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com> Excellent site! Thank you. Greg --- Stephen Posey wrote: > grogthing wrote: > > Yes please. > > > > Greg > > > > --- MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > > > >>In a message dated 10/15/2003 12:21:59 PM Central > >>Standard Time, > >>slposey at concentric.net writes: > >>Since you mention Ms. Shapero's name, I'm guessing > >>you've got the > >>first one, I can scan the second for you if you > >>like. > >> > >>Stephen Posey > >>slposey at concentric.net > >> Why yes, Stephen I do inded have that *first* > >>part (the Shapero article > >>with a drawing of a skull at the top of the first > >>page), but would *certainly* > >>appreciate a scan of the 2nd article :) > >> Now if you'd planned on posting said info to > your > >>website as you did that > >>*very* cool CoC-Ghost article, might I suggest you > >>scan the first part as > >>well, as I think there's likely some other > >>information-hungry referees who might > >>be interested :) > >> Best. > >> -Ken- > > I've posted scans of the two Different Worlds Gem > articles and > the article on Hypnotism in CoC to my web space: > > http://www.concentric.net/~slposey/Gamelinks.htm > > Enjoy... > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Oct 17 19:32:27 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:32:27 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Digest Message-ID: <51773.196.8.104.31.1066383147.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Are digest members receiving their full messages? Mine keeps on cutting off around message 7. Thought I would do the easy ask question check before checking my mail program. Tony -- Vacca Foeda! From tiberius at runequest.za.org Fri Oct 17 19:36:53 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:36:53 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Barony Message-ID: <55356.196.8.104.31.1066383413.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> I ken this is not the forum for this, but has anyone ever sighted/played a FRP game called Barony. It was published by Better Games. I read a review some time back and it looked real interesting. Can't seem to find info on the www or even someone selling a copy. Tony -- Vacca Foeda! From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Oct 18 00:22:18 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:22:18 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Barony Message-ID: <4554874.1066400538141.JavaMail.root@thecount.psp.pas.earthlink.net> I did a Google search using the words "Barony Better Games" and found a few websites that discuss it. It's been gone for close to a decade now and was a fan-publication. It never really got rolling. Good luck with your search for it! David Smart -----Original Message----- From: tiberius at runequest.za.org Sent: Oct 17, 2003 4:36 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Barony I ken this is not the forum for this, but has anyone ever sighted/played a FRP game called Barony. It was published by Better Games. I read a review some time back and it looked real interesting. Can't seem to find info on the www or even someone selling a copy. Tony -- Vacca Foeda! _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Oct 18 12:56:41 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 21:56:41 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mysterious RQ Weaponry References: <9d.3fb7a75e.2cbf8d92@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F90ABE9.7030608@earthlink.net> I have no idea either. I just excluded them from my list. David Smart MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Hi gang, > While looking for weapon stats for RQ online, I ran across a > weapons table at http://hjem.get2net.dk/royalpanto/weapons.pdf. > Wedged down between the Mauls and the Morningstars are an odd pair > of weapons; the *Moolie, Common* and *Moolie, Great*... > I tried looking moolie, but aside from the use of the name on the > RQ weapon sheet I'd found, all the references seemed to be some sort > of racial slur). > The stats are below(though the Great version didn't have all of > its stats listed). > Anyone have any idea as to just what these things are *supposed* to > be? The table unfortunately didn't provide any definitions for the > *Moolies* (or several other odd-sounding weapons). Maybe the term > means something else entirely in the table-maker's native language? > Maybe everyone but *me* knows what this thing is?.... > > Weapon STR/DEX Damage AP Base% SR Enc Cost > in "Silvers" > Moolie, Common 09/09 1D10 8 05% 2 > 4 140 > Moolie, Great 16/12 1D12 20 05% --- > --- --- > > Best. > -Ken Murphy- > > "One of his tricks of persuasion was to cut open the breast of a victim, > pull out the still beating heart, and gnaw upon it with great relish > while > the next menu object looked on in stark terror. No wonder few withheld > information from L'Olonais" > > Blackbeard > AH Games From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Oct 22 00:56:27 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:56:27 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Price list and Craft Notes Message-ID: <140.1aff0f9a.2cc6a31b@aol.com> Hey gang, I ran across this http://sherohman.org/rpg/wfrp/whprclst.txt while looking for perception modifiers for helmets in RQ and immediately cadged it! :) While designed with the accursed Warhammer (ptooey!) in mind, the thing is, as far as I'm concerned, just plain amazing, and would need very little work to port into anyone's campaign Just think what a hassle it'd be to have to knock this stuff out on your own! Best. -Ken Murphy- "You'll never get credit for my discovery. Who's going to beleive a talking head? Get a job in a sideshow." Herbert West, Reanimator -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031021/fd27f344/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 22 01:58:44 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:58:44 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Price list and Craft Notes Message-ID: <8802744.1066751924391.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031021/aa0a58e6/attachment.html From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Oct 22 17:36:57 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 07:36:57 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Price list and Craft Notes Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031022/c168f62d/attachment.html From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Oct 28 01:29:56 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 09:29:56 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Return of those Pesky Elementals Message-ID: <186.20fbeeb3.2cce85e4@aol.com> Hi gang, For awhile now I've been tinkering on and off with this Elemental document---essentially an expansion and minor rewrite of the Elemental stuff I posted to this list (or its predecessor) a year or two back. Anyhow, I've been wondering recently---RQ2 only requires only that an unspefied *some* amount (and not anywhere *near* that of the Elemental's volume) of the proper material to be present at the thing's summoning, while RQ3 requires *all* of the material to be present before the Elemental will show. I've been indecisive about this for awhile now, and on chatting with a friend, liked the idea that the Elemental shows up fastest (in the melee following the summons) if *all* the material is present (i.e: a 10m3 Salamander requires at least 10m3 of roaring fire to be on hand before it'll appear); the thing taking *longer* to materialize the less material present. Of course, now I am trying to figure the mechanics for this... Any ideas? Best. -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031027/70cb9161/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Oct 28 02:13:30 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 09:13:30 -0600 (GMT-06:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Return of those Pesky Elementals Message-ID: <5652412.1067267610509.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031027/b81c583b/attachment.html From stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk Tue Oct 28 02:18:00 2003 From: stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk (stephenmcg at blueyonder.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:18:00 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Return of those Pesky Elementals Message-ID: <185975719C549A4B9961C0D59A4802730250835D@ECOWV04M.Telewest.Internal> >I've been indecisive about this for awhile now, and on chatting with a friend, liked the idea that the Elemental >shows up fastest (in the melee following the summons) if *all* the material is present (i.e: a 10m3 Salamander >requires at least 10m3 of roaring fire to be on hand before it'll appear); the thing taking *longer* to materialize >the less material present. > >Of course, now I am trying to figure the mechanics for this... Couldn't you base it on strike ranks. The fire will accumulate an additional amount of the material for each strike rank that passes (seems a bit fast actually but you can increase the number of strike ranks or make it melee rounds instead) until the final volume is present. It would make a good background scene as the fire grows and grows until finally it breaks free from the fuel it was using and begins to stalk across the earth, buring the grass as it moves towards the heroes.... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 4146 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031027/32c0d5e7/attachment.bin From LKirshtein at howost.com Tue Oct 28 02:29:57 2003 From: LKirshtein at howost.com (Kirshtein, Leon (Consultant)) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:29:57 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Return of those Pesky Elementals Message-ID: <20BE9059B6FC2D4B9E8FF2A9E2C4EEBD134A51@HOS2KEXCHCL.howost.strykercorp.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031027/a6d7829e/attachment.html From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 28 04:41:33 2003 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:41:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: The Return of those Pesky Elementals In-Reply-To: <20031027144501.2095.30392.Mailman@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20031027174133.37369.qmail@web9607.mail.yahoo.com> Tony (tiberius at runequest.za.org): > Are digest members receiving their full messages? Mine keeps on cutting > off around message 7. Thought I would do the easy ask question check > before checking my mail program. My digest reached 12 today. Ken Murphy: > Message: 12 > Anyhow, I've been wondering recently---RQ2 only requires only that an > unspefied *some* amount (and not anywhere *near* that of the Elemental's > volume) > of the proper material to be present at the thing's summoning, while RQ3 > requires *all* of the material to be present before the Elemental will > show. I've recently read Drastic:Darkness for the first time and Stephen Martin has a useful take on this. He likes the RQ2-style elemental summoning, as did we all, so ha has a Call Elemental spell that works in the same way as the RQ2 spell - you need a bit of the element, cast your spell and "poof" up poops an elemental. He has Call (Small/Medium/Large) Elemental as in RQ2. > I've been indecisive about this for awhile now, and on chatting with a > friend, liked the idea that the Elemental shows up fastest (in the melee > following the summons) if *all* the material is present (i.e: a 10m3 > Salamander > requires at least 10m3 of roaring fire to be on hand before it'll appear); > the thing > taking *longer* to materialize the less material present. One thing I toyed with was having the Summon Spells work in two ways. One way was to summon an elemental for a limited period, this requires some of the element and allows the elemental to be summoned for 15 minutes, at the end of which it goes away, even if bound. The other way requires the full amount of element and summons an elemental to be here permanently, it can then be bound, called out of an enchantment and so on. > Of course, now I am trying to figure the mechanics for this... I quite like the idea of throwing a clump of earth onto the ground and opening a 10 cubic metre gnome up, or lighting a match and summoning a 10 cubic metre salamander. It's more heroic than having to have the full amount present before you start. Simon ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Oct 28 10:06:11 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 18:06:11 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals Message-ID: <48.2401b3d8.2ccefee3@aol.com> Hi gang, Sometime back someone was kind enough to send me scans of articles dealing with Celtic spells in RQ. Anyhow, one of the articles contained a kind of *green* elemental--a "Jack-o-the Green", I *think*... Working on an Elementals document recently, I suddenly got the urge to drop these "Green" Elementals into the mix. My trouble with this idea is that *my* copy of said article is corrupt, and the relevant page opens as a very hard to divine *black square* :( Could someone with access to said article (either in WD53, or 62 maybe?) please pass along the characteristics, etc for these things? Thanks in advance. -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031027/a3d553fc/attachment.html From slposey at concentric.net Tue Oct 28 16:01:01 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 22:01:01 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals In-Reply-To: <48.2401b3d8.2ccefee3@aol.com> References: <48.2401b3d8.2ccefee3@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F9DF80D.9000302@concentric.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Hi gang, > Sometime back someone was kind enough to send me scans of articles dealing > with Celtic spells in RQ. > Anyhow, one of the articles contained a kind of *green* elemental--a > "Jack-o-the Green", I *think*... > Working on an Elementals document recently, I suddenly got the urge to > drop these "Green" Elementals into the mix. My trouble with this idea is that > *my* copy of said article is corrupt, and the relevant page opens as a very hard > to divine *black square* :( > Could someone with access to said article (either in WD53, or 62 maybe?) > please pass along the characteristics, etc for these things? > Thanks in advance. > -Ken Murphy- Scanned and put up on my web space: http://www.concentric.net/~Slposey/Gamelinks.htm Enjoy! Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From MurfNMurf at aol.com Tue Oct 28 16:55:55 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:55:55 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals Message-ID: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> In a message dated 10/27/2003, Stephen Posey thoughtfully posted the WD celtic spell articles I was wondering about to his website... Scanned and put up on my web space: http://www.concentric.net/~Slposey/Gamelinks.htm Enjoy! Gee, thats great, Stephen, thanks! :) Now can anyone think of a more *Eelementy-sounding* name for these than *Jack in the Green*? Best. -Ken Murphy- "When I say, 'Fetch beer!' you'll put your pennies together and pick up beer for Tiny. If I only get enough beer I'll be silky as a kitten. But if I'm out of beer" - he made a long pause and looked around him ominously - "may God Almighty have mercy on you!" Legion of the Damned Sven Hassel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/bfe4a866/attachment.html From talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Oct 28 21:39:36 2003 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 05:39:36 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals References: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F9E4768.4080409@talmeta.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > Now can anyone think of a more *Eelementy-sounding* name for these > than *Jack in the Green*? Howabouta "Grenjack"? -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - When I was five years old I was on a merry go round. There was a gunshot nearby. The horses stampeded. There I was running down the street on a purple wooden horse. -- Steven Wright From tiberius at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 28 22:10:05 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 13:10:05 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Moolie Message-ID: <11124.196.8.104.37.1067339405.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> Ken Murphy wrote: hile looking for weapon stats for RQ online, I ran across a weapons table at http://hjem.get2net.dk/royalpanto/weapons.pdf. Wedged down between the Mauls and the Morningstars are an odd pair of weapons; the *Moolie, Common* and *Moolie, Great*... Well, first off, rocking weapons list, thanks for the link. As for Moolie, is it not a maul or spear from the Land of Ninja Box? I also can't seem to find anything on the web but. hmm, maybe a French Pole Arm/Pike? Or maybe a cow swung by the horns by trolls?? Tony -- Vacca Foeda! From tiberius at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 28 22:12:06 2003 From: tiberius at runequest.za.org (tiberius at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 13:12:06 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Barony Message-ID: <13145.196.8.104.37.1067339526.squirrel@mail.wack.co.za> David Smartt wrote: I did a Google search using the words "Barony Better Games" and found a few websites that discuss it Thanks, I was searching for Barony and Better Games seperatly. Obly problem is the siteds I found using your search criteria are basically write ups. Still, I will persevere. main reason i want it is it apparently had a pretty unique tarot card character generation system which sounds like it could be fun. Tony -- Vacca Foeda! From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Tue Oct 28 23:56:20 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:56:20 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Moolie Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/ec79b825/attachment.html From LKirshtein at howost.com Wed Oct 29 01:24:51 2003 From: LKirshtein at howost.com (Kirshtein, Leon (Consultant)) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 09:24:51 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons Message-ID: <20BE9059B6FC2D4B9E8FF2A9E2C4EEBD134A52@HOS2KEXCHCL.howost.strykercorp.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/0f134b94/attachment.html From Alain.RAMEAU at total.com Tue Oct 28 22:24:23 2003 From: Alain.RAMEAU at total.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:24:23 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elemental Name Message-ID: What about Chlorophillies ? Alain http://karamo.nexenservices.com/glowar/rq.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/162a9050/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 29 03:01:44 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:01:44 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons References: <20BE9059B6FC2D4B9E8FF2A9E2C4EEBD134A52@HOS2KEXCHCL.howost.strykercorp.com> Message-ID: <3F9E92E8.8080603@earthlink.net> I'm not sure how effective such a weapon would be. A sword requires application of its edge with a decent amount of force to be effective. Swinging one at the end of a chain makes controlling the placement of the edge much more difficult. That's why they didn't make it as a weapon in RealLife(tm). A spiked flail is much more effective. David Smart Kirshtein, Leon (Consultant) wrote: > Speaking of strange weapons I once came across a strange weapon, in > one of the games I played, called the Sword Flail It came in 2 > varieties one handed and two handed. It was basically a sword blade > attached by a chain to handle like a flail (hence the name) I think > the someone gat an idea for it from the Dark Border novels, but I am > not sure. Here are the stats as I remember. > > Sword Flail 1H STR9 DEX11 Base5% DAM2d4+1 AP10 > Sword Flail 2H STR12 DEX11 Base5% DAM2d8+1 AP12 > > The weapon is a slashing one and has a x2 chance to fumble as per > flails. The weapon was a favorite of our Humakties in a Sea based > campaign since flail is a water weapon but a sword flail would still > take a True Sword. > > Leon Kirshtein > > _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Oct 29 04:56:52 2003 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:56:52 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals In-Reply-To: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> References: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> Message-ID: <3F9EADE4.7070306@concentric.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/27/2003, Stephen Posey thoughtfully posted the WD > celtic spell articles I was wondering about to his website... > Scanned and put up on my web space: > > http://www.concentric.net/~Slposey/Gamelinks.htm > > Enjoy! > > Gee, thats great, Stephen, thanks! :) > > Now can anyone think of a more *Eelementy-sounding* name for these > than *Jack in the Green*? If Plant or Woods Elemental doesn't work for you, how about: Woodwight Woodwisp Strangleleaf Leafcrusher Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From andrew at crashbox.com Wed Oct 29 05:31:21 2003 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew Mellinger) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 10:31:21 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals Name In-Reply-To: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> References: <165.26eb3255.2ccf5eeb@aol.com> Message-ID: > Now can anyone think of a more *Eelementy-sounding* name for >these than *Jack in the Green*? Well since the classic elementals are Salamander, Undine, etc. I think it would be appropriate to make this a Dryad. -Andrew From LKirshtein at howost.com Wed Oct 29 06:08:13 2003 From: LKirshtein at howost.com (Kirshtein, Leon (Consultant)) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:08:13 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals Name Message-ID: <20BE9059B6FC2D4B9E8FF2A9E2C4EEBD0C0040@HOS2KEXCHCL.howost.strykercorp.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/36c98e54/attachment.html From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Oct 29 08:32:38 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 16:32:38 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Green Elementals Name Message-ID: <1a6.1bfa5bd8.2cd03a76@aol.com> Hi gang, Wow, everyone is coming up with such interesting names for the Green Elemental. As a space saver-type name, I was using "Green Elemental", then went to even *clunkier*-sounding (if thats possible) "Swardling" (as in something from the greensward? Its been *quite* a while since I read "Robin Hood"). I eventually ran across this minor slavic forest deity in my big, lime-green "Larousse Guide to Mythologies of the World" book, and went with that---calling the thing a "Leshy". Stats to follow :) Best. -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031028/6052bae3/attachment.html From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Wed Oct 29 19:09:22 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 08:09:22 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031029/50b0c08a/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Oct 29 23:20:56 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 06:20:56 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons References: Message-ID: <3F9FB0A8.2020803@earthlink.net> I bow to your infallible login. *grin* I can see different types of weapons then. A heavy blade for swinging attacks and a light blade for more whip-like attacks. Flail away! David Smart Bjorn Stolen wrote: > -But in a Glorantha -setting, a world of magic and absent naturelaws, > it could work, right? > > David Smart wrote: > I'm not sure how effective such a weapon would be. A sword requires > application of its edge with a decent amount of force to be effective. > Swinging one at the end of a chain makes controlling the placement of > the edge much more difficult. That's why they didn't make it as a > weapon in RealLife(tm). A spiked flail is much more effective. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Hotmail p? Norsk Hotmail snakker ditt spr?k! > - F? Hotmail p? norsk i > dag_______________________________________________ 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 Oct 30 07:16:54 2003 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 12:16:54 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons References: Message-ID: <031a01c39e59$a8df99d0$f4407442@wizard> I would think that this would have to be a "magic weapon." But I've always felt that Glorantha should have at least a pseudo-science base to go along with its pseudo-anthropology. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: Bjorn Stolen To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 12:09 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons -But in a Glorantha -setting, a world of magic and absent naturelaws, it could work, right? David Smart wrote: I'm not sure how effective such a weapon would be. A sword requires application of its edge with a decent amount of force to be effective. Swinging one at the end of a chain makes controlling the placement of the edge much more difficult. That's why they didn't make it as a weapon in RealLife(tm). A spiked flail is much more effective. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hotmail p? Norsk Hotmail snakker ditt spr?k! - F? Hotmail p? norsk i dag _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031029/8693288e/attachment.html From Aldanata at wmconnect.com Thu Oct 30 09:26:14 2003 From: Aldanata at wmconnect.com (Aldanata at wmconnect.com) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:26:14 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons Message-ID: <167.27779c21.2cd19886@wmconnect.com> IF I am not mistaken there is an oriental weapon that has a blade on one end of a chain and a weight on the other end. A version of the Manriki-Gusari. William -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031029/e4ab956e/attachment.html From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Oct 30 13:03:45 2003 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 20:03:45 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons References: <167.27779c21.2cd19886@wmconnect.com> Message-ID: <3FA07181.9090305@earthlink.net> The bladed weapon was a hooked dagger. One version had a weight while another had a metal ring. In both versions, the bladed weapon was held in one hand and the chain or rope was used to entangle an opponent's weapon and/or arm(s). Then the bladed weapon was used in hand to give a coup de grace. The weapon was called "kyoketsu shoge". For a nice online pic, go to: http://www.pittsburghbujinkan.com/pbd_034.htm David Smart Aldanata at wmconnect.com wrote: > IF I am not mistaken there is an oriental weapon that has a blade on > one end of a chain and a weight on the other end. A version of the > Manriki-Gusari. > William From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Oct 31 12:20:20 2003 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:20:20 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] British Empire book? Message-ID: <18.374c6a62.2cd312d4@aol.com> Hey gang, Several weeks back Iwas reading over some mailing list stuff which I *think* was on *this* list), and I could've sworn I read about a book called something like"A product of Empire". It was a true story, about some Victorian-era guy and his adventures--maybe someplace in Asia? Does this sound familiar to anyone? I wrote the author and title down in one of my notebooks whgen I first encountered it, but on going through my notes, I am unable to find the relevant info anywhere :( Thanks? -Ken Murphy- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031030/6786e837/attachment.html From rog_benham at hotmail.com Fri Oct 31 20:25:22 2003 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 09:25:22 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] British Empire book? Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031031/1efa0e87/attachment.html From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Fri Oct 31 20:33:30 2003 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 09:33:30 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Strange weapons Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20031031/88707ee1/attachment.html