From epon0608 at freebel.net Thu Jan 3 02:42:01 2002 From: epon0608 at freebel.net (Emmanuel Ponette) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 16:42:01 +0100 (CET) Subject: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? In-Reply-To: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <1009986121.3c332a4944d2c@webmail.tiscali.be> My PCs are also adventuring al the time, and they rarely have the time to make the exp checks. They mostly do their chacks when a fellow is busy praying for a rune spell (1 day for each spell...) or recovering from a disease or something similar. Otherwise, the tempo is quite high. And most of the time, when they have some 'free' days, they spend it seeing families and relatives, doing some 'menial tasks' at the temple,... well all the tings that make them still accepted in their clan or tribe, because they are ofen abroad. Therefore, they often have a chack to make for sword but don't do it for month because they don't have the time. Also, I cannot imagine somebody doing experience checking for 17 weeks without getting bored... It is more fun adventuring (and more important following orders from local priests our thane or chief or whatever) that sitting around making exp checks... Concerning the 'classes', I have a shaman player (who can fight but does it only when it is needed to save someone's life), I had a trickster who could nearly not fight at all, I have an ex knight with 7 of STR (definitly not a 'fighter'). It is possible to have non fighting characters, but your campaign should be less fight related. For exp rolls, I use the rule I saw somewhere in the internet: skill 01-25, 2 hours skill 26-50, 4 hours skill 51-75, 8 hours skill 76-100, 16 hours skill 101-125, 32 hours etc... I have a player with he sword at 130%. Whenever he tries to increase its skill, he needs 64 hours of training, more than a full week... it doesn't do it often. But I accept to do it few ours at the time, as long as it is done in a season. Otherwise, when they can make a check, they can't cumulate... It's been 11 years I play with the same players, and they finally reach the level required to become Runelord (but still have some missions to do for their temples to be accepted as a Runelord). But that my RQ. Just my 2 eurocents Manu En r?ponse ? Jeremy Martin : > The last letter about D&D3 and some d20 material I've been reading has > got me thinking... > > I guess most of my problem is that in RQ, everyone by default has to be > a warrior (except maybe the odd Chalana Arroy priestess). With the > group I'm running, there's a lot going on and so they're always out > adventuring. Every week, we seem to be coming back making experience > checks and, since there's pretty much always a fight going on, even our > mages have 60% plus with their weapons. > > And with the limitations of spells like Palsy and such, most of our > mages just put Damage Boosting on their weapons and go in, too... > > I kinda miss the class distinctions of D&D. ( Don't stone me to death > here...) > > I really like the system, but does anyone put a cap on how many exp > checks a character can roll? Do you guys use the 100% max for non Rune > types? > > I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the players 17 weeks for > training. How much time do most of you let your players train between > 'adventures'? Granted, it would let the players specialize a character > more... It just seems that there's always a bunch going on in the > campaign I set up - it just logically follows the last scenario. > > I'm kind of wandering here - think I'll send this and see what you guys > get from this... > > Thanks in advance. > > Jeremy > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be) From dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk Thu Jan 3 02:53:40 2002 From: dahak at dahak.free-online.co.uk (Adam Benedict Canning) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:53:40 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spells4 In-Reply-To: <20011230100803.7BF1A4BD3D@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <000001c193a5$a5fa0f40$2c159fd4@kitsune> > From: "Steve Perrin" > To: > > Since this is a sorcery ritual, is there a roll to > accomplish it? Wouldn't a > sorcery skill roll of some kind be better than the POW x 5 > roll? I'd have to > adapt it to Quest Rules, but it is interesting. Its a ritual enchantment so it requires an enchant roll to set up. I could see a Spirit travel roll instead of the POWx5 but that's a shaman skill. > > Reincarnation > > Ritual Enchantment > > 3POW > > Each time this Enchantment is performed, it takes effect > the next time the > > Sorcerer is slain. At death, the Sorcerer???s body and > any personally > Enchanted > > magical items corrupt with incredible speed, and at the > same time reform, > > alive and whole in the Homing Circle of the Sorcerer???s choice. As written, given high POW, this makes killing yourself a reasonable way of getting your magic items back off high powered thieves. Only a 5% chance of dying. > > This Enchantment requires the Sorcerer have a Homing > Circle to be of > any > > effect. > > When killed, a POW x5 roll must be made to make sure > the Sorcerer???s > spirit > > goes back to his newly reformed body. A Fumble indicates > his spirit has > > instead gone on to inhabit some other creature. If lucky > enough to be in > a > > sentient form, the Sorcerer will be surprising a lot of > people once the > new > > form is old enough to speak. Given INT and POW appear to be part of your spirit in this case [or the sorcerer won't be surprising] a non sentient form is going to be even more surprising to people. It would be nice to have plain text of the spells on the list to work from. Adam From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 3 03:19:53 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:19:53 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? Message-ID: In a message dated 1/2/02 9:11:44 AM Central Standard Time, Jeremy does a lot of wondering: Hmmm, As far as limiting Sorcerers, I believe that the rules-proper sets up a pretty stringent schedule for Sorcerous types; having only _so_ much free time to themselves to do all the things they want to do. In addition, IIRC, Sorcerers also have a limit to their physical skills based on some multiple of DEX (unless I'm thinking of Priests). While some folks use the Free Time limit for Sorcerers, I can tell you I've never played in a game where the DEX limits were actually used. As for Experience rolls, that's a little more tricky. When I'd run my game, the Experience rolls came about every 2 weeks game time; sometimes longer if there were extended periods of game time spent really doing nothing. In a few games I played in, where the action was continuously fast and furious, there were the occasional weekly Experience rolls. At the other extreme, our current GM allows Experience rolls only at the end of a game month, which I sure don't care for :( In all the games I've played in, as well as run, there's never been any upward limit imposed on any skills. Training time always seems to vary considerably, depending on the situation. Like just recently, one of the characters decided to train with a group of Aesthetic Mystic types. Their teachings would require him to stay for a year. The rest of the gang was given the decision to either go on without him, or stay in a new land and face the prospect of an entire year's worth of training. Several times I've run games where a few days or weeks have passed since the last "adventure." Occasionally several years have passed between; giving each character however-many-years'-worth of Previous Experience. -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From FireDrakeK at aol.com Thu Jan 3 03:24:36 2002 From: FireDrakeK at aol.com (FireDrakeK at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:24:36 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying Message-ID: <18d.1555ab0.29648e44@aol.com> OK, in RQ, all your skills go up when you use them, or succeed in the roll that puts them up. What about when you do something spectacularly cool? I mean come up with a really good idea. in all other systems you get more points for that? What about in RQ? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 3 03:35:25 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:35:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? In-Reply-To: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <20020102163525.2382.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > I guess most of my problem is that in RQ, everyone > by default has to be > a warrior (except maybe the odd Chalana Arroy > priestess). With the > group I'm running, there's a lot going on and so > they're always out > adventuring. Every week, we seem to be coming back > making experience > checks and, since there's pretty much always a fight > going on, even our > mages have 60% plus with their weapons. The standard RQ3 rules limit Sorcerors and Priests to Dex * 5 in most Manipulation and Agility skills. That may solve your problem. The other posibility is that you may have too many fighting chances and you may limit fights or increase other types of interaction. I believe that there is a rule (RQ2?) which said that you may not train past a break point (25%/50%/75%) without getting a check. This helps if your party has too many training chances. > > And with the limitations of spells like Palsy and > such, most of our mages just put Damage Boosting on > their weapons and go in, too... There are a number of ways to play a mage. If their concept is to go in themselves hand to hand than that is fine. Most player characters I have been playing with seem to take this approch as well. > I really like the system, but does anyone put a cap > on how many exp checks a character can roll? Do you > guys use the 100% max for non Rune types? I do not limit characters to 100% for non Rune types. I think that is one of the rules from RQ2 which was thrown out in RQ3. I find that the difficulty of making the check once you are at that level is limitation enough. There have been a number of suggestions at various times to limit the number of checks a character may take, but I find that tends to limit character development and I like a more Jack of All Trades type of adventurers than the highly specilized ones (one dimentional?) which the D&D system tends to generate. > I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the > players 17 weeks for training. How much time do most > of you let your players train between 'adventures'? That really depends on the story line I am following. In most cases the characters do not have time, money or the luxuary to really stay that long in one place. But, at the same time in one of my high level champaings I just gave the characters 2 years for training and they told me that it is not enough time to do the stuff that they had planed with the time off. > Granted, it would let the players specialize a > character more... It just seems that there's always > a bunch going on in the campaign I set up - it just > logically follows the last scenario. It seems what you have it just right. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 3 03:36:17 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:36:17 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spells4 Message-ID: <6f.204169dd.29649101@aol.com> In a message dated 1/2/02 10:00:34 AM Central Standard Time, Adam writes: > As written, given high POW, this makes killing yourself a reasonable > way of getting your magic items back off high powered thieves. Only a > 5% chance of dying. > > Oh wow, I'm usually pretty good at spotting things that can be perverted into terrible weapons, but that idea hadn't even _ocurred_ to me. Aside from a gut-level "No Effin Way!" reaction to such Naughty Player Tactics, I guess an option could be included in the spell where offing one's self would _automatically_ doom the Sorcerer to reincarnating as an animal or tree or something.Then give some sort of reduced POW roll to see if the unfortunate Sorcer is even able to _speak_ in his new form. Hahahahahaha! -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 3 03:38:41 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:38:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying In-Reply-To: <18d.1555ab0.29648e44@aol.com> Message-ID: <20020102163841.3543.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> --- FireDrakeK at aol.com wrote: > OK, in RQ, all your skills go up when you use them, > or succeed in the roll > that puts them up. What about when you do something > spectacularly cool? I > mean come up with a really good idea. in all other > systems you get more > points for that? What about in RQ? I try to make that type of rewards on an unquantified basis. Totally based on how cool it seemed to me. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jan 3 03:44:56 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 00:44:56 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mage vs. Warrior (was Re: [RQ RULES] Gaming system?) Message-ID: <20020102164456.21256.qmail@earthlink.net> In the last campaign I ran, the mage was the one no one wanted to mess with. He had the habit of creating wraith-binding enchantments with conditions to release the bound wraiths and have them attack whatever was attacking him. What made him so mean was he worked with a local shaman to bind some of the nastier versions from the inner reaches of the Spirit Plane. That and the player's use of psychology. The warriors in the group didn't really know what he was capable of until a group of 10 pretty tough broo with chaos features charged the party through a narrow gorge. He was the first one to react, being on point. The encounter ended with the mage standing around carrying 23 emptied wraith-binding matrices. The warriors had drawn their blades but held off when they saw just how many wraiths were being released by the mage. Looking over the carnage, the Runelord of the group asked him how many he had left and the mage slowly turned his head, looked the Runelord in the eye for 5 seconds, and gave a little smile before continuing down the gorge, alone, without saying a word. They all started calling him "Flakpanzer" after that. He couldn't use even a dagger but, damnation, that guy _knew_ sorcery. I'd hate to see what he could do with Sandy Peterson's rules. David Smart -- David Smart From esoteric at teleport.com Thu Jan 3 04:31:21 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 09:31:21 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] train between 'adventures'? In-Reply-To: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: >I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the players 17 weeks for >training. How much time do most of you let your players train between >'adventures'? Granted, it would let the players specialize a character >more... It just seems that there's always a bunch going on in the >campaign I set up - it just logically follows the last scenario. In the rules for RQ3, it is suggested that the game world advance four weeks per each one week of the players. If the players had about four weeks between sessions, then seventeen weeks would be just about on target. Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 3 04:51:53 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 09:51:53 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying References: <20020102163841.3543.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006901c193b6$2c73c4c0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> For my last RQ campaign (which I was using to testplay the Quest Rules, so it was sort of an amalgam) I gave out experience points which were used purely to determine how many checks a character could make when it came time to do so. If an adventure was worth four EP, then it didn't matter how many times he got a check, he only got to make four rolls. If a player did something cool, then he got more points. Steve Perrin, who found there was plenty of time to make experience rolls in a fairly fast-paced campaign ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 8:38 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying > > --- FireDrakeK at aol.com wrote: > > OK, in RQ, all your skills go up when you use them, > > or succeed in the roll > > that puts them up. What about when you do something > > spectacularly cool? I > > mean come up with a really good idea. in all other > > systems you get more > > points for that? What about in RQ? > > I try to make that type of rewards on an unquantified > basis. Totally based on how cool it seemed to me. > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.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 steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 3 05:02:10 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:02:10 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? Experience rolls References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> <1009986121.3c332a4944d2c@webmail.tiscali.be> Message-ID: <007701c193b7$9aa223a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> I think there's been a misunderstanding here, though perhaps I am just not remembering my RQ3 as well as I might. There is no time necessary for an experience roll. Time is only needed for training. Two different things. The experience roll is a character going "Aha!, That's how you do that!" and picking up a new trick of the trade because he's seen it done, lucked into the right answer, or had it done to him. I generally don't allow experience rolls in the middle of a fight or when the character has had no chance to think about what he's doing, but given any chance at all to think about the situation is enough time. My last campaign was run on weekday evenings and included some set piece battles that took three or four game sessions, so experience checks didn't happen all that often in the games. I generally let everyone make a check after a major encounter, but sometimes these checks could come a couple of times an evening if the encounter wasn't combat oriented. If you want to have a specific offline time period for experience checks, it's your game. But that wasn't the original intent. Steve Perrin, who has some clue about the original intent ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emmanuel Ponette" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 7:42 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? > My PCs are also adventuring al the time, and they rarely have the time to make > the exp checks. They mostly do their chacks when a fellow is busy praying for a > rune spell (1 day for each spell...) or recovering from a disease or something > similar. Otherwise, the tempo is quite high. And most of the time, when they > have some 'free' days, they spend it seeing families and relatives, doing some > 'menial tasks' at the temple,... well all the tings that make them still > accepted in their clan or tribe, because they are ofen abroad. > Therefore, they often have a chack to make for sword but don't do it for month > because they don't have the time. Also, I cannot imagine somebody doing > experience checking for 17 weeks without getting bored... It is more fun > adventuring (and more important following orders from local priests our thane or > chief or whatever) that sitting around making exp checks... > > Concerning the 'classes', I have a shaman player (who can fight but does it only > when it is needed to save someone's life), I had a trickster who could nearly > not fight at all, I have an ex knight with 7 of STR (definitly not a 'fighter'). > It is possible to have non fighting characters, but your campaign should be less > fight related. > > For exp rolls, I use the rule I saw somewhere in the internet: > > skill 01-25, 2 hours > skill 26-50, 4 hours > skill 51-75, 8 hours > skill 76-100, 16 hours > skill 101-125, 32 hours > etc... > > I have a player with he sword at 130%. Whenever he tries to increase its skill, > he needs 64 hours of training, more than a full week... it doesn't do it often. > But I accept to do it few ours at the time, as long as it is done in a season. > Otherwise, when they can make a check, they can't cumulate... It's been 11 > years I play with the same players, and they finally reach the level required to > become Runelord (but still have some missions to do for their temples to be > accepted as a Runelord). But that my RQ. > > Just my 2 eurocents > > Manu > > En r?ponse ? Jeremy Martin : > > > The last letter about D&D3 and some d20 material I've been reading has > > got me thinking... > > > > I guess most of my problem is that in RQ, everyone by default has to be > > a warrior (except maybe the odd Chalana Arroy priestess). With the > > group I'm running, there's a lot going on and so they're always out > > adventuring. Every week, we seem to be coming back making experience > > checks and, since there's pretty much always a fight going on, even our > > mages have 60% plus with their weapons. > > > > And with the limitations of spells like Palsy and such, most of our > > mages just put Damage Boosting on their weapons and go in, too... > > > > I kinda miss the class distinctions of D&D. ( Don't stone me to death > > here...) > > > > I really like the system, but does anyone put a cap on how many exp > > checks a character can roll? Do you guys use the 100% max for non Rune > > types? > > > > I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the players 17 weeks for > > training. How much time do most of you let your players train between > > 'adventures'? Granted, it would let the players specialize a character > > more... It just seems that there's always a bunch going on in the > > campaign I set up - it just logically follows the last scenario. > > > > I'm kind of wandering here - think I'll send this and see what you guys > > get from this... > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Jeremy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be) > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com Thu Jan 3 04:19:04 2002 From: Alain.RAMEAU at totalfinaelf.com (RAMEAU Alain) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 18:19:04 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DD3 for RQ Message-ID: <200201021806.TAA13326@vectra-int.hd.corp.local> For your information, I started to adapt DD3 system for Glorantha (but the way round of Leon Kirshtein), with specific character classes. It is unfortunately only in French, but those of you who understand this language can have a look at http://karamo.nexenservices.com/dnd/gd20.htm I'll probably translate and add Leon's list of Feat after adaptation to my new combat system. Alain. From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Jan 3 05:18:23 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:18:23 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] train between 'adventures'? In-Reply-To: References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: >>I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the players 17 weeks for >>training. How much time do most of you let your players train between >>'adventures'? Granted, it would let the players specialize a character >>more... It just seems that there's always a bunch going on in the >>campaign I set up - it just logically follows the last scenario. > >In the rules for RQ3, it is suggested that the game world advance >four weeks per each one week of the players. If the players had >about four weeks between sessions, then seventeen weeks would be >just about on target. Many games mention things like this, but I've never bought into it. The flow of time in the game world is very important to the story and should be tied to some real-world schedule. IMO, trying to create some sort of synchronicity between the two is crippling to story telling. If the characters were travelling through the woods when a session ends up, and the group only plays once every two weeks, do the characters spend 8 weeks in the woods? The events in the session took longer than expected and the session ends two days before the big tournament. The next game session (a week later) the characters missed it because 4 weeks passed in their world? What would be the benefit of trying to create this sort of synchronicity? -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 3 05:24:48 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:24:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DD3 for RQ - Language Translators In-Reply-To: <200201021806.TAA13326@vectra-int.hd.corp.local> Message-ID: <20020102182448.73764.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> By the way try this site to get a quick and dirty translation from French to English (others as well) http://world.altavista.com/tr Its not grammatically correct but you can get the jist fairly well. --- RAMEAU Alain wrote: > For your information, I started to adapt DD3 system > for Glorantha (byut the > way round of Leon Kirshtein), with specific > character classes. It is unfortunately only in > French, but > those of you who understand this language can have a > look at > http://karamo.nexenservices.com/dnd/gd20.htm > > I'll probably translate and add Leon's list of Feat > after adaptation to my > new combat system. > > > Alain. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Jan 3 05:31:15 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:31:15 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] [RQ RULES] Gaming system? Experience rolls In-Reply-To: <007701c193b7$9aa223a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> <1009986121.3c332a4944d2c@webmail.tiscali.be> <007701c193b7$9aa223a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: >I think there's been a misunderstanding here, though perhaps I am just not >remembering my RQ3 as well as I might. No, you are remembering correctly. D&D has always been the one with the "Week of training to get a level" thing. >There is no time necessary for an experience roll. Time is only needed for >training. Two different things. The experience roll is a character going >"Aha!, That's how you do that!" and picking up a new trick of the trade >because he's seen it done, lucked into the right answer, or had it done to >him. That's how I've always visualized it. There is some point where a person has some time to look back and "realize" what they've done. >I generally don't allow experience rolls in the middle of a fight or when >the character has had no chance to think about what he's doing, but given >any chance at all to think about the situation is enough time. I've always found this to be one of the great unwritten strengths of RQ. It is really up to the GM to determine what a good "breather" period is, or some time to give the character a chance to reflect. I like to use specific story-points to punctuate this. For me sleeping in a "dungeon" overnight doesn't count. Some sessions might see multiple check periods, while other times it might be two or three sessions until the get to "check." Sometimes I'll allow multiple checks even without significant breathers, but only one success per week or other appropriate time period. This slows outragous advancement, but guarantees increases. Or allow multiple checks to accrue for longer periods (while still only allowing one success) of the periods go longer. This of course has to make sense to everyone involved (and IMG most players are willing to go along with this sort of stuff) and is a great way to control the power level of the party. I've had games where people weren't that interested in all the mechanics so we didn't worry so much about checking boxes and rolling. I've had other games where the characters needed to get some more power so we could tackle some more difficult parts of the story. -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 3 05:39:47 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:39:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DD3 NPC and cult --> RQ In-Reply-To: <200201021806.TAA13326@vectra-int.hd.corp.local> Message-ID: <20020102183947.69282.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com> Since you guys seemed to like my feats, I am going to show how I use it in converting a D&D3 NPC to RQ as well as give you my write up of the cult and the special spell. Please feel free to ask about anythig which is not clear. B'zotrah, male yuan-ti, halfblood War5/Adp5: Str 16, Con 12, Siz 13, Int 18, Pow 18, Dex 12, Cha 17. HP 13, MP 18 + 36 familiar + 10 storage sp + 30 SD = 94 MV 8, Dex SR 3 (-1SR feat), Melee SR 5 (-1SR feat), Natural AP 3, Defense 5% Weapon SR Att(+9) Damage Parry(+5) AP Quarterstaff 5 95% 1d8+1d4+5d2+Poison+* 95% 25 Constriction 7 75% 1d6+1d4 - - Comp Bow 3/9 110% 1d8+1 45 4 Tail 1 - 6 9/5 Abd 7 - 10 9/5 Chest 11 - 12 9/6 LA 13 - 15 9/4 RA 16 - 18 9/4 Head 19 - 20 9/5 Maintains: Illusion of Touch 5 on Quarterstaff, Boost Armor 6, Storage 10 Skills: Fast Talk 25%, Climb 65%, Concentration 75%, Alchemy 80%, Sacrifice 65%, Handle animal 55%, First Aid 70%, Hide 75%, Intimidate 40%, Disguise 70%, Memorize 100%, Magic Lore 55%, World Lore 30%, Listen 60%, Maneuver 35%, Sneak 20%, Scent by Taste 50%, Human Lore 25%, Scan 30, Swim 40% Divine Magic: Sanctify x2, Worship, Aversion x2, Chameleon, Heal Wound x2, Mindlink, Constriction 3. Magic Skills: Ceremony 50% Enchant 55% Summon 75% Intensity 75% Duration 60% Range 60% Ease 60% Empower 55% Maintain 60% Maximixe 55% Sorcery Spells: Bless Bow 50% *Boost Armor 60% Boost Poison 30% Call Shadow 75% Castback 45% Concel Soul 45% Decrease CON 45% Detect Magic 75% Dominate 60% Illusion of Touch 45% Neutralize Magic 60% Resist Damage 90% Resist Poison 45% Show Life 45% Skin of Life 45% Smother 45% Storage 90% Summon 75% Teleport 60% Blind-fight, Expertise (Att%->Parry%), Improved initiative(-1SR), Power attack (Att%->Damage). EQUIPMENT: Comp Bow w/Bless Bow +20% (2pt SD); x2 Blade Venom (Pot 8) *Slarge Metal Quarterstaff (4pt SD) (+2 damage vs Humans) w/Bound Snake Demon Str4 Con25 Siz3 Int14 Pow22 Dex13 App16; Poison (Snake Venom) = Con Familiar (x3 multiplier)OTHER WEALTH: 158gp, 2284sp, 11Gems[20sp;60sp;20sp;70sp;60sp;60sp;80sp;70sp;50sp;300sp;400sp = 1290sp] Merrshaulk The Sleeping God, Demon Lord of Serpents Runes: Beast, Chaos, Dragonnewt. Worshippers: Yuan ti, other chaotic reptilians. Skills: Alchemy, Apothecary, Ceremony, Craft , Disguise, Search, Hide, Sneak, Cult Lore, Scent-by-Taste, Attack, Parry Duties: Seek power, promote the downfall of all other civilizations, and perform enough sacrifices to wake the god. Cult Magic: Demoralize, Fanaticism, Protection 2/4/6, Strength 2/4/6, Vigor 2/4/6, IronHand 2/4/6, Silence 2/4/6 Divine Magic: all common (except Divination), Aversion, Boost Poison., Command Snake, Chameleon, Slow Poison, Sweat Poison. Associated Cults: Primal Chaos (Chaos Feature). Hykim (Transform Self), Srrrrtststtaaack (Enchant Slarge Metal) Subcult: Cobra (Bite), Python (Constriction) Miscellaneous: Must kill/sacrifice all captured priests of other cults. Must sacrifice an intelligent being every high holy day (usually a slave). May be sorceress Aversion 1 point Ranged, temporal, no stackable, reusable With this spell can create a compulsion effect targeting one creature. If the power of the target is overcome, the subject must stay at least 20 feet from any snake or worshiper of Merrshaulk, alive or dead. A subject may overcome this compulsion if he can make POW x5 roll, but still suffer deep anxiety. This causes a 30% reduction to all skills until the effects wears off or the subject is no longer within 20 feet. Background Merrshaulk, the snake-headed god of the Yuan ti, was once a minor demonic power. Centuries ago, his faith began to spread through the ancient Suel imperium, and his power grew. His worship was carried south into the Hepmonaland during the collapse of the Suel Empire. His priests built a great empire south of the Tilvanot peninsula, centered on a city built inside a mountain rift. The empire of the Yuan ti reached its apex two hundred years before the founding of the Great Kingdom. Fed by the souls sacrificed upon his altars, Merrshaulk's power grew to levels unheard of amongst demon kind. The empire of the Yuan ti waxed in strength for the next two hundred years, and soon was threatening to encroach upon the southern Flanaess. However, as their power grew, their bloodline also became corrupted -- his priests, already reptilian in spirit, took on the outward aspect of their demon prince. This corruption spread throughout the faithful of the Yuan Ti, bringing with it the worst aspects of their lord -- treachery, arrogance, and a growing lassitude. Over the next century, the Yuan ti began a great decline. Just over five centuries ago, powerful forces of unknown nature descended upon the Yuan ti's capital, decimating their armies. Their jungle empire rapidly collapsed, and their mountain fortress was lost to memory, known now only as the Forbidden City. The tribes of the Hepmonaland have since returned to the old ways. Merrshaulk himself is now barely a memory -- he lies deep in his Abyssal lair, dreaming of his past glory, and dining on the thousand thousand souls delivered onto him by his serpent priests. An adventurer traveling into the Hepmonaland will hear legends of the demon-people of the jungles, half-man and half-snake. The Yuan ti still live in their ruined cities deep in the jungles of the Hepmonaland, served by bugbears, tasloi, and their human slaves. It is rumored that the Forbidden City yet survives, and that the Yuan ti once again dream dreams of conquest and blood. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From ekjim at earthlink.net Thu Jan 3 06:01:31 2002 From: ekjim at earthlink.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:01:31 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mass Combat Message-ID: <00bb01c193c0$12236d00$678c3841@frkt5> I'm sure this topic must have discussed already, but I've been with the group for only the past year or so. What rules do you GMs use to handle mass combat? I'm especially interested in hearing how SPQR will handle this issue. J. From FireDrakeK at aol.com Thu Jan 3 09:05:49 2002 From: FireDrakeK at aol.com (FireDrakeK at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 17:05:49 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying Message-ID: <15e.6854c1d.2964de3d@aol.com> I don't think perrin's is fair, because if you botch all the rolls (like I do) it really seems unfair. I hear of giving other types of rewards, but I'm looking for ideas. I mean i can't just have a God come down and say "you role-play well, here's an extra 75 lunars, and a rune spell" --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 3 09:59:25 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:59:25 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ and QR Mass Combat References: <00bb01c193c0$12236d00$678c3841@frkt5> Message-ID: <007401c193e1$211910a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> I've been thinking about how to handle the many-orcs-vs-one-hero problem lately. Right now I'm thinking that you take the attack values of about three attackers and add them together, and that's the attack roll against the hero. He only has to make one parry/dodge roll. If the attackers are successful, one attack gets through with normal results. I seriously have not been looking at real mass combat rules. Depending on how long a battle you want, it could be as simple as two leaders rolling military lore rolls against each other, winner does vast damage to the opposition, or something like Total the number of members in a unit: That's the hit points Use the best rank-and-file attack as the attack chance Use the best r-&-F defense as the defense chance Use the best weapon as the damage done (;just use the maximum value to cut down rolling time) Use the best armor AP as the AP Both sides attack and defend. Damage that gets through is subtracted from the numbers of the opposing unit. Repeat. Would probably work if you just wanted to have a battle between troops and had a day to kill. And of course, if you are actually involving a PC group in a battle, just put the PCs against a group of enemies that have about the same quality and quantity difference vis a vis the PCs as the opposing armies do, and fight it out. If the PCs win, their side wins. If the PCs lose, their side loses. Casualty rates should reflect the results of the PC battle. Hmmm, I should probably add a Tactics skill to the skill list, or at least write up the Military Lore skill. ----- Original Message ----- From: "J and/or Ellen" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 11:01 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mass Combat > I'm sure this topic must have discussed already, but I've been with the group for only the past year or so. What rules do you GMs use to handle mass combat? I'm especially interested in hearing how SPQR will handle this issue. > > J. From taotoday at earthlink.net Thu Jan 3 07:07:16 2002 From: taotoday at earthlink.net (William Wenz) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:07:16 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ and QR Mass Combat References: <00bb01c193c0$12236d00$678c3841@frkt5> <007401c193e1$211910a0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: <3C336870.25D796FF@earthlink.net> We may finally be able to start playing again soon. One of the things I have been thinking about doing is having the players eventually become the lords of a small area or tribe, part of their responsibilities would be to lead the locals against raiders and lead punitive attacks. I will probably use a variation of the Pendragon rules for the most part. I have never played them, but have been intrigued by them. Does any one else have experience using them? -Kurt From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 3 10:32:41 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:32:41 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying References: <15e.6854c1d.2964de3d@aol.com> Message-ID: <001301c193e5$c6ee89c0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> I have a lot of problem with botched rolls, too. This has led others to ask why, if I have such bad dice luck, I created a game in which dice were necessary to advance. My answer, "It seemed like a good idea at the time." However, this is why in Quest Rules a player can always take an experience point and turn it into a 1% addition to his lowest %ile checked skill. If you don't like your luck, take the easy way out. I've had players use it, too. Steve Perrin, often desperate to go up 1% ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 2:05 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying > I don't think perrin's is fair, because if you botch all the rolls (like I > do) it really seems unfair. I hear of giving other types of rewards, but I'm > looking for ideas. I mean i can't just have a God come down and say "you > role-play well, here's an extra 75 lunars, and a rune spell" > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jan 3 10:45:22 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:45:22 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying References: <15e.6854c1d.2964de3d@aol.com> Message-ID: <001601c193e7$8d13d460$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Yes and no. If the player role plays his character's devotion to his god well, then you can do exactly this. If he roleplays his fealty to an overlord well, you can do something very similar. You have to work on the wording, though. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 2:05 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying > I don't think perrin's is fair, because if you botch all the rolls (like I > do) it really seems unfair. I hear of giving other types of rewards, but I'm > looking for ideas. I mean i can't just have a God come down and say "you > role-play well, here's an extra 75 lunars, and a rune spell" > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html > --- > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 3 11:08:36 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:08:36 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying Message-ID: <189.158bc6c.2964fb04@aol.com> In a message dated 1/2/02 4:06:37 PM Central Standard Time, FireDrakeK at aol.com writes: > I don't think perrin's is fair, because if you botch all the rolls (like I > do) it really seems unfair. I hear of giving other types of rewards, but > I'm > looking for ideas. I mean i can't just have a God come down and say "you > role-play well, here's an extra 75 lunars, and a rune spell" > Heck, you could always just give a couple of extra skill checks as a reward; maybe assigned to skills the GM thinks appropriate, maybe chosen by the player. I believe I read something similar on the Web :) -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From trentfs at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 3 11:33:25 2002 From: trentfs at ix.netcom.com (trentfs at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:33:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Rewards for good roleplaying Message-ID: Fiat in-milieu character rewards for 'good roleplaying' are fallacies of a 'winning the game' mentality, and I'm glad RQ doesn't have a mechanic to encourage them. Good roleplaying should be its own reward, the benefits of which follow naturally and organically -- increased wealth, reknown, friends/contacts, status/position are all tangible in-game fruits of 'good roleplaying' that don't require any arbitrary 'experience points' or 'hero points' or whatever. Let the game-world progress organically and those players who role-play better will tend to flourish. But I see no reason why simply having a 'cool idea' or keeping your fellow-players entertained should necessarilly translate into a quantitatively more powerful character... YMMV, Trent From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jan 3 11:43:54 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 18:43:54 -0600 Subject: Strange Thoughts ( was Re: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spells4) References: <6f.204169dd.29649101@aol.com> Message-ID: <3C33A94A.1C92858B@earthlink.net> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- Hmmmm. Is the above a report on how to clear an area of mimes in a cost-effective manner that devastates the local environment or is it a list of strippers who paint their faces white and pretend they're in an invisible box? David Smart From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Thu Jan 3 12:40:24 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:40:24 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] train between 'adventures'? References: <3C0B9821.AFACD5C6@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C33B688.749C327@libra.seed.net.tw> Brad Furst wrote: > >I also just saw a campaign where the GM gave the players 17 weeks for > >training. How much time do most of you let your players train between > >'adventures'? Granted, it would let the players specialize a character > >more... It just seems that there's always a bunch going on in the > >campaign I set up - it just logically follows the last scenario. > > In the rules for RQ3, it is suggested that the game world advance > four weeks per each one week of the players. If the players had > about four weeks between sessions, then seventeen weeks would be just > about on target. > > Brad Furst > esoteric at teleport.com Wow, that means I should give my party a year's worth of training, since we've only played once since I saw you... ;-( And when you give them time off for training, do you let them use all 50 hours a week? So for 17 weeks, they'd get 850 hours? Or, if they're working for someone, would you limit it, maybe 35 hours a week after some shifts of guard duty, etc. to pay for their keep? Jeremy PS - Brad, did you get my last two emails? From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Thu Jan 3 12:53:10 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 09:53:10 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mage vs. Warrior (was Re: [RQ RULES] Gaming system?) References: <20020102164456.21256.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3C33B986.5745DBD9@libra.seed.net.tw> Hmmm. Two questions: 1. Where did he get access to the 69 POW he would have to have sacrificed to pay for all those enchantments? 2. Then isn't it really the shaman that's so bad? Other than maybe the POW, what did the sorcerer do here? Maybe I'm just not fully conversant with Sandy's sorcery system (I know I'm not: I just finally got 'Presence' - thanks Brad!), but my party is running around with Boost Damage, Boost Dex and Damage Resistance, with one Held Palsy... What are the coolest spell setups you guys have in your games? Jeremy David Smart wrote: > In the last campaign I ran, the mage was the one no one wanted to mess with. He had the habit of creating wraith-binding enchantments with conditions to release the bound wraiths and have them attack whatever was attacking him. What made him so mean was he worked with a local shaman to bind some of the nastier versions from the inner reaches of the Spirit Plane. That and the player's use of psychology. > > The warriors in the group didn't really know what he was capable of until a group of 10 pretty tough broo with chaos features charged the party through a narrow gorge. He was the first one to react, being on point. > > The encounter ended with the mage standing around > carrying 23 emptied wraith-binding matrices. The warriors had drawn their blades but held off when they saw just how many wraiths were being released by the mage. > > Looking over the carnage, the Runelord of the group asked him how many he had left and the mage slowly turned his head, looked the Runelord in the eye for 5 seconds, and gave a little smile before continuing down the gorge, alone, without saying a word. > > They all started calling him "Flakpanzer" after that. > He couldn't use even a dagger but, damnation, that guy _knew_ sorcery. > > I'd hate to see what he could do with Sandy Peterson's rules. > > David Smart > > -- > > 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 vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Thu Jan 3 13:13:01 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 10:13:01 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spells4 References: <6f.204169dd.29649101@aol.com> Message-ID: <3C33BE2D.5E26C147@libra.seed.net.tw> MurfNMurf at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 1/2/02 10:00:34 AM Central Standard Time, Adam writes: > > > As written, given high POW, this makes killing yourself a reasonable > > way of getting your magic items back off high powered thieves. Only a > > 5% chance of dying. > > > > > > Oh wow, I'm usually pretty good at spotting things that can be perverted > into terrible weapons, but that idea hadn't even _ocurred_ to me. Aside from > a gut-level "No Effin Way!" reaction to such Naughty Player Tactics, I guess > an option could be included in the spell where offing one's self would > _automatically_ doom the Sorcerer to reincarnating as an animal or tree or > something.Then give some sort of reduced POW roll to see if the unfortunate > Sorcer is even able to _speak_ in his new form. > Hahahahahaha! > -Ken- As written. Well, then just add 'any personally Enchanted magic items in contact with his/her body...' Since this spell will get out quickly (probably already has, unless the character created the spell), any high-powered thief will know to grab an item as the sorcerer falls. And to strike crippling blows that aren't instantly fatal... Jeremy From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 3 18:51:37 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 02:51:37 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery spells4 Message-ID: <83.14c177b1.29656789@aol.com> In a message dated 1/2/02 8:04:37 PM Central Standard Time, both Jeremy and I are discussing a goofy Sorcery spell: > As written, given high POW, this makes killing yourself a reasonable > > > way of getting your magic items back off high powered thieves. Only a > > > 5% chance of dying. > > > > > > > > > > Oh wow, I'm usually pretty good at spotting things that can be > perverted > > into terrible weapons, but that idea hadn't even _ocurred_ to me. Aside > from > > a gut-level "No Effin Way!" reaction to such Naughty Player Tactics, I > guess > > an option could be included in the spell where offing one's self would > > _automatically_ doom the Sorcerer to reincarnating as an animal or tree or > > something.Then give some sort of reduced POW roll to see if the > unfortunate > > Sorcer is even able to _speak_ in his new form. > > Hahahahahaha! > > -Ken- > > As written. Well, then just add 'any personally Enchanted magic items in > contact with his/her body...' > > Since this spell will get out quickly (probably already has, unless the > character created the spell), any high-powered thief will know to grab an > item > as the sorcerer falls. And to strike crippling blows that aren't instantly > fatal... > > Well, point out the obvious why dontcha? :) Okay, I added both the doomed reincarnation idea, as well as your Enchanted items in contact idea to the spell's description As for the only a 05% chance of the Sorcerer dying, its more like he WILL die, but there's only a 05% chance of him suffering something detrimental (like coming back as a Crow, or worm, or something). Y'know, just when you think things are nailed down, you get shown that they're not. With my 20-20 Hindsight working just fine, I suppose I should've added a note about how this should probably be an exceedingly rare Spell that'd ideally be set aside for an Evil NPC Sorcerer. Mystify the gang by having this joker be killed (maybe with his head being cut off) and then creepily dissolve into nothingness would be dramatic, as well as leave them a little shaken once he reappears.lol! Ook! There's another point. Headhunting would _definately_ stop this spell from working; the Boss' body and stuff reforming at the designated Homing Circle sans head.:) Ook, again! And here I just generated another thing to drop into the spell description (grumble grumble). I'm sure I probably missed another glaring mistake...Illuminate me! -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From phlnje at ARTS-01.NOVELL.LEEDS.AC.UK Thu Jan 3 22:00:15 2002 From: phlnje at ARTS-01.NOVELL.LEEDS.AC.UK (N.J. Effingham) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:00:15 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Training and role-playing awards In-Reply-To: <20020103004703.2752E4BD3E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3C3439BE.22226.F5D56C@localhost> > Heck, you could always just give a couple of extra skill checks >as a >reward; maybe assigned to skills the GM thinks appropriate, >maybe chosen by >the player. > I believe I read something similar on the Web :) > -Ken- Probably my webpage. I award between one and three extra experience ticks for role-playing. This means characters get rewards for playing well, plus can supplement those skills they never get to use in adventures, and increase POW (I've found that these extra ticks mean that even a character reduced to 2 POW is still playable as given five sessions it'll be back up to a level whereby they can actually start doing things again). As for training, when my campaign was lower level I awarded about a week or two per adventure on average, with larger adventures warranting more downtime. Nowadays my PCs are higher level, more training is needed and it makes less sense for them to have a constant flow of adventures (being only so many threats to their Famil/clan, demons to entomb, political coups to usurp etc... which is what you get at high level) so often get seven to eight weeks of downtime, playing about four or five adventures every game year. I'd say don't begrudge your PCs downtime, they deserve it. Sure they might stick it in weapon attacks etc... but it's even more useful for Lores and cult skills that are never used or can't be ticked (it's been a long time since I've called for a Conceal roll, so without downtime my wannabe Humakti rune lords would be complaining). My two clacks, Nikk __________________________________ Nikk Effingham Work E-mail address: phlnje at leeds.ac.uk Permanent E-mail address: nikk at MailAndNews.com URL: http://www.crashbox.com/nikk/ From jurrubin at earthlink.net Fri Jan 4 00:19:41 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 07:19:41 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mage vs. Warrior (was Re: [RQ RULES] Gaming system?) References: <20020102164456.21256.qmail@earthlink.net> <3C33B986.5745DBD9@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C345A6D.3AF7FB42@earthlink.net> Jeremy Martin wrote: > > Hmmm. Two questions: > > 1. Where did he get access to the 69 POW he would have to have sacrificed to pay for all those enchantments? We'd been playing about 5 years real time; he'd spent only part of the POW himself, getting the rest made by others through buying, looting, stealing, threatening, mutual support agreements, etc. > 2. Then isn't it really the shaman that's so bad? Other than maybe the POW, what did the sorcerer do here? Just push the envelope on the use of binding matrices. Knowing what I do know, I wouldn't allow it again. The player DID force me to take a long, hard look at what could be done with sorcery. Combos of different bound spirit types can be pretty effective. David From bick10 at attbi.com Fri Jan 4 14:58:25 2002 From: bick10 at attbi.com (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:58:25 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ and QR Mass Combat Message-ID: <001701c194d4$1047c0c0$2479f50c@c1105786-a.attbi.com> I have been a PC in several large scale battles and run a couple as GM. The method I hate the most is the abstract one roll-glory-or-die system. This is where all factors are determined. Commanders, troops, win/loose, PC ability. Modify if the PC plans to hold back, or seek glory. Then roll percentile once and check results. Oh too bad, . . . your character just died. I have been forced to play that, but I have never run it. As a GM I once tried to run a small battle, 300 troops total using standard RQ combat rules. Only those attacking the PC?s and the PC?s themselves needed to make rolls. The rest of the battle was handled abstractly with the overall outcome depending on the PC?s. What a long night that was. My best attempt was more abstract. None of the PC?s were in command, they ended up ridding along in chariots. When the armies met, (aprox 30,000 total troops) I described to the PC?s what action they could see. When their chariots were sent in to strike an exposed flank, they made their own missile rolls. The success of the unit was related to their success, but I didn?t tell them that. They did get into a big fight with the Dragon that broke the center. They were thrown in to try and stop or delay it. At this point the players took control of their own destiny and dismounted to become heroes or martyrs. (didn't really expect that. The actions of one inspired ll of them) They were victorious, but singed. As they were using their last healing, I described the death of their commander from the other dragon. We then had the pleasure of role-playing a route. My suggestion if you plan on doing a large battle. Role-play it. Reduce the amount of Rolling. Only if/when they go heroic pull out the paper and pencil and start keep the minute details. Whether the players can influence the battle or not is your call. I tried to keep the whole night from being the fight and concentrated on the before and aftermath. Jim B From: J > >> I'm sure this topic must have discussed already, but I've been with the >group for only the past year or so. What rules do you GMs use to handle mass >combat? I'm especially interested in hearing how SPQR will handle this >issue. >> >> J. From AAlanrichards at aol.com Sat Jan 5 09:28:16 2002 From: AAlanrichards at aol.com (AAlanrichards at aol.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:28:16 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re:increasing skills Message-ID: <97.20f7b134.29678680@aol.com> I think (and this is how I've played them for X years) A player can only 'cash in' an experience check after the adventure. (we've always left it about a week) Training, researching and Practising comes during down time. I'll agree with someone else here of thinking the rules (somewhere) say about four weeks between an adventure. Rewards for really cool ideas. I give 'free' experience checks to a skill which I think is related to the player's brainwave. Also possibly add some more contacts (nicked from Shadowrun) as word spreads and people want to be seen with the character. As regards Combat mages. The big thing which attracted me to BRP after playing a level and class based game was that now my Sorcerer would actually get a game reward for using his sword in a fight. I used to get p****d off (and be mightily confused) when my low-level Sorcerer character would get most of his monster bashing experience from chopping up baddies and then his ability with magic improved. If characters are all getting samey maybe the GM should throw in other challenges. No one's Climb or Jump skills are going to improve in a campaign based around raids and counter raids but a spot of adventuring in the mountains might well lead to more checks here than for 1H Sword Attack. Ah, all rambled out From AAlanrichards at aol.com Sat Jan 5 22:26:09 2002 From: AAlanrichards at aol.com (AAlanrichards at aol.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 06:26:09 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Groovy New spells Message-ID: <111.b2560f5.29683cd1@aol.com> Enchanted Staff of Doom I'd say that it is quite fair to burn POW to get extra damage. After all the Sorcerer is only paying 1 POW (2 if staff bought) and 1 INT to get a reserve of (POW)D6 damage. Divine Magic users even those under a variant of the RunePower rules would give their eye teeth for that ratio. (although the Sorcerer still has to hit his opponent, but I'd say that the POW is only expended if (s)he hits) On the Gandalf vs. Balrog theme. Howsabout Spending 1 staff POW to ignore 1D6 damage (whatever the source) in a round Spending 2 staff POW to inflict 1D6 damage at Sorcerer's POWm range (aka Gandalf and Saruman in their duel) Reincarnation I'd say that on successful use of this spell the Sorcerer's spirit ends up in his/her Staff or Familiar. The player then needs to find a way of taking over amore useful form or they can try and influence another character. aka Sourcery by Terry pratchett or a Ring in some obscure fantasy book I once read....... From MurfNMurf at aol.com Sun Jan 6 02:21:46 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 10:21:46 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Groovy New spells Message-ID: <14d.6c2bb77.2968740a@aol.com> In a message dated 1/5/02 5:27:15 AM Central Standard Time, AAlanrichards at aol.com writes: > I'd say that it is quite fair to burn POW to get extra damage. After all the > Sorcerer is only paying 1 POW (2 if staff bought) and 1 INT to get a > reserve > of (POW)D6 damage. > Well, put like _that_, the Staff sounds like quite the scary device, huh? I think that Sorcerers, generally being a pretty twitchy bunch when it comes to their MP storage (you can _never_ have too many MP, y'know), wouldn't usually be willing to lower the MP storage capacity of their _favorite_ MP storing device (1 POW to get POW & MP equal to the Sorcerer's own would definitely qualify as the Sorcerer's fave, in my book). At least this seems to be the case with every Sorcerous character I've ever run or encountered in a game :) > Spending 1 staff POW to ignore 1D6 damage (whatever the source) in a round > Spending 2 staff POW to inflict 1D6 damage at Sorcerer's POWm range (aka > Gandalf and Saruman in their duel) > Hmm, I like this. Would the Sorcerer have to actually Parry with the Staff to use this Ignoring D6 thing, or would it just automatically happen when the POW was burnt? -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Sun Jan 6 03:53:26 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2002 00:53:26 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Groovy New spells References: <111.b2560f5.29683cd1@aol.com> Message-ID: <3C372F86.7B8C0FA4@libra.seed.net.tw> AAlanrichards at aol.com wrote: > Enchanted Staff of Doom > > I'd say that it is quite fair to burn POW to get extra damage. After all the > Sorcerer is only paying 1 POW (2 if staff bought) and 1 INT to get a reserve > of (POW)D6 damage. > > Divine Magic users even those under a variant of the RunePower rules would > give their eye teeth for that ratio. (although the Sorcerer still has to hit > his opponent, but I'd say that the POW is only expended if (s)he hits) ???? Do you guys know something I don't about gaining INT? I almost passed on the spell just because it costs the Sorcerer a point of INT. The staff is cool, but I might lose it one day. INT, on the other hand... Is there a way for a Sorcerer (esp. my INT 12 Malkioni...) to increase Intelligence? Thanks, Jeremy From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 6 12:08:39 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 19:08:39 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mage vs. Warrior (was Re: [RQ RULES] Gaming system?) References: <20020102164456.21256.qmail@earthlink.net> <3C33B986.5745DBD9@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C37A397.946FBDD8@earthlink.net> Jeremy Martin wrote: > > What are the coolest spell setups you guys have in your games? > > Jeremy Sorry, just realized I hadn't answered this. My last player group was mainly fighters who used spirit magic to boost their damage dealing abilities. The sorceror, however... He was the most fun I've had GM'ing. "Flakpanzer", used layered defenses (Shimmer, Cast Back, Damage Resist, etc) in addition to having multiple Armoring/Strengthening Enchantments cast on him. He had the Strengthenings done first, then the Armorings on one location at a time. I swear the player must have studied the Player's Manual for two months just to make sure he knew the rules on magic backwards and forwards. The thing is these layered defenses cost him _nothing_. His true power was in spirit command and control. He'd use spirits to cast most of his spells. He'd have these things keep his defenses up while he kept his MPs for spirit combat. He also had a number of bound spirits that kept him buffed and would keep only the most powerful POW and INT spirits he could find. He would spend _hours_ trying to get just the right spirits. The wildest thing he ever did though was to pay another PC sorceror with magic items and the teaching of defensive spells to have a couple of dime-sized pieces of bone removed from the back of each shoulder blade and his skull and turn them into binding enchantments for multiple spirits. The pieces were then put back into place and Healed. I ruled he couldn't have them healed beyond Heal 1 or the healing magic would remove the matrices from each piece of bone. The rest of the healing would have to be natural. He agreed and I naively let the other player follow through. Then Flak said he'd do the same favor for the other player. When the time came to remove the first bone shard, he turned his "friend" into his first bound ghost instead. As you might expect, the player wasn't pleased. This made for a few interesting sessions thereafter. I'll never allow this again but I kept Flak as an NPC. David From gavinmcintyre at blueyonder.co.uk Sat Jan 5 09:29:04 2002 From: gavinmcintyre at blueyonder.co.uk (Gavin McIntyre) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 22:29:04 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mass Combat References: <20020106013602.D4C174BD3E@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <004e01c1956f$38352500$0240180a@gavspc> Hi, Ive been a member of the list for some time but only post rarely as i get te digest but only get a chance to read / download it once a week or so......anyway Mass Combat I use 3 different approaches. 1. The outcome is pre ordained but will the PCs come up with some good ideas to improve there lot / increase their chance of getting away. 2. Roll Playing the battle letting the PCs be the generels and agreeing an outcome with my word being final. I will thenhave some scurmishes with the PCs being involved and have that modify the outcome 3. Use a mass combat system called Reaper. This is an old % system that works wonders for RQ amonst other systems. Its onlt a small simple system and I would urge you to get if if you ever come across it. The basis of the system is each person (say spearman) has a % to hit, say 25%. You add up all the %ages of the front rank, say 10 men - this gives a total of 250% (10*25) this gives 2 hits and a 50% chnace of a 3rd - so no need to roll 25 sets of die.!!! Then each weapon has a Kill factor (FK) and armour a resistance factor (RF). This is like a resistance table so a spear has a KF of 6 and light armour a RF of 3 so you have a 75% of a kill / hit. Now we had say 2 hits = 2 *75 = 150 = 1 kill and a 50% of a second. As you can see whole units can be worked out quickly and quite large battles can be done fast with only 2 die rolls for each unit to work out hits / kills. ( on an aside when fighting a friend used to WarHammer and the invunrability that high toughness gives was rather shocked when his 5 dragons fell out of the sky when they flew a bit to close to a few hundred elven archers ). Gavin From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 8 23:35:13 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 06:35:13 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Mass Combat References: <20020106013602.D4C174BD3E@thinbits.com> <004e01c1956f$38352500$0240180a@gavspc> Message-ID: <3C3AE781.B095EC74@earthlink.net> Gavin McIntyre wrote: > > 3. Use a mass combat system called Reaper. This is an old % > system that works wonders for RQ amonst other systems. Its onlt a > small simple system and I would urge you to get if if you ever > come across it. This sounds interesting! Any idea where we can get it? David From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 15 03:27:40 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:27:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C240214.D2D5E802@optonline.net> Message-ID: <20020114162740.26435.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules to the following: Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined by ones school/teacher). A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an attack or parry must state so before attempting a roll. The chance of succes is limited to the lower of the two skills and is resolved by a single roll. A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level of defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry would be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal parry, critical parry --> special parry. A special roll would reduce by two levels and a critical would reduce the level of success by three. A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the level of attacker attack in the same matter. The Martial Artist would also benifit from any effects of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. A most amusing situation I have seen so far with this rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo with a spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going for the guys head and he had no armor in that location. I thought the character (and the parry) was done for. But no the character managed to a critical parry(01) with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his school) which not only deflected the the blow but shattered the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a missed attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo with his own special attack(05) which recduced the broo's dodge(22) to a failure. Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead for the last several days!! Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From epon0608 at freebel.net Tue Jan 15 03:40:51 2002 From: epon0608 at freebel.net (Emmanuel Ponette) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 17:40:51 +0100 (CET) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <20020114162740.26435.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020114162740.26435.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1011026451.3c430a131b33f@webmail.tiscali.be> Personnaly, I find it a little to much. But it depends the type of game you like. I have one player having martial art skill and I play it mostly as the rule: just double the damage of fist or foot attack. If I remember well, in RQ3, it is stated that the max martial art cannot be higher than the fist attack. I dropped it. I makes MA kind of useless (in a group where everybody has 10-15 AP in combat). I decided to make the strength bonus double also. I also decided that on an unarmed combat, it is the strength that is doubled. The PC (with STR of 8!!) could thanks to that hold a full armoured Uz and throw him to the ground, face in the dirt (OK it was also a critical, but it was very fun). Any other ideas? Manu En r?ponse ? Leon Kirshtein : > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules to > the following: > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined by > ones school/teacher). > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an attack > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. The > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the two > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level of > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry would > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > critical would reduce the level of success by three. > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the level of > attacker attack in the same matter. > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any effects > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with this > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo with a > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going for > the guys head and he had no armor in that location. I > thought the character (and the parry) was done for. > But no the character managed to a critical parry(01) > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his school) > which not only deflected the the blow but shattered > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a missed > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo with > his own special attack(05) which recduced the broo's > dodge(22) to a failure. > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead for > the last several days!! > > Leon Kirshtein > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be) From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 15 03:54:32 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:54:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <1011026451.3c430a131b33f@webmail.tiscali.be> Message-ID: <20020114165432.19591.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> The basic rule always bothered me because it did not allow for use of any weapons with Martial Arts and did not convey any real benifits for the defender. Doubling of AP from 3 to 6 is just not enough IMO. IMO Martial Arts should equal out the the combat between a large/strong and small/weaker opponents. The str rules you are using do not really refelect that and in fact make the differences worse. As a side question do you double the actual str or the enhanced str in cases where str in augmented by magic? Leon Kirshtein --- Emmanuel Ponette wrote: > Personnaly, I find it a little to much. But it > depends the type of game you > like. I have one player having martial art skill and > I play it mostly as the > rule: just double the damage of fist or foot attack. > If I remember well, in RQ3, > it is stated that the max martial art cannot be > higher than the fist attack. I > dropped it. I makes MA kind of useless (in a group > where everybody has 10-15 AP > in combat). I decided to make the strength bonus > double also. I also decided > that on an unarmed combat, it is the strength that > is doubled. The PC (with STR > of 8!!) could thanks to that hold a full armoured Uz > and throw him to the > ground, face in the dirt (OK it was also a critical, > but it was very fun). > > Any other ideas? > > Manu > > En r?ponse ? Leon Kirshtein : > > > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules > to > > the following: > > > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined > by > > ones school/teacher). > > > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an > attack > > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. > The > > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the > two > > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level > of > > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry > would > > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > > critical would reduce the level of success by > three. > > > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the > level of > > attacker attack in the same matter. > > > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any > effects > > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with > this > > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo > with a > > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going > for > > the guys head and he had no armor in that > location. I > > thought the character (and the parry) was done > for. > > But no the character managed to a critical > parry(01) > > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his > school) > > which not only deflected the the blow but > shattered > > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a > missed > > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo > with > > his own special attack(05) which recduced the > broo's > > dodge(22) to a failure. > > > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead > for > > the last several days!! > > > > Leon Kirshtein > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail > (http://webmail.tiscali.be) > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 15 03:54:32 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:54:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <1011026451.3c430a131b33f@webmail.tiscali.be> Message-ID: <20020114165432.62318.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com> The basic rule always bothered me because it did not allow for use of any weapons with Martial Arts and did not convey any real benifits for the defender. Doubling of AP from 3 to 6 is just not enough IMO. IMO Martial Arts should equal out the the combat between a large/strong and small/weaker opponents. The str rules you are using do not really refelect that and in fact make the differences worse. As a side question do you double the actual str or the enhanced str in cases where str in augmented by magic? Leon Kirshtein --- Emmanuel Ponette wrote: > Personnaly, I find it a little to much. But it > depends the type of game you > like. I have one player having martial art skill and > I play it mostly as the > rule: just double the damage of fist or foot attack. > If I remember well, in RQ3, > it is stated that the max martial art cannot be > higher than the fist attack. I > dropped it. I makes MA kind of useless (in a group > where everybody has 10-15 AP > in combat). I decided to make the strength bonus > double also. I also decided > that on an unarmed combat, it is the strength that > is doubled. The PC (with STR > of 8!!) could thanks to that hold a full armoured Uz > and throw him to the > ground, face in the dirt (OK it was also a critical, > but it was very fun). > > Any other ideas? > > Manu > > En r?ponse ? Leon Kirshtein : > > > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules > to > > the following: > > > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined > by > > ones school/teacher). > > > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an > attack > > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. > The > > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the > two > > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level > of > > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry > would > > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > > critical would reduce the level of success by > three. > > > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the > level of > > attacker attack in the same matter. > > > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any > effects > > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with > this > > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo > with a > > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going > for > > the guys head and he had no armor in that > location. I > > thought the character (and the parry) was done > for. > > But no the character managed to a critical > parry(01) > > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his > school) > > which not only deflected the the blow but > shattered > > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a > missed > > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo > with > > his own special attack(05) which recduced the > broo's > > dodge(22) to a failure. > > > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead > for > > the last several days!! > > > > Leon Kirshtein > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail > (http://webmail.tiscali.be) > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From epon0608 at freebel.net Tue Jan 15 04:06:57 2002 From: epon0608 at freebel.net (Emmanuel Ponette) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:06:57 +0100 (CET) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <20020114165432.62318.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020114165432.62318.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1011028017.3c431031b5775@webmail.tiscali.be> I plan to make subskill of Martial art. One for fighting, one for dodging/parrying, one for jumping,... that all do basicly the same: doubling the effect. It should keep the rules simple and make it interesting for the skilled person. It is also very related to a culture, therefore, not heavy armoured kung fu master or one with a Troll maul. For the strength, it is the whole strength (magic+...) Manu En r?ponse ? Leon Kirshtein : > The basic rule always bothered me because it did not > allow for use of any weapons with Martial Arts and did > not convey any real benifits for the defender. > Doubling of AP from 3 to 6 is just not enough IMO. > > IMO Martial Arts should equal out the the combat > between a large/strong and small/weaker opponents. > The str rules you are using do not really refelect > that and in fact make the differences worse. > > As a side question do you double the actual str or the > enhanced str in cases where str in augmented by magic? > > Leon Kirshtein > > --- Emmanuel Ponette wrote: > > Personnaly, I find it a little to much. But it > > depends the type of game you > > like. I have one player having martial art skill and > > I play it mostly as the > > rule: just double the damage of fist or foot attack. > > If I remember well, in RQ3, > > it is stated that the max martial art cannot be > > higher than the fist attack. I > > dropped it. I makes MA kind of useless (in a group > > where everybody has 10-15 AP > > in combat). I decided to make the strength bonus > > double also. I also decided > > that on an unarmed combat, it is the strength that > > is doubled. The PC (with STR > > of 8!!) could thanks to that hold a full armoured Uz > > and throw him to the > > ground, face in the dirt (OK it was also a critical, > > but it was very fun). > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > Manu > > > > En r?ponse ? Leon Kirshtein : > > > > > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules > > to > > > the following: > > > > > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > > > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined > > by > > > ones school/teacher). > > > > > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an > > attack > > > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. > > The > > > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the > > two > > > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > > > > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level > > of > > > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry > > would > > > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > > > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > > > > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > > > critical would reduce the level of success by > > three. > > > > > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the > > level of > > > attacker attack in the same matter. > > > > > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any > > effects > > > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > > > > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with > > this > > > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo > > with a > > > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going > > for > > > the guys head and he had no armor in that > > location. I > > > thought the character (and the parry) was done > > for. > > > But no the character managed to a critical > > parry(01) > > > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his > > school) > > > which not only deflected the the blow but > > shattered > > > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a > > missed > > > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo > > with > > > his own special attack(05) which recduced the > > broo's > > > dodge(22) to a failure. > > > > > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead > > for > > > the last several days!! > > > > > > Leon Kirshtein > > > > > > ===== > > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > > > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > > This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail > > (http://webmail.tiscali.be) > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through Tiscalinet Webmail (http://webmail.tiscali.be) From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 15 11:57:20 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:57:20 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: <20020114165432.62318.qmail@web14509.mail.yahoo.com> <1011028017.3c431031b5775@webmail.tiscali.be> Message-ID: <3C437E70.238EF1D4@earthlink.net> This discussion brings back some fond memories of a similar discussion back in college shortly after I finished a paper on the history of ninjutsu. It led me to develop the following skill, based on what I had found on ninja fighting techniques, for RQIII/Land of the Ninja. For Ninja character profession, it replaces the Martial Arts skill. TAIHENJUTSU (Knowledge) (00%) This skill is a discipline of the mind which allows a humanoid character to use his hands and feet with deadly effectiveness. It allows the following bonuses: 1) A successful attack with hands or feet gives the benefit of two damage rolls. 2) The hands may be used to parry up to a maximum of 6 points of damage from a melee, thrown, or natural weapon. Any damage in excess of 6 points is taken to the parrying location. 3) When in a prone position, the feet may be used to attack without penalty to hit. Hit location modifiers should be applied as the referee sees fit (-10 is suggested). The feet may also be used from a prone position to parry melee and natural weapon attacks (NOT missiles) in a fashion similar to the hands with a 15% penalty. The hands have a 30% penalty when used from a prone position. 4) A special success of the Attack roll AND the Taihenjutsu skill roll allows the character to choose (before damage is rolled) from one of the following effects: a) double the total damage done (include STR bonuses) and roll for an intentional knockback, adding 1 to the total of STR and SIZ for every 3 points of damage (dropping fractions) OR b) choose to have struck either the head or abdomen (subject to referee discretion) and roll to stun using the Stunning and Subduing rules in Book 1, on pg. 51. 5) Finally, this skill removes the need for a second grapple attack in order to immobilize, throw, break the bones of, or strangle the target. David From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Tue Jan 15 13:03:44 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:03:44 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: <20020114162740.26435.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C438E00.4E8227BA@libra.seed.net.tw> I see a couple of problems with this. First of all, two martial artists will basicly be missing each other and missing dodges with every shot (on similar rolls). That's not what I've seen of Martial Arts - there's a lot more contact and guiding or blocking. I guess you could describe it as 'parried so well, you didn't get a chance to apply any force. Next, you would be able to do some pretty amazing parries - Troll mauls, Giant sweep attacks, etc. Barehanded. But without a weapon in your style, you wouldn't be able to touch a guy in moderate armor. Picture kicking a guy in chainmail. You're average SIZ & STR, so with a special (in each), you made him miss his parry, but you still only did 1D6 damage - nowhere near enough to scratch him. Also, at least with Aikido, we're learning to try and turn the attacker's hit against him. Hmmm... Now to try and help, instead of just find problems... When you roll for MA, roll it separate from the combat roll and always treat it like an attack roll with the limb used. On an attack, the damages are added together if your base attack hits. On a parry or dodge, you have a choice - if you think your defense is good enough, treat it as a free hit on your opponent (I dodge your sword blow and get a grapple on your sword arm!), or subtract the damage from their hit (add it to your AP). I agree the description sounds cool, but did you realize, the combat would have played out the exact same way, without using martial arts, too? Except for the shattered spear, that is... Good to see comments here again! Jeremy Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules to > the following: > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined by > ones school/teacher). > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an attack > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. The > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the two > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level of > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry would > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > critical would reduce the level of success by three. > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the level of > attacker attack in the same matter. > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any effects > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with this > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo with a > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going for > the guys head and he had no armor in that location. I > thought the character (and the parry) was done for. > But no the character managed to a critical parry(01) > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his school) > which not only deflected the the blow but shattered > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a missed > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo with > his own special attack(05) which recduced the broo's > dodge(22) to a failure. > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead for > the last several days!! > > Leon Kirshtein > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Tue Jan 15 13:07:12 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:07:12 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gaining INT Message-ID: <3C438ED0.5B03BDC@libra.seed.net.tw> Guys, I asked once before and didn't get a reply, so let's try again: Is there a way to increase INT? There's a Malkioni Sorcerer in my group with an INT of 12... His first couple of vows gain him very little Presence, and he's not going to try any magic that sac's INT... Any ideas? If you sacrifice a stat, say Intelligence, will a Restore Health (INT) get it back? Thanks, Jeremy From talmeta at optonline.net Tue Jan 15 14:02:25 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:02:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gaining INT References: <3C438ED0.5B03BDC@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C439BC1.99A3CA85@optonline.net> Jeremy Martin wrote: > > Is there a way to increase INT? There's a Malkioni Sorcerer in my group > with an INT of 12... His first couple of vows gain him very little > Presence, and he's not going to try any magic that sac's INT... Any > ideas? Perhaps some sort of mystic quest? There really isn't a rules mechanic I can think of offhand, but that doesn't mean you can't invent one that's game/story related (but be prepared for others to attempt the same quest...) > If you sacrifice a stat, say Intelligence, will a Restore Health (INT) > get it back? I'd rule no. -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - this is the first day of my last days From northerndm at hotmail.com Tue Jan 15 16:36:38 2002 From: northerndm at hotmail.com (Northern DM) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 22:36:38 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] GURPS Magic Message-ID: My group is coming back to Runequest after trying D&D 3rd Edition. It was OK but the level system bothered us. However, we rather enjoyed the magic system. It was easy and for me, the DM, it made creating an NPC mage so much easier when trying to figure out what spells they have (especially using the NPC creator programs out there). This brings me to my question, we are thinking of using the GURPS magic system as it fits in well with Runequest (ie: max damage is 3d6 which is not instant kill). Has anybody else done this? If so, any comments or suggestions. The part I am having some difficulty with is what to do about fatigue as I do not use fatigue in Runequest (drove me nuts). STR I can see as magic points but what about fatigue? Northern DM PS Are there any NPC creator programs for Runequest out there? _________________________________________________________________ Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 04:08:34 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:08:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C438E00.4E8227BA@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <20020115170834.6231.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > I see a couple of problems with this. > > First of all, two martial artists will basicly be > missing each other and > missing dodges with every shot (on similar rolls). Which happens now anyway without martial arts. > That's not what I've seen of Martial Arts - there's > a lot more contact and guiding or blocking. I guess > you could describe it as 'parried so well, you didn't > get a chance to apply any force'. No, I would just describe it as parried. > Next, you would be able to do some pretty amazing > parries - Troll mauls, Giant sweep attacks, etc. > Barehanded. In effect those would be misses as opposed to parried attacks. > But without a weapon in your style, you wouldn't be > able to touch a guy in moderate armor. Picture > kicking a guy in chainmail. You're average > SIZ & STR, so with a special (in each), you made him > miss his parry, but > you still only did 1D6 damage - nowhere near enough > to scratch him. As opposed to the way it is now? The martial arts kick would do 2d6 = 7pts average, which would equal to 0 damage versus someone in chainmail. On the other hand if the same person is using a greatsword and you parried him, with the current rules 6AP, your arm will be disabled. With my rules the character manages to knock aside the attack. > Also, at least with Aikido, we're learning to try > and turn the > attacker's hit against him. And how is this reflected in the current rules? > Hmmm... Now to try and help, instead of just find > problems... > > When you roll for MA, roll it separate from the > combat roll and always > treat it like an attack roll with the limb used. On > an attack, the > damages are added together if your base attack hits. > On a parry or > dodge, you have a choice - if you think your defense > is good enough, > treat it as a free hit on your opponent (I dodge > your sword blow and get > a grapple on your sword arm!), or subtract the > damage from their hit > (add it to your AP). I would rather not have another die roll and this still does not allow for use of weapons with martial arts. > I agree the description sounds cool, but did you > realize, the combat > would have played out the exact same way, without > using martial arts, > too? Except for the shattered spear, that is... Not really. Without martial arts the parry would have stoped 12AP and the rest of the damage would have gone to the characters head with no armor or magic protection. The spear would do 1d8+1(spear)+9(critical)+1d6(str bonus) = 4.5 + 3.5 + 10 = 18pt; which would mean 6pt to the head and the weapon has a chance of being stuck in the wound ======> dead character roll for DI. > Good to see comments here again! It's great to be able to disagree with someone about trivial thing. :) Leon > > Jeremy > > > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > I am thinking of changing the Martial Arts rules > to > > the following: > > > > Martial Arts maybe used unarmed attack, parry, or > > dodge, as well as with certain weapons (determined > by > > ones school/teacher). > > > > A character wishing to use Martial Arts with an > attack > > or parry must state so before attempting a roll. > The > > chance of succes is limited to the lower of the > two > > skills and is resolved by a single roll. > > > > A successful Martial Arts attack reduces the level > of > > defenders parry or dodge. Thus a normal parry > would > > be --> a missed parry, a special parry --> normal > > parry, critical parry --> special parry. > > > > A special roll would reduce by two levels and a > > critical would reduce the level of success by > three. > > > > A successful Martial Arts defense reduces the > level of > > attacker attack in the same matter. > > > > The Martial Artist would also benifit from any > effects > > of the successful attack, parry, or dodge. > > > > A most amusing situation I have seen so far with > this > > rule is then a character was attacked by a Broo > with a > > spear. The Broo criticaled(02) the blow was going > for > > the guys head and he had no armor in that > location. I > > thought the character (and the parry) was done > for. > > But no the character managed to a critical > parry(01) > > with his katana (Martial Arts weapon for his > school) > > which not only deflected the the blow but > shattered > > the Broo's spear (a successful sword parry vs a > missed > > attack rule). He then proceeded to kill the broo > with > > his own special attack(05) which recduced the > broo's > > dodge(22) to a failure. > > > > Comments welcomed. God this List has been dead > for > > the last several days!! > > > > Leon Kirshtein > > > > ===== > > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! > > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From andrew at crashbox.com Wed Jan 16 04:20:36 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:20:36 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] GURPS Magic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:36 PM -0700 1/14/02, Northern DM wrote: >My group is coming back to Runequest after trying D&D 3rd Edition. >It was OK but the level system bothered us. However, we rather >enjoyed the magic system. It was easy and for me, the DM, it made >creating an NPC mage so much easier when trying to figure out what >spells they have (especially using the NPC creator programs out >there). This brings me to my question, we are thinking of using the >GURPS magic system as it fits in well with Runequest (ie: max damage >is 3d6 which is not instant kill). Has anybody else done this? If >so, any comments or suggestions. The part I am having some >difficulty with is what to do about fatigue as I do not use fatigue >in Runequest (drove me nuts). STR I can see as magic points but >what about fatigue? Stun damage. Works like fatigue, but is general HP damage. Give some recovery rate similar to recovering fatigue in GURPS. It would be interesting if it was occasionally stun damage in the arms. After casting as big spell you'd see the mage standing there with his limbs hanging limply at his side, waiting for the feeling to come back so he could cast another spell. That'd be pretty funny. >PS Are there any NPC creator programs for Runequest out there? I just make spreadsheets. -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 05:13:52 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:13:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] GURPS Magic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020115181352.16227.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> > >PS Are there any NPC creator programs for Runequest > out there? > > I just make spreadsheets. > > -Andrew I use the D&D3 generator at: http://www.aarg.net/~minam/npc.cgi and then convert it. Works fairly well. I also use their treasure generator, and again convert it. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From talmeta at optonline.net Wed Jan 16 07:12:11 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:12:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DMD: Fanthros for RQ/Greyhawk Message-ID: <3C448D1B.1C13BD8E@optonline.net> Another in my series, inspired by 'The Centaur Papers' by Stephen Inniss and Kelly Adams back in Dragon 103. FANTHROS Runes: Air, Beast, Fire Called the Sky Thunderer, Sky-Rider, and Hurler of Thunderbolts, Fanthros is the chenxa god with dominion over the Sky and Weather. Cult in the World Fanthros is widely regarded as the forefather of the chenxa pantheon, a luminous being composed primarily of stormclouds, lightning, and pure blue sky. In the Dawn Age, Fanthros was more Oerth-bound, but the Second Age and the battles with the Host changed that. Wielding lightning loaned to him by another, he was changed by it, and took some part of it into his substance and his spirit. Fanthros' followers celebrate his High Holy Day on the 8th of Reaping, the beginning of a three day festival known as the Thundering. It is a time of feasting, contests of strength, speed, and accuracy, as well as a common time for young males to formally begin courtships. Priests of this cult typically bleach and dye their hair (both mane & tail) with nerrithroot, which leaves it an almost metallic blue. Braids are common, as is the interweaving of silver threads or trinkets. Lay Membership Requirements: All male chenxa in a tribe are automatically considered lay members of this cult in their seventh summer. Skills taught by the cult include Dance, Dodge, Jump, Maneuver, Tumble, Orate, Sing, Speak Languages, First Aid, Lores (chenxa, world), Play Instrument, Listen, Scan, Search, Ceremony, and Atlatl/Javelin attack. Initiate Membership Requirements: Standard. Known as the Hu'onar, or Stormcrows, initiates of this cult are taught the mysteries of the sky and it's powerful magics. Though mighty warriors, Hu'onar fight only in defense of the tribe, never for pay or as mercenaries. Spirit Magic: Unlike most members of this pantheon, Fanthros' cult has, for the most part, evolved past shamanism; spirit magics common to this cult include: Fanaticism, Farsee, Ironhoof, Javelin of Lightning, Jumping, Multimissile, Protection, Shimmer, Speedart, Strength, Mobility, and Vigor. Priesthood / Rune Lords Requirements: Standard for Rune Lords. Collectively known as Hu'jasnir, or Storm-Eagles, the Rune-Priests of this cult often assume roles of temporal as well as spiritual leadership of their tribes. Hu'jasnir who master the Rune of Air may Call or Clear Clouds once per hour, at a level equivalent to their current POW. Hu'jasnir who master the Rune of Beasts can call upon the fury of a Berserk spell once per hour, and do not suffer the deleterious effects of the spell afterwards. Hu'jasnir who master the Rune of Fire can command Salamanders by voice alone. Virtues for Fanthros include Energetic, Honorable, Proud, and Unpredictable. Common Divine Magic: all Special Divine Magic: Berserk, Cloud Call, Cloud Clear, Firespear, Hurling, Increase Wind, Pathway, Skywatch, Summon Firewind, Summon (Salamander, Sylph), Thunderbolt, Wind Words Associated Gods Asam: provides Retrieve Weapon Brilos: provides Clear Sight -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - A closed mouth gathers no foot. From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Jan 16 13:40:02 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:40:02 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: <20020115170834.6231.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C44E802.97D71C53@libra.seed.net.tw> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > > I see a couple of problems with this. > > > > First of all, two martial artists will basicly be > > missing each other and > > missing dodges with every shot (on similar rolls). > > Which happens now anyway without martial arts. Not really. Now it's parried, which is different to me. Would your system allow a martial artist to force a fumble? > > > That's not what I've seen of Martial Arts - there's > > a lot more contact and guiding or blocking. I guess > > you could describe it as 'parried so well, you > didn't > > get a chance to apply any force'. > > No, I would just describe it as parried. > > > Next, you would be able to do some pretty amazing > > parries - Troll mauls, Giant sweep attacks, etc. > > Barehanded. > > In effect those would be misses as opposed to parried > attacks. > > > But without a weapon in your style, you wouldn't be > > able to touch a guy in moderate armor. Picture > > kicking a guy in chainmail. You're average > > SIZ & STR, so with a special (in each), you made him > > miss his parry, but > > you still only did 1D6 damage - nowhere near enough > > to scratch him. > > As opposed to the way it is now? The martial arts kick > would do 2d6 = 7pts average, which would equal to 0 > damage versus someone in chainmail. On average. But on a good roll, 2D6 can do some damage, while 1D6 never will. > > On the other hand if the same person is using a > greatsword and you parried him, with the current rules > 6AP, your arm will be disabled. With my rules the > character manages to knock aside the attack. > > > Also, at least with Aikido, we're learning to try > > and turn the > > attacker's hit against him. > > And how is this reflected in the current rules? It's not. I agree that MA should be revised and fleshed out, not sure about the way yet. That's why I like discussion like this... ;-) > > > Hmmm... Now to try and help, instead of just find > > problems... > > > > When you roll for MA, roll it separate from the > > combat roll and always > > treat it like an attack roll with the limb used. On > > an attack, the > > damages are added together if your base attack hits. > > On a parry or > > dodge, you have a choice - if you think your defense > > is good enough, > > treat it as a free hit on your opponent (I dodge > > your sword blow and get > > a grapple on your sword arm!), or subtract the > > damage from their hit > > (add it to your AP). > > I would rather not have another die roll and this > still does not allow for use of weapons with martial > arts. Sure it does, just not as much damage. If I hit you with my Katana, I do 1D10+1+1D3+ (dam bonus x2), using fist damage for the extra, since I'm holding it in my hands. I'm playing in a pretty low powered world right now and already don't like crits to ignore all armor or piercing crits to do max x2 damage... > > > I agree the description sounds cool, but did you > > realize, the combat > > would have played out the exact same way, without > > using martial arts, > > too? Except for the shattered spear, that is... > > Not really. Without martial arts the parry would have > stoped 12AP and the rest of the damage would have gone > to the characters head with no armor or magic > protection. The spear would do > 1d8+1(spear)+9(critical)+1d6(str bonus) = 4.5 + 3.5 + > 10 = 18pt; which would mean 6pt to the head and the > weapon has a chance of being stuck in the wound > ======> dead character roll for DI. The 3E rulebook says "A Critical Parry will always block the entire damage done by the blow parried, even if it is a Critical Attack. The parrying weapon will take no damage." (p. 55) > > > Good to see comments here again! > > It's great to be able to disagree with someone about > trivial thing. :) > > Leon > Half the fun of gaming... :) Jeremy From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 14:27:33 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:27:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C44E802.97D71C53@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <20020116032733.9327.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > Not really. Now it's parried, which is different to > me. Would your > system allow a martial artist to force a fumble? No. The most would be a miss. Otherwise it is overpowering. > On average. But on a good roll, 2D6 can do some > damage, while 1D6 never will. True. However, someone who is unarmed (even with MA) and is facing a heavily armored and skilled opponent should not be in the fight in the first place. > > I would rather not have another die roll and this > > still does not allow for use of weapons with > martial > > arts. > > Sure it does, just not as much damage. If I hit you > with my Katana, I > do 1D10+1+1D3+ (dam bonus x2), using fist damage for > the extra, since > I'm holding it in my hands. Actually under my proposal the damage is less. It is the chance of getting through which is increased. > I'm playing in a pretty > low powered world > right now and already don't like crits to ignore all > armor or piercing > crits to do max x2 damage... Not here. In fact I use the RQ2 ways of resolving specials and criticals. That is why reducing the level of success is so important. > > The 3E rulebook says "A Critical Parry will always > block the entire > damage done by the blow parried, even if it is a > Critical Attack. The > parrying weapon will take no damage." (p. 55) Hmmp ... I knew there was a reason why I ingnored most of RQ3 rules. Thanks for reminding me. :) On a different trail of thought. Why can there not be different styles of MA in the same world!? It would be interesting to see two MA specialist fighting each other with each persons skill being reflected somewhat differently. > Half the fun of gaming... :) More like half the fun of living ... :) Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 16 15:01:11 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:01:11 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: <20020116032733.9327.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C44FB07.FDF3252F@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > On a different trail of thought. Why can there not be > different styles of MA in the same world!? It would be > interesting to see two MA specialist fighting each > other with each persons skill being reflected somewhat > differently. There can be. Check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/4528/rq1.html David From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Jan 16 15:59:03 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 12:59:03 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: <20020116032733.9327.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C450897.2295CCAC@libra.seed.net.tw> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > > > Not really. Now it's parried, which is different to > > me. Would your > > system allow a martial artist to force a fumble? > > No. The most would be a miss. Otherwise it is > overpowering. Good. Agreed. > > > On average. But on a good roll, 2D6 can do some > > damage, while 1D6 never will. > > True. However, someone who is unarmed (even with MA) > and is facing a heavily armored and skilled opponent > should not be in the fight in the first place. True. And the 2D6 supports that, but does allow for some small chance to win... Are you going for completely real, or somewhat cinematic/heroic? > > > > I would rather not have another die roll and this > > > still does not allow for use of weapons with > > martial > > > arts. > > > > Sure it does, just not as much damage. If I hit you > > with my Katana, I > > do 1D10+1+1D3+ (dam bonus x2), using fist damage for > > the extra, since > > I'm holding it in my hands. > > Actually under my proposal the damage is less. It is > the chance of getting through which is increased. Right, sorry. But a chance to get past the foe's shield can be lethal... > > > I'm playing in a pretty > > low powered world > > right now and already don't like crits to ignore all > > armor or piercing > > crits to do max x2 damage... > > Not here. In fact I use the RQ2 ways of resolving > specials and criticals. That is why reducing the level > of success is so important. What is that? I used to play 1st ed back in the mid 80s, but live overseas now and only have access to a 3E rulebook I had shipped over. And some thing through Brad... > > > > > The 3E rulebook says "A Critical Parry will always > > block the entire > > damage done by the blow parried, even if it is a > > Critical Attack. The > > parrying weapon will take no damage." (p. 55) > > Hmmp ... I knew there was a reason why I ingnored > most of RQ3 rules. Thanks for reminding me. :) SURE! Hee hee... I am curious about 2E rules now... > > On a different trail of thought. Why can there not be > different styles of MA in the same world!? It would be > interesting to see two MA specialist fighting each > other with each persons skill being reflected somewhat > differently. A friend of mine is developing Hard and Soft styles, where Hard is pretty standard, and Soft is a buildup from grab into holds and throws. It wouldn't be hard from there to name them and make variations for other styles as well. Drunken Style (soft): can't initiate an attack, but on a successful defense you may start an attack nest SR. I'm probably going to a system of # of successes, then you could add your MA successes to your defense or, if its already sufficient, to your attack next SR. Then spend successes to decrease their defense or maybe increase your success. Or Kendo, which would let you use a sword with MA skills. Or... > > > Half the fun of gaming... :) > > More like half the fun of living ... :) > > Leon Kirshtein > From MurfNMurf at aol.com Wed Jan 16 16:16:30 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 00:16:30 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Message-ID: <144.7e6a86f.297666ae@aol.com> Hi gang, Boy, its been kinda lean here on the RQ list, huh? Anyhow, all of this talk of Martial Arts reminded me that on the Chaosium Digest archives there's a CoC write up for cinematic style Martial Arts fury called "MARTIAL ARTS IN COC" by one Ricardo Christe. -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jerrym at lanset.com Wed Jan 16 17:16:33 2002 From: jerrym at lanset.com (jerrym) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:16:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! Message-ID: <01C19E12.4ABBB4E0.jerrym@lanset.com> I was digging around my vault of forgotten lore (i.e. closet) and found my old spelljammer box set for adnd and got to thinking about trying to use third ed. RQ for it (with some adjustments ofcourse. what do you think? could it work? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.313 / Virus Database: 174 - Release Date: 1/2/02 From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Jan 16 17:25:35 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 14:25:35 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! References: <01C19E12.4ABBB4E0.jerrym@lanset.com> Message-ID: <3C451CDF.C0B66531@libra.seed.net.tw> jerrym wrote: > I was digging around my vault of forgotten lore (i.e. closet) and found my > old spelljammer box set for adnd and got to thinking about trying to use > third ed. RQ for it (with some adjustments ofcourse. > > what do you think? could it work? > > --- Well, one of the reasons I play RQ is its adaptability (modern RQ with a few skill changes and no magic...), so why not? RQ power levels are lower, so you'll have to do most work here - what kind of magic could get a spelljammer up?!??? Good luck. Maybe post your notes to a website? Jeremy From sneadj at mindspring.com Wed Jan 16 20:35:29 2002 From: sneadj at mindspring.com (sneadj at mindspring.com) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:35:29 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C44FB07.FDF3252F@earthlink.net> Message-ID: On 15 Jan 02, at 22:01, David Smart wrote: > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > > On a different trail of thought. Why can there not be > > different styles of MA in the same world!? It would be > > interesting to see two MA specialist fighting each > > other with each persons skill being reflected somewhat > > differently. > > There can be. Check out: > > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/4528/rq1.html Many and eternal thanks for posting this, this is an *excellent* MA system and one I will use the next time I run RQ. I couldn't find any working links, has this person done anything else RQ-related? -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com From sneadj at mindspring.com Wed Jan 16 20:35:29 2002 From: sneadj at mindspring.com (sneadj at mindspring.com) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 01:35:29 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! In-Reply-To: <01C19E12.4ABBB4E0.jerrym@lanset.com> Message-ID: On 15 Jan 02, at 22:16, jerrym wrote: > I was digging around my vault of forgotten lore (i.e. closet) and > found my old spelljammer box set for adnd and got to thinking about > trying to use third ed. RQ for it (with some adjustments ofcourse. > > what do you think? could it work? I love the idea. A spell jammer helm (or whatever they were called) is clearly an enchanted item that costs POW to create and requires MP to function. Hmm, so what would the stats be for Illithids... -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 16 23:42:44 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:42:44 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts References: Message-ID: <3C457544.6096EC87@earthlink.net> sneadj at mindspring.com wrote: > > On 15 Jan 02, at 22:01, David Smart wrote: > > > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > > > > On a different trail of thought. Why can there not be > > > different styles of MA in the same world!? It would be > > > interesting to see two MA specialist fighting each > > > other with each persons skill being reflected somewhat > > > differently. > > > > There can be. Check out: > > > > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/4528/rq1.html > > Many and eternal thanks for posting this, this is an *excellent* MA > system and one I will use the next time I run RQ. I couldn't find > any working links, has this person done anything else RQ-related? Oh, my, yes! His mainpage is at: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/4528/ Just hit the "Runequest" link under his Role-playing games heading and have fun. After wading through 63 pages of listings of RQ sites (using the Google search engine), I found his site was the most comprehensive on life in Kralorela. He also has some material on Prax. David From kruch7 at home.com Thu Jan 17 00:53:30 2002 From: kruch7 at home.com (Joseph Elric Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 08:53:30 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! References: <01C19E12.4ABBB4E0.jerrym@lanset.com> Message-ID: <011701c19e95$2e71a500$787ba8c0@vbch1.va.home.com> Well I am sure it could work. Heck Tal Meta can run runequest in Greyhawk. that is the joy of the runequest the system can go most any where, now how you deal with the gods and the spheres in another question, and I look forward to hearing what you do, and am more then happy to discuss it on line. Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comic Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil then you ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 1:16 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! > I was digging around my vault of forgotten lore (i.e. closet) and found my > old spelljammer box set for adnd and got to thinking about trying to use > third ed. RQ for it (with some adjustments ofcourse. > > what do you think? could it work? > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.313 / Virus Database: 174 - Release Date: 1/2/02 > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From kruch7 at home.com Thu Jan 17 00:54:25 2002 From: kruch7 at home.com (Joseph Elric Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 08:54:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! References: Message-ID: <011f01c19e95$4f4f5740$787ba8c0@vbch1.va.home.com> Brings to mind the old walkapuss. Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comic Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil then you ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 4:35 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! > On 15 Jan 02, at 22:16, jerrym wrote: > > > I was digging around my vault of forgotten lore (i.e. closet) and > > found my old spelljammer box set for adnd and got to thinking about > > trying to use third ed. RQ for it (with some adjustments ofcourse. > > > > what do you think? could it work? > > I love the idea. > > A spell jammer helm (or whatever they were called) is clearly an > enchanted item that costs POW to create and requires MP to > function. > > Hmm, so what would the stats be for Illithids... > > -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.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 Thu Jan 17 01:35:02 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 06:35:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C44FB07.FDF3252F@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020116143502.46597.qmail@web14505.mail.yahoo.com> Thanks David. This is exactly what I was leading to without even knowning. It incorporates all aspects of the recent discussion on MA. This is definently going into my unofficial/official version of the RQ rules. Leon Kirshtein. --- David Smart wrote: > > There can be. Check out: > > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/4528/rq1.html > ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 17 02:26:21 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 07:26:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Special attacks and parries was: Martial Arts In-Reply-To: <3C450897.2295CCAC@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <20020116152621.41275.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > > Not here. In fact I use the RQ2 ways of resolving > > specials and criticals. That is why reducing the > level > > of success is so important. > > What is that? I used to play 1st ed back in the mid > 80s, but live > overseas now and only have access to a 3E rulebook I > had shipped over. > And some thing through Brad... > > > > The 3E rulebook says "A Critical Parry will > always > > > block the entire > > > damage done by the blow parried, even if it is a > > > Critical Attack. The > > > parrying weapon will take no damage." (p. 55) > > > > Hmmp ... I knew there was a reason why I ingnored > > most of RQ3 rules. Thanks for reminding me. :) > > SURE! Hee hee... I am curious about 2E rules > now... I am not sure it is directly from RQ2, but ... Sp. Blunt Weapon = weapon dam + DB + Maximum BD Sp. Slash Weapon = weapon dam + weapon dam + DB Sp. Impail Weapon = weapon dam + Maximum Weapon dam + DB Critical = ignore all armor (execept for parrying armor) or choose location and do regular damage. Modified Parry rules: I use shaft on shaft rules for combat involving things like spears vs spear. So a successful parry reduces the level of attack as opposed to going against the armor points of the parrying weapon. Sp. parry = Parrying weapon takes no damage Cr. parry = Parrying weapon APx2 plus as Sp. parry Note: assuming none of the weapon involved are magical or have Divine magic cast on them. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From AAlanrichards at aol.com Fri Jan 18 03:51:12 2002 From: AAlanrichards at aol.com (AAlanrichards at aol.com) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 11:51:12 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Staves Message-ID: <178.239ab77.29785b00@aol.com> My idea was for the Sorceror to negate D6 damage simply by burning the Staff's POW. On the subject of raising INT. The short answer is it depends. I use a lot of rules from Elric! rather than RQ as such and this allows the raising of INT (with no limit on either that or POW). Bushido had a system where raising skills to a high level raised characteristics, I've always thought that that might work quite nicely in BRP. From AAlanrichards at aol.com Fri Jan 18 03:51:44 2002 From: AAlanrichards at aol.com (AAlanrichards at aol.com) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 11:51:44 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] re: Martial Arts Message-ID: <38.21a1b956.29785b20@aol.com> This has been an interesting discussion and I'd like to chuck in my 0.5 Euro When people talk about Martial Arts they seem to think Western / Occidental = clumsy thumping people with bits of wood / dirty great axes Eastern / Oriental= scientific fighting The truth is a little more complicated There are some wonderful woodcuts at the Tower of London which show moves used by Mediaeval Greatsword users which are every bit as complex and involved as Kenjutsu Pankrathon ('Ultimate Challenge') was a Greek unarmed martial art which is just as intricate as Kempo. The thing is that most western styles did not survive the advent of gunpowder. The forms and patterns were not written down and kept alive. The only western ones we have are Boxing and Fencing. Which seem limited because they are sport forms. If you compare Judo with Jujitsu or Bu Jitsu or even Gami Uchi it is relatively simple to see how a style can be simplified and altered to make it more suitable as a sport / pastime rather than a way of killing people. That was a rather long winded way of saying that I think a 'Martial Artist' should just be a BRP character with training (and high skill) in the Attack, Parry and Dodge/Defence skills appropriate to their Art. I would rather see increased damage for very good skill rolls and/or high skill than adds just for a way of fighting. I think another problem is that when people design PCs and NPCs they link high STR, SIZ with high weapon skills. This seems a bit odd surely characters' creatures with high DEX, AGL, whatever should have the higher skill. Some of the Internal Arts of oriental forms could need new rules but the time taken to learn these to any useful level is such that PCs in the archetypal RPG game is not going to be able to learn and / or study them. Alan From jurrubin at earthlink.net Fri Jan 18 23:23:18 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 06:23:18 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] re: Martial Arts References: <38.21a1b956.29785b20@aol.com> Message-ID: <3C4813B6.ABA71E5E@earthlink.net> AAlanrichards at aol.com wrote: > > This has been an interesting discussion and I'd like to chuck in my 0.5 Euro > > When people talk about Martial Arts they seem to think > > Western / Occidental = clumsy thumping people with bits of wood / dirty great > axes > Eastern / Oriental= scientific fighting > > The truth is a little more complicated > > There are some wonderful woodcuts at the Tower of London which show moves > used by Mediaeval Greatsword users which are every bit as complex and > involved as Kenjutsu > > Pankrathon ('Ultimate Challenge') was a Greek unarmed martial art which is > just as intricate as Kempo. Do you mean "Pankration"? At least that's how I've always heard it. Regardless, it's pretty wicked stuff. If anyone's interested, there's a decent website on it at: http://www.channel1.com/pankration/history/ David From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jan 19 05:19:52 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 02:19:52 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question Message-ID: <20020118181952.41754.qmail@earthlink.net> Has anyone seen the new "Pavis/The Big Rubble" book that's been recently published? (silly question) If so, does it contain all the material of the 1980's publications? Is it strictly for Hero Wars or does it also contain RQ2/RQ3-related material? David -- David Smart From esoteric at teleport.com Sat Jan 19 06:18:37 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:18:37 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question In-Reply-To: <20020118181952.41754.qmail@earthlink.net> References: <20020118181952.41754.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: >Has anyone seen the new "Pavis/The Big Rubble" book that's been >recently published? (silly question) > >If so, does it contain all the material of the 1980's publications? >Is it strictly for Hero Wars or does it also contain RQ2/RQ3-related >material? The reprint http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/products/pavis.htm is a full reprint of Pavis and Big Rubble. It does have some additional new artwork. It is all RQ2, without any RQ3 and without any HW. Or, are you inquiring about the new publications by Tradetalk fanzine? http://Tradetalk.de/ Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Jan 19 06:37:53 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells In-Reply-To: <3C457544.6096EC87@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020118193753.74447.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com> Some time ago we got together on this list and created a number of elemental spirit spells on the power level of Fireblade (shameless plug :) http://www.geocities.com/leonbk/spirit_spells.htm). With all the recent talk of martial arts i realized that the game really lacks any cool spirit magic to enhance unarmed combat. The only spell currently is Ironhand. So I proposed we put our heads together and comeup with some for various styles/schools of MA. I will start us of with a spell that you may wish to use as a guide of the general power level I am thinking. Tiger Claws 4pts, Touch, Temporal, Passive This spell will double the base damage of fist attack. The damage from such attack will be considered as slashing. In addition the spell will increase the persons martial arts (MA) skill by 15% (for fist attack only), if the MA style is based on a feline form. While the spell is in effect the recipients arms appear to be overlaid by translucent image of tiger claws. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jan 19 07:14:48 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 04:14:48 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question Message-ID: <20020118201448.83730.qmail@earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- From: Brad Furst Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:18:37 -0800 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question > >Has anyone seen the new "Pavis/The Big Rubble" book that's been > >recently published? (silly question) > > > >If so, does it contain all the material of the 1980's publications? > >Is it strictly for Hero Wars or does it also contain RQ2/RQ3-related > >material? > > The reprint > http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/products/pavis.htm > is a full reprint of Pavis and Big Rubble. It does have some > additional new artwork. It is all RQ2, without any RQ3 and without > any HW. Excellent! Time to save up my pennies. > Or, are you inquiring about the new publications by Tradetalk fanzine? > http://Tradetalk.de/ What?!? More RQ publications? Arrrgh! I've _got_ to win the Lottery to support my RQ habit. David -- David Smart From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jan 19 07:34:13 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 04:34:13 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells Message-ID: <20020118203413.18575.qmail@earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 11:37:53 -0800 (PST) To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells > Some time ago we got together on this list and created > a number of elemental spirit spells on the power level > of Fireblade (shameless plug :) > http://www.geocities.com/leonbk/spirit_spells.htm). > > With all the recent talk of martial arts i realized > that the game really lacks any cool spirit magic to > enhance unarmed combat. The only spell currently is > Ironhand. > > So I proposed we put our heads together and comeup > with some for various styles/schools of MA. > > I will start us of with a spell that you may wish to > use as a guide of the general power level I am > thinking. > > Tiger Claws > 4pts, Touch, Temporal, Passive > > This spell will double the base damage of fist attack. > The damage from such attack will > be considered as slashing. In addition the spell will > increase the persons martial arts > (MA) skill by 15% (for fist attack only), if the MA > style is based on a feline form. > > While the spell is in effect the recipients arms > appear to be overlaid by translucent > image of tiger claws. How about some "skill spirits" that can teach the basics of the Ki skills from Land of the Ninja? As for spirit spells, I offer the following: MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration 1 round This spell's turns the caster into the fabled "Immovable Object", allowing him to ignore all knockback effects (only) from damage received as well as rush attacks, the famous Shield Push skill, wind (including hurricane force), water flow (including tidal waves), etc. While this spell is in effect, however, the caster must remain in place, unable to move his legs which have become locked to the ground. The caster can still choose to (but not be forced to) twist and bend from the waist up and attack any foe that comes within weapon range. This effectively reduces the caster's Dodge by 75% (to a minimum of 0%)and all weapon attacks by 10%. This is great for those who stand in a doorway or narrow corridor and insist "None Shall Pass." Rip this apart all you want; I just thought of it while reading your email and haven't playtested it. David -- David Smart From talmeta at optonline.net Sat Jan 19 13:42:58 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 21:42:58 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells References: <20020118203413.18575.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3C48DD32.6DED6912@optonline.net> David Smart wrote: > > MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration 1 round > Rip this apart all you want; I just thought of it while reading your email and haven't playtested it. What does the variable do? Increase the duration, perhaps? -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - kinda like a cloud i was up, way up in the sky From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jan 19 14:50:13 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 21:50:13 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells References: <20020118203413.18575.qmail@earthlink.net> <3C48DD32.6DED6912@optonline.net> Message-ID: <3C48ECF5.F4A44C8D@earthlink.net> Tal Meta wrote: > > David Smart wrote: > > > > MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration 1 round > > Rip this apart all you want; I just thought of it while reading your email and haven't playtested it. > > What does the variable do? Increase the duration, perhaps? Arrrgh! That should be "3 points". I was considering making it variable and having each point negate a certain number of damage points/wind/water velocity in terms of knockback (only) but realized that would be a headache to compute during play. Also, that didn't fit the requirements of making the spell on the level of a Fireblade. Sorry about that. I also found a similar spell defined on someone's website while I was surfing some RQ sites this afternoon. Can't remember which site, though. I'm going to hit a number of sites this weekend and start making bookmarks (I use Netscape). If I find it again, I'll post the site URL. David From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Jan 19 17:08:41 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:08:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells In-Reply-To: <3C48ECF5.F4A44C8D@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020119060841.87704.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> Don't worry about making it on par with Fireblade. A variable spell will do nicely, it is the playability and coolness which count! Leon > Arrrgh! That should be "3 points". I was considering > making it variable > and having each point negate a certain number of > damage > points/wind/water velocity in terms of knockback > (only) but realized > that would be a headache to compute during play. > Also, that didn't fit > the requirements of making the spell on the level of > a Fireblade. > > Sorry about that. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From sneadj at mindspring.com Sat Jan 19 20:07:22 2002 From: sneadj at mindspring.com (sneadj at mindspring.com) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:07:22 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells In-Reply-To: <20020118203413.18575.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: On 19 Jan 02, at 4:34, David Smart wrote: > How about some "skill spirits" that can teach the basics of the Ki > skills from Land of the Ninja? Excellent Idea. I remember a 2 point ranged spell that I designed for a RQ game back in the late 80s. It produced a blast of magical force that did 2D6 of knockback, without doing any real damage. Useful, but not overpowering and very wuxiaesque. > As for spirit spells, I offer the following: > > MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration 1 round > This spell's turns the caster into the fabled "Immovable Object", > allowing him to ignore all knockback effects (only) from damage > received as well as rush attacks, the famous Shield Push skill, wind > (including hurricane force), water flow (including tidal waves), etc. > > While this spell is in effect, however, the caster must remain in > place, unable to move his legs which have become locked to the ground. > The caster can still choose to (but not be forced to) twist and bend > from the waist up and attack any foe that comes within weapon range. > This effectively reduces the caster's Dodge by 75% (to a minimum of > 0%)and all weapon attacks by 10%. > > This is great for those who stand in a doorway or narrow corridor and > insist "None Shall Pass." > > Rip this apart all you want; I just thought of it while reading your > email and haven't playtested it. If it's a 3 point spell, then I think it should have the normal 5 minute duration. 1 round of immobility and holding a passage is notably less good than being able to hold it throughout the battle, also the spell has enough negative aspects that I don't see any possible reason not to give it the longer duration. -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com From jerrym at lanset.com Sat Jan 19 20:49:33 2002 From: jerrym at lanset.com (jerrym) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 01:49:33 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? Message-ID: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> Well, for starters a.. I use RQIII, since i've no experience with RQII and therefore no negative bias against these rules. b.. didn't someone come up with a dnd magic conversion? dnd spell levels, I think I remember seeing something on a website....I should get a copy it might work c.. I was thinking...greater helm would convert a jammers POW/3 into SR, while a leser helm wuold convert POW/5 into SR...using a LTMU rule (Long Term Magic Use ) basically....no MP recovery while using a helm, use 1 MP for a greater helm, 2MP for lesser (jammers own MP only) per hour so in 24 (or 12) hours the jammer is 'out of power' and must rest using normal recovery rules. d.. open portal can be devine (cult of ptah) or sorcery spell, increasing intensity creates larger opening allowing a larger ship to pass.... by using RQ over DND, there will be a shift, down in power level, and away from the 'if your not a multiclass mage or cleric something' your screwed nature of the usual spelljammer campaign. hmmm, then their is the Arcane....what to do with blue giants? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 20 00:08:30 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 07:08:30 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells References: Message-ID: <3C496FCE.5685A8C2@earthlink.net> sneadj at mindspring.com wrote: > > If it's a 3 point spell, then I think it should have the normal 5 minute > duration. 1 round of immobility and holding a passage is notably > less good than being able to hold it throughout the battle, also the > spell has enough negative aspects that I don't see any possible > reason not to give it the longer duration. > > -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com Hmmm..five minutes is an awfully long time to not be able to move in combat. The spell, as initially submitted, doesn't give the caster a choice. This would really limit its usefulness. Since Leon doesn't mind it being variable (thank you!), let's keep the variableness of the spell and go with Tal's idea. How about.... ----------- MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration variable This spell's turns the caster into the fabled "Immovable Object", allowing him to ignore all knockback effects (only) from damage received as well as rush attacks, the famous Shield Push skill, wind (including hurricane force), water flow (including tidal waves), etc. Every magic point used when casting increases the spell's duration by one combat round. ----------- The one line added at Tal's suggestion would allow a player to stand against the odds (bad pun) while having some say in what s/he does when the "irresistable force" really _is_ a tidal wave. After all, the spell protects only against knockback effects. An avalanche of granite boulders will still crush the caster; s/he'll be smashed flat in an upright position then fall apart when the spell ends (ewwwww!) I could have just said "1 MP, 1 round duration" but keeping the variableness forces the caster to think about what s/he's doing. The player may realize too late s/he put a bit too much duration into the spell but, as a GM, I don't have a problem with players dying by their own hand. Naturally, the spell can be Dispelled/Dismissed by the caster or a nearby friend..if there is time to do so. And so could an enemy. Thoughts? David From steve at perrinworlds.com Sun Jan 20 08:25:02 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 13:25:02 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? References: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> Message-ID: <001901c1a12f$c2af7ca0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Anyone interested in this might want to look at the Dragonstar rules just out from Fantasy Flight Games. I haven't read them except cursorily myself, but it might be an inspiration. Steve Perrin, who sells the game but hasn't played it, yet. ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 1:49 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? Well, for starters a.. I use RQIII, since i've no experience with RQII and therefore no negative bias against these rules. b.. didn't someone come up with a dnd magic conversion? dnd spell levels, I think I remember seeing something on a website....I should get a copy it might work c.. I was thinking...greater helm would convert a jammers POW/3 into SR, while a leser helm wuold convert POW/5 into SR...using a LTMU rule (Long Term Magic Use ) basically....no MP recovery while using a helm, use 1 MP for a greater helm, 2MP for lesser (jammers own MP only) per hour so in 24 (or 12) hours the jammer is 'out of power' and must rest using normal recovery rules. d.. open portal can be devine (cult of ptah) or sorcery spell, increasing intensity creates larger opening allowing a larger ship to pass.... by using RQ over DND, there will be a shift, down in power level, and away from the 'if your not a multiclass mage or cleric something' your screwed nature of the usual spelljammer campaign. hmmm, then their is the Arcane....what to do with blue giants? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 20 10:05:17 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:05:17 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? References: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> <001901c1a12f$c2af7ca0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> Message-ID: <3C49FBAD.CD9D0344@earthlink.net> This discussion has triggered some random thoughts in me (ouch) leading to some curiosity and a question for the list. On average, how many bound POW spirits do the PCs you've run or encountered had? The reason why I'm asking is I've always thought my PCs were rather low on the Runelord scale but after reading a number of adventure on the Web, they seem to be almost munchkin-like. I've one Land of the Ninja character who seems to be a serious threat to most "Published" Runelords and he's only a sorceror. Makes me wonder if I really messed up all these years as an RQ GM. David From wmolendyk at yahoo.com Sun Jan 20 10:37:26 2002 From: wmolendyk at yahoo.com (William Molendyk) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 15:37:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RUNEJAMMER!!!! In-Reply-To: <20020118203102.A3E4F4BD44@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <20020119233727.62789.qmail@web20606.mail.yahoo.com> I haven't looked at my Spelljammer rules in over four years. From what I remember of them conversion should not be to difficult. Here's some quick thoughts on the subject. Unlike D&D, everyone can cast spells in Runequest. This means that anyone can man the helm of a spelljamming ship. The simplest way to convert the spelljamming helms would be to give ships with a major helm a spelljammer rating of the helmsmans current MPs/2. Minor helms spelljammer rating would be current MPs/3. After eight hours at the helm reduce the spelljammer rating by one for each additional hour at the helm. Once a character is seated at a helm they cannot use their own magic points for the rest of the day. They may not cast magic using stored MPs or recieve the benefits of magic cast by others while seated at the helm. It is up to the GM to decide if the helmsman is immune to damaging spells cast at them while seated. Personally, I think they should be immune to spells that target them specifically. Once a character leaves the helm they may not resume helmsman duties and they are unable to cast spells from their own MP for the rest of the day (say, for example, 16 hours). Stored power may be used normally. Hope this helps spark some ideas, Bill __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From talmeta at optonline.net Sun Jan 20 11:18:39 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 19:18:39 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? References: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> <001901c1a12f$c2af7ca0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <3C49FBAD.CD9D0344@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3C4A0CDF.5292DB5F@optonline.net> David Smart wrote: > > The reason why I'm asking is I've always thought my PCs > were rather low on the Runelord scale but after reading > a number of adventure on the Web, they seem to be almost > munchkin-like. I suppose it depends; alot of Glorantha-purists I've seen on the web run fairly low-level campaigns, while others run fairly high-end. I figure that my own campaigns have been fairly high-end, with loads of DI magic intensive battles. In the campaign prior to my Greyhawk outing, between the sorcerer, the elf priest, and the gashta shaman, there were easily twice as many bound spirits as there were PCs (and the characters I mentioned were slightly less than half the party). -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - The gent who wakes up and finds himself a success hasn't been asleep. From sneadj at mindspring.com Sun Jan 20 13:48:44 2002 From: sneadj at mindspring.com (sneadj at mindspring.com) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 18:48:44 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? In-Reply-To: <3C4A0CDF.5292DB5F@optonline.net> Message-ID: On 19 Jan 02, at 19:18, Tal Meta wrote: > David Smart wrote: > > > > The reason why I'm asking is I've always thought my PCs > > were rather low on the Runelord scale but after reading > > a number of adventure on the Web, they seem to be almost > > munchkin-like. > > I suppose it depends; alot of Glorantha-purists I've seen on the web > run fairly low-level campaigns, while others run fairly high-end. I > figure that my own campaigns have been fairly high-end, with loads of > DI magic intensive battles. In the campaign prior to my Greyhawk > outing, between the sorcerer, the elf priest, and the gashta shaman, > there were easily twice as many bound spirits as there were PCs (and > the characters I mentioned were slightly less than half the party). Back when we played RQ regularly, almost every PC had one bound Power spirit, and several characters had 3 or 4 bound spirits, and none of them were Rune Lords or full priests. -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sun Jan 20 23:42:13 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 06:42:13 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? References: Message-ID: <3C4ABB25.19A9A4BF@earthlink.net> Thank you, Tal and John, for your comments; I don't feel so bad now. David From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 21 05:00:37 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 10:00:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound spirits was RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? In-Reply-To: <3C4ABB25.19A9A4BF@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020120180037.78865.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > Thank you, Tal and John, for your comments; I don't > feel so > bad now. > > David I use a rule that a person may have a number of things (spirits, elementals, etc) bound equal to 1/2 his Char (yes I still use it as well as App). and Shamans may have their full Char of bound things. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From jurrubin at earthlink.net Mon Jan 21 08:12:45 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:12:45 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound spirits was RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? References: <20020120180037.78865.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4B32CD.A17AAE97@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > --- David Smart wrote: > > Thank you, Tal and John, for your comments; I don't > > feel so > > bad now. > > > > David > > I use a rule that a person may have a number of things > (spirits, elementals, etc) bound equal to 1/2 his Char > (yes I still use it as well as App). and Shamans may > have their full Char of bound things. Oh, I _like_ that! Simple yet effective, just like RQ. ;) Thank you; this just became a standard home rule for me. David From sneadj at mindspring.com Mon Jan 21 11:54:46 2002 From: sneadj at mindspring.com (sneadj at mindspring.com) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 16:54:46 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound spirits was RuneJammer / SpellQuest ? In-Reply-To: <3C4B32CD.A17AAE97@earthlink.net> Message-ID: On 20 Jan 02, at 15:12, David Smart wrote: > > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > > I use a rule that a person may have a number of things > > (spirits, elementals, etc) bound equal to 1/2 his Char > > (yes I still use it as well as App). and Shamans may > > have their full Char of bound things. > > Oh, I _like_ that! Simple yet effective, just like RQ. ;) > > Thank you; this just became a standard home rule for me. I like it too, but if you are using APP instead of CHA, I'd instead may it POW/2 for most folk and POW for shamans. -John Snead sneadj at mindspring.com From vhaag at rim.net Tue Jan 22 09:25:14 2002 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:25:14 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question In-Reply-To: <20020118201448.83730.qmail@earthlink.net> References: <20020118201448.83730.qmail@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <15436.38218.559396.541846@wolfe.rim.net> David Smart writes: > > The reprint > > http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/products/pavis.htm > > is a full reprint of Pavis and Big Rubble. It does have some > > additional new artwork. It is all RQ2, without any RQ3 and without > > any HW. > > Excellent! Time to save up my pennies. The same people that did that reprint (Rick Meints and MoonDesign Productions) also have done a reprint of the original Griffin Mountain, which includes (I believe) some material from the Griffin Island boxed set, and does *not* include the fold out map from the original GM. Rick also said that he was intending to release reprints of the RQ2 'Cults' books (Cults of Pavis, Cults of Terror, and RuneLords, I think), and 'Borderlands' (in that order, I believe). Rick can confirm or deny these details as my memory is rather hazy. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "I put all the socially redeeming stuff in one speech at the end, so the audience knows when that comes on, it's safe to leave." From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 09:58:12 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 06:58:12 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question Message-ID: <20020121225812.17050.qmail@earthlink.net> -----Original Message----- From: Viktor Haag Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:25:14 -0500 To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] New Publications Question > > The same people that did that reprint (Rick Meints and MoonDesign > Productions) also have done a reprint of the original Griffin > Mountain, which includes (I believe) some material from the > Griffin Island boxed set, and does *not* include the fold out map > from the original GM. > > Rick also said that he was intending to release reprints of the > RQ2 'Cults' books (Cults of Pavis, Cults of Terror, and > RuneLords, I think), and 'Borderlands' (in that order, I > believe). > > Rick can confirm or deny these details as my memory is rather hazy. Thanks, Viktor. I've found that all the copies of Pavis/Big Rubble are sold out. By the time I can save enough for the hardback version, that'll be sold out as well. *sigh* Tanjit! David -- David Smart From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 11:27:53 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:27:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells In-Reply-To: <3C496FCE.5685A8C2@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020122002753.27325.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > sneadj at mindspring.com wrote: > ----------- > MOUNTAIN STANCE variable, self only, duration > variable > This spell's turns the caster into the fabled > "Immovable Object", > allowing him to ignore all knockback effects (only) > from damage > received as well as rush attacks, the famous Shield > Push skill, wind > (including hurricane force), water flow (including > tidal waves), etc. > > Every magic point used when casting increases the > spell's duration by one combat round. > ----------- This would be a cool special spell for the Pillar of Heaven school. Here is another I came up with for the Silver Shadow style: Shadow Slip 4pts, Self, Temporal, Passive The spell envelops the caster in a cloak like shadow this grants the caster +25% to his chance to hit as well as decreases his target's parry or dodge by -25%. As a side effect the casters Hide will also be enhanced by 25% in a shadow filled enviroment. In addition the spell will increase the persons martial arts (MA) skill by 15%, if the MA style is based on a stealth skills. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 11:59:24 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:59:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Martial Arts Spirit Spells In-Reply-To: <20020122002753.27325.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020122005924.63158.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> > Shadow Slip > 4pts, Self, Temporal, Passive > The spell envelops the caster in a cloak like shadow > this grants the > caster +25% to his chance to hit as well as > decreases > his target's > parry or dodge by -25%. Lets change that to: The spell envelops the caster in a cloak like shadow. This gives -25% to the casters chance of being hit as well as decreases a person's defence (parry or dodge)by -25% versus attacks from the caster. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From esoteric at teleport.com Tue Jan 22 12:36:46 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 17:36:46 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <3C49FBAD.CD9D0344@earthlink.net> References: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> <001901c1a12f$c2af7ca0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <3C49FBAD.CD9D0344@earthlink.net> Message-ID: >On average, how many bound POW spirits do the PCs you've >run or encountered had? Yesterday's game session, the veteran shaman (he survived the Cradle Adventure in the past) used 88 magic points which nearly exhausted him. That character is exceptional. The other party members have zero or one or two POW spirits (IIRC only the healer has 2). Those without POW spirits each have a bound magic spirit instead. In Thursday's campaign (rookies in the Borderlands scenarios), characters have zero or one POW spirit. In the retired campaign (where all retired but the shaman mentioned above), characters had a few bound spirits, achieving totals similar to the shaman. Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 15:34:32 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 22:34:32 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <000c01c1a0ce$99649ee0$ea4c5142@alf> <001901c1a12f$c2af7ca0$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> <3C49FBAD.CD9D0344@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3C4CEBD8.60E64B60@earthlink.net> Brad Furst wrote: > > >On average, how many bound POW spirits do the PCs you've > >run or encountered had? > > Yesterday's game session, the veteran shaman (he survived the Cradle > Adventure in the past) used 88 magic points which nearly exhausted > him. That character is exceptional. The other party members have > zero or one or two POW spirits (IIRC only the healer has 2). Those > without POW spirits each have a bound magic spirit instead. > > In Thursday's campaign (rookies in the Borderlands scenarios), > characters have zero or one POW spirit. > > In the retired campaign (where all retired but the shaman mentioned > above), characters had a few bound spirits, achieving totals similar > to the shaman. Oh. Then I guess a PC with 16 POW spirits giving him 356 MPs would be a bit much, huh? The player got them in 14 years (realtime) of play and most of them were from the AH adventures. I gotta admit it was fun seeing just how much I could throw at him while he was running solo. Actually this leads me to ask a question. There have been published examples of a patch of tattooed skin with a spell matrix on it being usable by others. My question is: will a Binding Enchantment that is a tatoo/scar pattern keep bound a spirit when the person having the pattern in their skin dies or is the spirit automatically released? I've always assumed decay will eventually destroy the enchantment but can the spirit be "recovered" by intentionally damaging the pattern immediately after death while casting a Dominate/Control spell? Thoughts please? David From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 15:51:10 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:51:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <3C4CEBD8.60E64B60@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020122045110.26293.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > Actually this leads me to ask a question. There have > been > published examples of a patch of tattooed skin with > a spell > matrix on it being usable by others. My question is: > will a > Binding Enchantment that is a tatoo/scar pattern > keep bound > a spirit when the person having the pattern in their > skin > dies or is the spirit automatically released? As a house rule we have always played that then a character dies all his spirits are released. So, adventurers may find binding matrixies, but they have to fill them themselves. This way most of the time the matrixies are used as portabale cash as well as for binding spirits. Or, you could use the rule from the Elric game which says that when you pickup an item with a bound spirit/demon in it, it immedeatly fights you in spirit comabat for control. You basicly need to rebind them right there and then. 1/2 Char (or Pow if you wish) nice lid on things. ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 16:06:29 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:06:29 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <20020122045110.26293.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4CF355.A1B7A949@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > As a house rule we have always played that then a > character dies all his spirits are released. So, > adventurers may find binding matrixies, but they have > to fill them themselves. This way most of the time > the matrixies are used as portabale cash as well as > for binding spirits. > > Or, you could use the rule from the Elric game which > says that when you pickup an item with a bound > spirit/demon in it, it immedeatly fights you in spirit > comabat for control. You basicly need to rebind them > right there and then. > > 1/2 Char (or Pow if you wish) nice lid on things. Yeah, you're right. Wish I'd thought of that back in the 80's. > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." Ain't that the truth? ;) David From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 16:55:29 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 21:55:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <3C4CF355.A1B7A949@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020122055529.51593.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> > Yeah, you're right. Wish I'd thought of that back in > the 80's. It is never too late. We also use a rule that if a bound spirit is ever reduced to 0mp it is released. It doesn't seem like much but you would be suprised how often that happens. Besides, have you tried puting these character against someone who has a magic spirit with a Control Pow Spirit spell? Nothing scares characters more than when they start lossing their spirits in the midle of combat :::))) Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr Tue Jan 22 17:15:16 2002 From: s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr (St=?ISO-8859-1?B?6Q==?=phane FRANCOIS) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:15:16 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <20020122045110.26293.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > Actually this leads me to ask a question. There have > been > published examples of a patch of tattooed skin with > a spell > matrix on it being usable by others. My question is: > will a > Binding Enchantment that is a tatoo/scar pattern > keep bound > a spirit when the person having the pattern in their > skin > dies or is the spirit automatically released? If the spirit matrix itself (enchanted tatoo/scar) is not damaged by death, then the entity in it should stay trapped until something frees it, either natural decay, intentional destruction or deliberate release after a control, to put it into your own storage. From s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr Tue Jan 22 17:19:20 2002 From: s.francois2 at wanadoo.fr (St=?ISO-8859-1?B?6Q==?=phane FRANCOIS) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:19:20 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <20020122055529.51593.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > It is never too late. We also use a rule that if a > bound spirit is ever reduced to 0mp it is released. > It doesn't seem like much but you would be suprised > how often that happens. If the spirit is outside of his matrix at the time maybe, but if it's still inside (like a POW spirit "emptied") ? > Besides, have you tried puting these character against > someone who has a magic spirit with a Control Pow > Spirit spell? Nothing scares characters more than > when they start lossing their spirits in the midle of > combat :::))) If the holding matrix has a condition for use, does this condition has an effect on "external" attemps control ? From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 23:28:21 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 06:28:21 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <20020122055529.51593.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4D5AE5.EADDF8EC@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > Yeah, you're right. Wish I'd thought of that back in > > the 80's. > > It is never too late. We also use a rule that if a > bound spirit is ever reduced to 0mp it is released. > It doesn't seem like much but you would be suprised > how often that happens. Good point! That did happen quite a bit. > Besides, have you tried puting these character against > someone who has a magic spirit with a Control Pow > Spirit spell? Nothing scares characters more than > when they start lossing their spirits in the midle of > combat :::))) I was successful with that against some players but William really learned the rules well. He always made his own binding enchantments and was very good about maximizing enchantment condition effects while minimizing POW loss. Not that he strung a bunch of "ands" in the condition but his bound POW spirits were usable only by him and his bound spirits while his INT spirits were usable only by him. I have to admit he really taught me how the rules could be used to power up a character without "twisting" the rules. But then he bought one of the first copies of RQI to hit Dallas and had been thinking about the rules since that day. David From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 23:35:36 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 06:35:36 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: Message-ID: <3C4D5C98.5BCEA586@earthlink.net> St?phane FRANCOIS wrote: > > > Actually this leads me to ask a question. There have > > been > > published examples of a patch of tattooed skin with > > a spell > > matrix on it being usable by others. My question is: > > will a > > Binding Enchantment that is a tatoo/scar pattern > > keep bound > > a spirit when the person having the pattern in their > > skin > > dies or is the spirit automatically released? > > If the spirit matrix itself (enchanted tatoo/scar) is not damaged by death, > then the entity in it should stay trapped until something frees it, either > natural decay, intentional destruction or deliberate release after a > control, to put it into your own storage. Bonjour! Merci de votre commentaire. This was the same ruling I made so many years ago. It worked rather well under most circumstances and forced the players to look around frantically for a Resurrection spell on more than one occasion. David From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 23:43:14 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 06:43:14 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <3928D516.CE458A10@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C4D5E62.CD552CF3@earthlink.net> Jeremy Martin wrote: > > And the sorcerer with all the wraiths mentioned earlier? Could you imagine the > havoc if he was killed by a Sunspear or similar spell? I would count that as > destroying most of the tattooes, which would mean a whole swarm of wraiths... Yeah, it was hilarious the one time the sorceror went unconscious from wounds. Two players who didn't know about my ruling on "body-bound" spirits turned and ran for the horizon when they saw him drop. The rest of the players died laughing while I explained to the two why they didn't have to worry. David From jurrubin at earthlink.net Tue Jan 22 23:51:32 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 06:51:32 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Jeremy Martin's Emails References: <3928D9BB.9FCE6F05@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <3C4D6054.284C1074@earthlink.net> By the way, Jeremy, your two posts came across with the following heading. > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? > Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 14:54:51 +0800 > From: Jeremy Martin > Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Look at the "Date:" above. For some reason, either your ISP's mail server or your own PC is posting a date of May 2000 on your emails. This causes them to sort at the bottom of most people's email inbox. If you've experienced people not answering your emails recently, this may be a reason. (Yes, I do LAN-based software support at work. ;) ) David From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 23 00:17:17 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 05:17:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020122131717.53639.qmail@web14501.mail.yahoo.com> --- St?phane FRANCOIS wrote: > > It is never too late. We also use a rule that if > a > > bound spirit is ever reduced to 0mp it is > released. > > It doesn't seem like much but you would be > suprised > > how often that happens. > > If the spirit is outside of his matrix at the time > maybe, but if it's still > inside (like a POW spirit "emptied") ? The ruling is that there is nothing to hold on to and so the spirit just 'drifts' away. > > > Besides, have you tried puting these character > against > > someone who has a magic spirit with a Control Pow > > Spirit spell? Nothing scares characters more than > > when they start lossing their spirits in the midle > of > > combat :::))) > > If the holding matrix has a condition for use, does > this condition has an > effect on "external" attemps control ? The "external" attempt is not a an really an attempt to control but rather an attempt to interfere with the binding and thus does not trigger the conditions. Remeber it is always easier to brake then to make. LEon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 23 00:32:06 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 05:32:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <3C4D5AE5.EADDF8EC@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20020122133206.18458.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > I was successful with that against some players but > William really learned the rules well. He always > made his own binding enchantments and was very > good about maximizing enchantment condition effects > while minimizing POW loss. Not that he strung a > bunch of "ands" in the condition but his bound POW > spirits were usable only by him and his bound > spirits > while his INT spirits were usable only by him. Tree points here: 1. If the character is using this much power on spirits, then he is not using it to sacrifice for Divine Magic or other enchantments. If he is, then you are doing something wrong. :) 2. The power spirits are bound to the character and thus should not be useable by his bound magic spirits since they can not touch the binding matrix. We use the same rule even for allied spirits (but not animal familiars). These can have attuned crystals instead which in turn makes crystals much more valuable. 3. As I stated in another post an attempt to release should not triger conditions for using "breaking <> useing". > I have to admit he really taught me how the rules > could > be used to power up a character without "twisting" > the rules. God, I hate rule lawers :( They should all face a firing squad of Zorak Zorani armed with heavy X-bows with Seal Wound on the bolts. > But then he bought one of the first copies of > RQI to hit Dallas and had been thinking about the > rules since that day. He must really have no real life. :) Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Wed Jan 23 03:20:50 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 00:20:50 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <20020122133206.18458.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4D9162.39746858@libra.seed.net.tw> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- David Smart wrote: > > I was successful with that against some players but > > William really learned the rules well. He always > > made his own binding enchantments and was very > > good about maximizing enchantment condition effects > > while minimizing POW loss. Not that he strung a > > bunch of "ands" in the condition but his bound POW > > spirits were usable only by him and his bound > > spirits > > while his INT spirits were usable only by him. > > Tree points here: > > 1. If the character is using this much power on > spirits, then he is not using it to sacrifice for > Divine Magic or other enchantments. If he is, then you > are doing something wrong. :) Exactly. He said the guy had played the character for something like 4 years, real time. This doesn't seem impossible if that's all the guy is working on... > > 2. The power spirits are bound to the character and > thus should not be useable by his bound magic spirits > since they can not touch the binding matrix. We use > the same rule even for allied spirits (but not animal > familiars). These can have attuned crystals instead > which in turn makes crystals much more valuable. I've always played crystals have to be in contact as well. > > > 3. As I stated in another post an attempt to release > should not triger conditions for using "breaking <> > useing". Are you sure? RQ3, p57, says "Also, a contol spell supersedes the innate control held over a creature bound into an item. An enchanter who does not use conditions to restrict the use of his items may find his Bond creatures stolen from him or used against him by crafty opponents..." To me this sounds like user restrictions could protect his bound creatures. Jeremy From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 23 04:28:08 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 09:28:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? In-Reply-To: <3C4D9162.39746858@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: <20020122172808.3350.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeremy Martin wrote: > > 3. As I stated in another post an attempt to > release > > should not triger conditions for using "breaking > <> useing". > > Are you sure? RQ3, p57, says "Also, a contol spell > supersedes the > innate control held over a creature bound into an > item. An enchanter > who does not use conditions to restrict the use of > his items may find > his Bond creatures stolen from him or used against > him by crafty > opponents..." To me this sounds like user > restrictions could protect > his bound creatures. All this says to me is that if you do not have a condition on the matrix then anyone can take it and use it. Releasing a spirit <> using it. The trick as I see it is to being able to target the spirit and effecting it with the proper spell (based on the spirit type). I also give a bonus to the spirits pow for defense egual to the POw used in creating the matrix. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From mcarthur at dstc.edu.au Wed Jan 23 10:29:06 2002 From: mcarthur at dstc.edu.au (Robert McArthur) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:29:06 +1000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <20020122172808.3350.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4DF5C2.186F1051@dstc.edu.au> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > Are you sure? RQ3, p57, says "Also, a contol spell > > supersedes the > > innate control held over a creature bound into an > > item. An enchanter > > who does not use conditions to restrict the use of > > his items may find > > his Bond creatures stolen from him or used against > > him by crafty > > opponents..." To me this sounds like user > > restrictions could protect > > his bound creatures. > > All this says to me is that if you do not have a > condition on the matrix then anyone can take it and > use it. Releasing a spirit <> using it. The trick as > I see it is to being able to target the spirit and > effecting it with the proper spell (based on the > spirit type). I also give a bonus to the spirits pow > for defense egual to the POw used in creating the > matrix. Hmm, I'd play it that the conditions DO come into play when attempting anything to do with that creature. However, I would certainly say that a struggle ensued which took the creatures attention away from whatever it was supposed to be doing (like supporting the character). I'd rule it wouldn't otherwise effect the character (the conditions "protect" the character - that's part of what they're for) or the creature (unless the conditions allowed it to). Of course the creature may be "screaming" to the character to help it - it may well be afraid even though it can't be hurt. This may well unbalance the character's concentration :-) Cheers Robert From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jan 23 15:14:22 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 22:14:22 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] how many bound POW spirits? References: <20020122133206.18458.qmail@web14502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4E389E.9349C607@earthlink.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > 2. The power spirits are bound to the character and > thus should not be useable by his bound magic spirits > since they can not touch the binding matrix. We use > the same rule even for allied spirits (but not animal > familiars). These can have attuned crystals instead > which in turn makes crystals much more valuable. Unfortunately, some published material have examples that support the use of bound power spirits by bound magic spirits. As for rules lawyers, I don't mind them at all. I just said "prove it" and gave them 3 minutes to do so. If they did't show me in that time, I stick to my ruling. If they did, then I learned the rules better and became a better GM. ;) David From jerrym at lanset.com Wed Jan 23 18:33:27 2002 From: jerrym at lanset.com (jerrym) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 23:33:27 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Message-ID: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? and are there current games going on? Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... ....hmmmmm. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From steve at perrinworlds.com Wed Jan 23 20:59:11 2002 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 01:59:11 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: <001a01c1a3f4$9c4ca160$6401a8c0@surfcity.net> My most recent campaign stopped about two years ago. It had one player playing some Gloranthan trolls, but the rest of the party were from other RuneQuest (and some other games) worlds. At some point you'll be able to see a writeup of the world as a Quest Rules world. Steve Perrin www.perrinworlds.com/SPQR.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 11:33 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? and are there current games going on? Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... ....hmmmmm. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From ericla at ultranet.com Wed Jan 23 21:13:49 2002 From: ericla at ultranet.com (Eric Leventhal Arthen) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 05:13:49 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? In-Reply-To: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20020123050932.00a094b0@pop.ma.ultranet.com> At 02:33 AM 1/23/02, you wrote: >Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? >and are there current games going on? > >Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they >all seem years old... I and a friend do run an RQ3 campaign with around regular ten players in a pair of worlds not at all like Glorantha. Of course, if we wrote it up for the web, we would have a lot less time to actually play it. This campaign and its direct predecessors have been going on (with RQ 3 or 2) for almost 20 years now, Earth time. (Those years can sneak up on you...) Eric ------ Eric Leventhal Arthen ericla at ultranet.com From kruch7 at cox.net Thu Jan 24 00:40:23 2002 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:40:23 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: <00c301c1a413$825c3760$8cfbfea9@hr.cox.net> Well I know tal mete runs his in Greyhawk, and I have done the same using his source material. Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comic Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil then you ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:33 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? and are there current games going on? Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... ....hmmmmm. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From talmeta at optonline.net Thu Jan 24 00:54:16 2002 From: talmeta at optonline.net (Tal Meta) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:54:16 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: <3C4EC088.8B2992FB@optonline.net> jerrym wrote: > > Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? > and are there current games going on? > Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... > Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... I ran a year+ long campaign set on the World of Greyhawk (ala AD&D), but that ended last year. -- talmeta at optonline.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - i am the hate you try to hide From phlnje at ARTS-01.NOVELL.LEEDS.AC.UK Thu Jan 24 00:57:05 2002 From: phlnje at ARTS-01.NOVELL.LEEDS.AC.UK (N.J. Effingham) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:57:05 -0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Bound spirits In-Reply-To: <20020122125203.4783D4BD3D@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3C4EC130.25791.197800B@localhost> After playing for five years real time, my characters have a lot of magic items, not just power spirits. On of the PCs can draw upon just over 200 magic points (and, amazingly, still runs out on a regular basis). Other characters have far less, one has just over 100 magic points, most characters have something like 40 (which means about three or four spirits each). The problem, I found, was a trickle down effect. You kill the baddy, nick his gear, so the next baddy has to have a similar amount of gear to possibly beat you, and so on. If I was to run my game from the beginning, all over again, I would say that people routinely use conditional enchantments (basically so that they don't get mugged for their stuff). I never liked the POW/2 or CHA/2 thing, it capped the power of the characters too low. The biggest problem with lots of power spirits is lots of healing magic, it makes combats last a long, long time. Nikk __________________________________ Nikk Effingham Work E-mail address: phlnje at leeds.ac.uk Permanent E-mail address: nikk at MailAndNews.com URL: http://www.crashbox.com/nikk/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 01:25:04 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 06:25:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? In-Reply-To: <3C4EC088.8B2992FB@optonline.net> Message-ID: <20020123142504.76441.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> > jerrym wrote: > > > > Does anybody run RQ in something other than > Glorantha? > > and are there current games going on? > > Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is > glorantha based, and they all seem years old... > > Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out > there.... > > I ran a year+ long campaign set on the World of > Greyhawk (ala AD&D), but > that ended last year. I have several campaings I am running, most of them jump from world to world at some point usually with Glorantha as the point of origin. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From MurfNMurf at aol.com Thu Jan 24 03:18:41 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:18:41 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Message-ID: <12a.b0cfd21.29803c61@aol.com> In a message dated 1/23/02 1:27:30 AM Central Standard Time, jerrym wonders: > Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? > and are there current games going on? > Oh, don't let the Gloranthan sites fool you. AFAIK, there are plenty of us non-Gloranthans lurking about (whether or not we have stuff on a webpage). I've been running an Alternate Earth game for about 15yrs or so set mostly in Celtic Ireland; though adventures in the rest of the world happen as well. With the group I've currently been gaming with, we've played a RQ campaign similar to Pournelle's Jannisaries. Another was a RQ/CoC mix used to play Highlander. In addition, our group's primary RQ GM uses a non-Gloranthan setting of her own devising (though a few Gloranthan things, like Broos and Disease Spirits _are_ present.Uugh!). -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Jan 24 03:54:39 2002 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O. Mellinger) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:54:39 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? In-Reply-To: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: >Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? >and are there current games going on? I rarely run in glorantha. >Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and >they all seem years old... > >Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... > >....hmmmmm. I typically run in Harn or in my own world. I've run games using many maps/worlds. I'll take pretty much any map and run a game on it. -Andrew -- /*----------------------------------------------------------------- mailto:andrew at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com -----------------------------------------------------------------*/ From AAlanrichards at aol.com Thu Jan 24 04:13:48 2002 From: AAlanrichards at aol.com (AAlanrichards at aol.com) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:13:48 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Writing one email to really annoyt everyone Message-ID: I've admitted it in the heading so no whinging please 1. Limits to bound spirits I've used the 1/2 CHA rule for decades It was only when the idea was posted here that I realised it was from Stormbringer not RQ! It works beautifully. I would say definitely not 1/2 POW though. POW is stupidly powerful (unintentional) as it is. Shaman's use full CHA to represent their Fetch if you based on POW sneaky players (and GMs) would say use Shaman POW + Fetch POW. Fuck off quite frankly. Rules Lawyers Its my game. Argue a point of logic / sensible simulation of the real world fine. Quote page number and rule revision and I'm going to ignore you I'm afraid Game Worlds My longest running Champaign is based in Legend a world which came with a very old defunct RPG called Dragon Warriors. I haven't posted anything on it because a) I'm too lazy b) Its not mine to put into the public domain Similarly games I've set in Middle Earth or other worlds would really just be a boring list of rules / guidelines plus suggestions of where to read for the real flavour. From ekjim at earthlink.net Thu Jan 24 04:09:26 2002 From: ekjim at earthlink.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:09:26 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> Message-ID: <008a01c1a431$736a8cc0$a441d03f@frkt5> I use hybrid RQ3/SPQR rules to run a PBEM campaign in the Young Kingdoms. I'm considering switching to Glorantha, however. In the YK, magic = Chaos = evil/loony. When the "bad" guys get to choose from the largest pool of spells, role playing becomes pretty limited. ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 1:33 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? and are there current games going on? Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... ....hmmmmm. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From esoteric at teleport.com Thu Jan 24 04:58:42 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:58:42 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dispel Magic Message-ID: Remind me, if you please (my rule books are not handy), can a single casting of Dispel Magic (or Dismiss Magic or Neutralize Magic) negate more than one spell at a time? Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 06:35:05 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:35:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dispel Magic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brad Furst wrote: > Remind me, if you please (my rule books are not > handy), can a single > casting of Dispel Magic (or Dismiss Magic or > Neutralize Magic) negate > more than one spell at a time? As a house rule we played it, what it depends on how the character phrased it. So you would hear things like "I attempt to Neutralize things that protecting him from damage." Since people are never really sure as to which spell is being used to actaully protect. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ From peter at maranci.net Thu Jan 24 12:51:45 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 20:51:45 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: other worlds? In-Reply-To: <20020123163502.AF1824BD44@thinbits.com> References: <20020123163502.AF1824BD44@thinbits.com> Message-ID: *"jerrym" wrote: >Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? Yes, often. Well, when I was able to play at all. The sneering of the new Gloranthan elite rather put me off of that world, actually. And it turned out that the system worked amazingly well for all sorts of settings and even genres. >and are there current games going on? I'm sure there are, and if you're in the southeastern Massachusetts/Rhode Island area of the United States I'd be glad to set one up - assuming we can find at least a couple more players. Fortunately I have some possible leads, at long last! >Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they = >all seem years old... What search engine(s) did you use? My site's last update was today, and I update it quite frequently. Although some of my scenarios are set in Glorantha, most of it is aimed at working with any fantasy setting. It's at http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm . Perhaps I should be selfish and mention that as far as I know mine's the only RuneQuest site listed on EffieRover's Top 50, and your "5" vote (top score) would be very helpful and much appreciated! There's a vote-link on my main page. On an unrelated note, I haven't given up on the RuneQuest pamphlet project, I just have had my life consumed by my four-month-old. If APP equals cuteness, he's a 21. :) ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm From esoteric at teleport.com Thu Jan 24 12:59:31 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:59:31 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dispel Magic In-Reply-To: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >--- Brad Furst wrote: >> Remind me, if you please (my rule books are not >> handy), can a single > > casting of Dispel Magic (or Dismiss Magic or >> Neutralize Magic) negate >> more than one spell at a time? Let's hypothesize that I have Bladesharp 2 on my weapon and Coordination 2 & Protection 3 & Spirit Screen 4 on me. Under what circumstances and phrasing would more than one of these be negated? How many points of Dispel Magic are needed to negate more than a single spell? Does Coordination count as "protecting [me] from damage" in your example below, since it improves my Dodge and Parry? >As a house rule we played it, what it depends on how >the character phrased it. So you would hear things >like "I attempt to Neutralize things that protecting >him from damage." Since people are never really sure >as to which spell is being used to actaully protect. > >Leon Kirshtein Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com From esoteric at teleport.com Thu Jan 24 13:02:07 2002 From: esoteric at teleport.com (Brad Furst) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:02:07 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] _Between_the_Rivers_ In-Reply-To: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I have just started Harry Turtledove's _Between_the_Rivers_, which I am enjoying. Is there anyone out there familiar with this novel who would like to discuss with me (privately, off-list) about how RQ parameters might be applied to portray some of this? Brad Furst esoteric at teleport.com From greatdragon13 at msn.com Thu Jan 24 14:08:59 2002 From: greatdragon13 at msn.com (greatdragon13) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 19:08:59 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] _Between_the_Rivers_ References: <20020123193505.9892.qmail@web14508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01c1a484$78c80fa0$fb56e1cf@computer> I ahve all of Harry turtle doves fantasy novels. started to read this one but did not finish it. Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Furst" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 6:02 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] _Between_the_Rivers_ > I have just started Harry Turtledove's _Between_the_Rivers_, which I > am enjoying. Is there anyone out there familiar with this novel who > would like to discuss with me (privately, off-list) about how RQ > parameters might be applied to portray some of this? > > Brad Furst > esoteric at teleport.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 Thu Jan 24 15:07:21 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 20:07:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Dispel Magic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020124040721.86606.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brad Furst wrote: > Let's hypothesize that I have Bladesharp 2 on my > weapon and > Coordination 2 & Protection 3 & Spirit Screen 4 on > me. > > Under what circumstances and phrasing would more > than > one of these be negated? Under the rules we use, Bladesharp is a separate target altogether. You should add Protection and Spirit Screen together if the player specifies: 'all protective magic'; or Coor, Prot, and Sp Screen if they say: 'all magic on the target' > How many points of Dispel Magic are needed to negate > more than a single spell? We just add the intensity of all spells to be effected, remember that any Divine spells count as 2pt of intensity per point. They will either all be dispelled or none of them. > Does Coordination count as "protecting [me] from > damage" > in your example below, since it improves my Dodge > and Parry? No, nor would Shimmer, but Shield and Damage Resistence would. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com From vesper at libra.seed.net.tw Thu Jan 24 16:15:48 2002 From: vesper at libra.seed.net.tw (Jeremy Martin) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 13:15:48 +0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <20020123142504.76441.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3C4F9884.903935DD@libra.seed.net.tw> That's what I'm trying to do. We're in Glorantha, and i'm just getting into the mythology and heroquests. But I've introduced (very hard to use) Portals around the world, and a Tower that wanders between worlds (ala Elric, Sailor on the Seas of Fate), but we've been too wrapped up in other quests. The party stayed in the tower until it had returned to their world... Hopefully soon. The tower had popped through Krynn, Greyhawk, the Diablo world and a Dune-like world... Jeremy Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > jerrym wrote: > > > > > > Does anybody run RQ in something other than > > Glorantha? > > > and are there current games going on? > > > Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is > > glorantha based, and they all seem years old... > > > Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out > > there.... > > > > I ran a year+ long campaign set on the World of > > Greyhawk (ala AD&D), but > > that ended last year. > > I have several campaings I am running, most of them > jump from world to world at some point usually with > Glorantha as the point of origin. > > Leon Kirshtein > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.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 paulstolar at sprintmail.com Thu Jan 24 18:22:36 2002 From: paulstolar at sprintmail.com (Paul W. Stolar) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:22:36 -0800 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? In-Reply-To: <3C4F9884.903935DD@libra.seed.net.tw> Message-ID: Harn is also an easily adapted world. It has a good 'feel' to it. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-admin at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Jeremy Martin Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 9:16 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? That's what I'm trying to do. We're in Glorantha, and i'm just getting into the mythology and heroquests. But I've introduced (very hard to use) Portals around the world, and a Tower that wanders between worlds (ala Elric, Sailor on the Seas of Fate), but we've been too wrapped up in other quests. The party stayed in the tower until it had returned to their world... Hopefully soon. The tower had popped through Krynn, Greyhawk, the Diablo world and a Dune-like world... Jeremy Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > jerrym wrote: > > > > > > Does anybody run RQ in something other than > > Glorantha? > > > and are there current games going on? > > > Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is > > glorantha based, and they all seem years old... > > > Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out > > there.... > > > > I ran a year+ long campaign set on the World of > > Greyhawk (ala AD&D), but > > that ended last year. > > I have several campaings I am running, most of them > jump from world to world at some point usually with > Glorantha as the point of origin. > > Leon Kirshtein > > ===== > "No good deed shall go unpunished." > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From northerndm at hotmail.com Thu Jan 24 16:33:46 2002 From: northerndm at hotmail.com (Northern DM) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 22:33:46 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Message-ID: Yes, I play using the Mystara world from the D&D Basic Rules. I was never able to get into the Gloranthean thing nor the cult thing. I also find it hard to find stuff for RQ that is non-Gloranthean which makes me wonder if that is why more people do not play RQ because it is so world specific? Northern DM >From: "jerrym" >Reply-To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >To: >Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? >Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 23:33:27 -0800 > >Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? >and are there current games going on? > >Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they >all seem years old... > >Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... > >....hmmmmm. > > >--- >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/02 > > >--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- >multipart/alternative > text/plain (text body -- kept) > text/html >--- >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jan 24 23:39:56 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 06:39:56 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: <000e01c1a3e0$3fb346c0$262e5142@alf> <00c301c1a413$825c3760$8cfbfea9@hr.cox.net> Message-ID: <3C50009C.5CDB4FE@earthlink.net> My RQ campaigns have always been in my own world. I developed surface contour maps using hex paper and colored pencils back in the early '80's and have been using them ever since. My world is post-apocalyptic 12th century with a Tolkien/Drow influence. David ----- Original Message ----- From: "jerrym" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:33 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? Does anybody run RQ in something other than Glorantha? and are there current games going on? Surfing the net, I find all but one RQ site is glorantha based, and they all seem years old... Makes me wonder if anyone is actually playing out there.... ....hmmmmm. From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jan 24 23:46:22 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 06:46:22 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] other worlds? References: Message-ID: <3C50021E.BF30CF6C@earthlink.net> "Paul W. Stolar" wrote: > > Harn is also an easily adapted world. It has a good 'feel' to it. I'll second that! I wish I had Harn when I GMing started RQ. David From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jan 24 23:59:28 2002 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 06:59:28 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: other worlds? References: <20020123163502.AF1824BD44@thinbits.com> Message-ID: <3C500530.49F9F7FD@earthlink.net> Peter Maranci wrote: > > It's at http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm . > > Perhaps I should be selfish and mention that as far as I know mine's > the only RuneQuest site listed on EffieRover's Top 50, and your "5" > vote (top score) would be very helpful and much appreciated! There's a > vote-link on my main page. He's not kidding, folks. I was ecstatic when I found Peter's site a couple of weeks ago. Peter, you do very, very good work! David From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Jan 25 10:26:40 2002 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:26:40 EST Subject: [RQ-Rules] WD RQ stuff Message-ID: Hey gang, While looking for a source selling the old Traveller book, 101 Robots, I ended up running across an index of White Dwarf articles (funny how Google works). Anyhow, the list had the following RQ-related entries: #61) The Spice of Life: An expansion of Alchemy in RuneQuest #99) Eeeyaaargh: Martial Arts in RQIII Does anyone have access to these, and if so, would you be interested in passing the info along?:) Thanks everyone -Ken- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From diadochi at bigfoot.com Sat Jan 26 05:55:58 2002 From: diadochi at bigfoot.com (David Ford) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 18:55:58 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Gloranthan elite (RANT) Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20020125185308.00c3db60@mail.btinternet.com> >Yes, often. Well, when I was able to play at all. The sneering of the >new Gloranthan elite rather put me off of that world, actually. And it >turned out that the system worked amazingly well for all sorts of >settings and even genres. I apologise for quoting you Peter but I tend to agree that the Gloranthan elite are very exclusive about what is acceptable for Glorantha. One thing that I really hate is their apparent hatred of RQ and the old simpler cleaner Glorantha that everyone once used to enjoy. David From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 29 04:18:46 2002 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:18:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Recent RQ adventure - not for the Gloranthan purists. - Long In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020128171846.47888.qmail@web14504.mail.yahoo.com> I have just came from a weekend of playing RuneQuest with my old friends from college and I though I would relay what happened as a way to show you how we mix Gloranthan and none Gloranthan elements in our campaigns. I have left out all names to protect the innocent and the guilty. Starting adventurers group: Humakti(A)/Lankher Mhy(I) ? human party leader, item of note Mithral and Iron Sword from Middle Earth Argan Argar (A)/Black Arkat (S) ? dark troll, has a SIZ 32 scorpion familiar Shaman of Screamer in the Dark (Troll spirit cult) ? dark troll, many bad things in his possession. Eurmal(A)/ Xiola Umbar (A) ? imp, has a Craft Darkness skill and has made his weapons as such. Storm Bull (A)/ Screamer(I) ? dark troll Vanakeera(A)/Screamer(A) ? dark troll Screamer(I) ? cave troll 2 player with no current characters. Supporting NPCs 3 dark troll initiates of Humakt 12 trollkin Humakti laymembers As we started the game our community was under attack by the Afadgani Empire (primarily Malkioni worshippers in our world, with a mixture of Vivamort and Ikadz worship amongst the nobility), to which we caused a great deal of trouble in the past. Most of the high ranking Rune levels were summoned to the Tarmo mountains for a concentrated counter attack through the Hero plain on the Afadgani. This left the party in charge of protecting our home. The actual attack took the form of a number of Ogres Sorcerers and Chaos Demons punching through into the Screamer in the Dark?s temple while the Afadgani army attempted a mundane assault. The party managed to defended the temple, but lost the Vanakeera(A)/Screamer(A) character, which was later resurrected but unable to continue for the adventure, and the cave troll who was killed by an explosion then he ripped apart one of the demons. While this battle took place the counter attack from Tarmo, which focused on the founder of the empire, managed to disrupt the Afadgani Empire to a great deal, sending them into a state of anarchy. The Afadgani army fled the field while the sorcerers and their escort fled Glorantha in order to regroup and gather new powers. The party decided to follow the sorcerers, through the opening left by the original attack, in order to end this threat one and for all. The party found itself in ancient Greece several months after the fall of Troy where we met a group of Spartan mercenaries looking for a job. This made us somewhat nervous for several reasons. First most of our party were trolls, but this was not a problem for we soon discovered that to them we appeared as rather large black skinned humans, and because the last time we were in this world we fought for the Trojans. The second was not a problem as well since these guys did not remember us. Five Spartans were hired and traveled with us. Our further trek through this world brought us in contact with Minotors and lesser Cyclopes. One of each joined the party (as player characters). Later we were ambushed by a group of imps in the service of Baahl sent by the people we were chasing. Our imp managed to trick them and almost got them to join us instead, but they split into two groups and fought amongst themselves with only one unfriendly surviving. This imp managed to hit out imp with a magical dart as he fled. The dart actually did more damage than the rest of the encounter as it proved to be highly magical and tied to Baahl. Who through his link to the dark, and some really stupid moves by the party, almost killed/enslaved several party members. Only a divine intervention to Xiola Umbar saved us. The Minotaur and Cyclops took this opportunity to join her cult. We followed the tracks of our enemies into a large cave complex and after a long time found ourselves Ningelbub of the Nine Eyes (a powerful sorcerer from the world Lankhmar forgive the spelling) cave. We asked him for help in tracking our enemies, who passed through here as well. He agreed to point us to the right exit which would put us ahead of the Afadgani on the path to their goal. As payment he demanded some juicy gossip or other information. The imp proceeded to tell him a total lie about the sexual preferences of the Red Goddess and here relationship with Teelo Nori, and various other implement being used in an inappropriate ways. Ningelbub knew it was a lie, but liked anyway. By following his shortcut, we cut through another world (not sure which one it was), where we picked up a saurian as a character and found ourselves in the world of the Black Company(by Glen Cook) at the time of the first book in the city of Beryl. (I am going to assume that people here are somewhat familiar with these novels , if not then they are a great read.) We entered the city, procured lodgings, and proceeded to search for sources of magical activity under the impression that this is there our enemies will be heading. Our search lead us to the dock and to the three black galley?s bearing the emissary of the Lady to Beryl. We attempted to get an audience with the emissary. Our mistake was to do this at night (since we did not want be seen). Instead we ran into the emissary as he was returning from town and so things which we should not have seen. The emissary turned out to be one of the Taken, Shapeshifter to be precise. The resulting battle woke the entire city, as we almost killed him (he managed to teleport out with the help of the Lady). We where upset and so the imp sank two of the Lady?s galleys (the none magical ones) with a Crack spell against the keel of each. Needless to say this proved to be a false lead and we got kicked out of the city, but not before we noticed another source of magical activity coming from ancient burial ground of the city founders. Investigation over the next several days confirmed this and we found out that the city founders are apparently not dead are rumored to be some sort of blood drinkers and are attempting to get out. We offered the merchant rulers of Beryl to take care of their problem, again under the assumption that this is the goal of our enemies. Note the vampire connection. The merchants agreed since their efforts to contain whatever it was proving to be ineffective and we proceeded to cleans this source of evil. To make the long story short (yeah I know it is too late). We fought the 13 vampire/were leopards in their temple and managed to kill all of them. Our losses were severe: all of the dark troll initiates, half of the trollkin, 2 Spartans, the Minotaur, and the Cyclops, in addition two divine interventions cost us 19 points of POW and we lost/broke/used up of several magic items. But, the worst news was that our enemies were cited at one of the other Jewel Coast cities. So this was another red herring. And so the adventure continues, till next time. Leon Kirshtein ===== "No good deed shall go unpunished." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com From vhaag at rim.net Tue Jan 29 09:17:20 2002 From: vhaag at rim.net (Viktor Haag) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:17:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] WD RQ stuff In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <15445.52720.389630.935248@wolfe.rim.net> MurfNMurf at aol.com writes: > Hey gang, > While looking for a source selling the old Traveller book, > 101 Robots, I ended up running across an index of White Dwarf > articles (funny how Google works). Anyhow, the list had the > following RQ-related entries: > > #61) The Spice of Life: An expansion of Alchemy in RuneQuest > #99) Eeeyaaargh: Martial Arts in RQIII > > Does anyone have access to these, and if so, would you be > interested in passing the info along?:) Ken, I might be able to uncover them. One local comic shop had pretty extensive backish bins of WD. They might have the issues you're looking for, and I wouldn't mind those articles for myself. I'll drop by there on my way home from the office today... -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ "We are not thugs. We are not fanatics. We are vitamin supplements to justice." From peter at maranci.net Tue Jan 29 22:24:47 2002 From: peter at maranci.net (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 06:24:47 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic RQ project, site update In-Reply-To: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> References: <20020124131502.3C7854BD3F@thinbits.com> Message-ID: I'm wondering if anyone is interested in helping out with the Basic RuneQuest project? It's my attempt to create a booklet with the basic rules needed to play or GM RuneQuest. I'd made some progress on it, but haven't had a chance to do much with it since my son was born. It'll be available online once it's finished, and is intended to introduce new players to the system. If anyone wants to take a look at it, it's at http://www.maranci.net/basicrq.doc . It's a Word document right now, and is still completely a work in progress. And as I said any help would be appreciated. It's a bigger project than I realized, and it's also very important that it be extremely easy to read and use. On a separate point, I should mention that my web site has been updated with a set of scenario expansion ideas for the Grey Company scenario. They're called "The Further Adventures of the Grey Company", and they're by Alexander Wallis. I've posted them in the Scenarios section. ->Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Maranci peter at maranci.net Woonsocket, RI Come to Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying!: http://www.maranci.net/rq.htm