From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Thu Jul 1 02:59:08 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:59:08 -0700 Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040630095242.02104ba8@incoming.verizon.net> At 01:50 AM 6/30/2004, you wrote: >>The Greeks had rapiers during the bronze age. I thought that they were a >>later development as well until just recently. >> >>http://www.kroraina.com/thracia/hb/thrac_arms.html >> > >Oh it's a thrusting sword undoubtedly, but I don't see that it falls inside >any useful _gaming_ definition of 'rapier' as, given its cross section and >material, it will behave differently to the rapier shown in the weapon >silhouettes in the RQIII rules (which looks to be a 1500 - 1700 pattern >blade and by inference steel)... > >The point was simply that the RQIII weapon list is eclectic (it's a fantasy >roleplaying game and Glorantha, its original setting, is an invented >world): MOST of what's on that list is anachronistic in that it is NOT a >carefully chosen sub set of weapons available at a particular point in >history (or a particular level of metallurgy or weapons technology). For >most games it doesn't matter, and is easy enough to address if it does >matter. But "rapier" in the modern sense cheek by jowl with "gladius" IS >anachronistic in my book... > >Cheers, > >Nick Middleton Straight from the RQ II book (spelling error intact! <>): "RAPIER ? this is not the overlong, laborate weapon of our Renaissance but it instead a basic cut-and-thrust weapon. Lighter than broadswords." It isn't the one you are talking about Nick, but the one in the image at the web page supplied by Michael. What ever Avalon Hill did to RQ was not in keeping with the game as originally stated. It is a suggestion of system improvements, and can not be taken as a serious attempt to improve Glorantha (at least not until the Glorantha specific boxes and books began to flow). And arguing about the anachronisms of a world in a bronze age with a people using rifles is just plain silly. Especially when you consider that at any time a god can alter reality... Bo From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jul 1 07:00:41 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:00:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Message-ID: <7737444.1088629241261.JavaMail.root@dewey.psp.pas.earthlink.net> And so can some of the non-divine local heroes. David -----Original Message----- From: Bo Whitten Sent: Jun 30, 2004 11:59 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: RE: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Especially when you consider that at any time a god can alter reality... Bo From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jul 1 18:35:03 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:03 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows Message-ID: >Having a big empire doesn't sound very Bronze age, but having the There existed several bronze -age empires, the Sumerian is the only one I can remember just now. There is several indications that trade in bronze age was very extensive,(bronze found in Norway originating from the baltic) -and for all we know; europe could allso have had empires prior to the etruskians and kelts. _________________________________________________________________ Last ned MSN Messenger gratis http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger - Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jul 1 18:26:45 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:26:45 +0000 Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Message-ID: There are loads of weapons that didn't exist in the bronze age, like the longsword, greatsword, katana, nodachi, ball'n chain, etc. I asume everybody adds and removes stuff they don't seem fit in their personal settings. >From: Matt Conrad >Reply-To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat >Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 09:07:04 -0500 > >Does it bug anybody but me that RQ even *has* crossbows? Can you make >a crossbow with bronze? > >I've thought about leaving crossbows out of my game, or maybe just >letting the dwarves have them. > >On a more general note, are there any other loudly anachronistic >things that people have noticed creeping into Runequest by default? I >just happened to think about the crossbows, I bet there's a lot of >other stuff I missed. > >I like the idea of having little bits and pieces of the standard D&D >kit be conspicuously absent, to give my players a little bit of >culture shock. > >Matt > > >On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 14:49:25 +0100, nick.middleton at invensys.com > wrote: > > > > > > >As a side note. Has anyone used armor penetration > > >rules (from CoC) for crossbows? > > > > > >Leon >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. Gratis! From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jul 1 18:29:38 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:29:38 +0000 Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Message-ID: >I thought crossbows were strictly medieval. How about that. > >Thanks for the correction. > >Matt There are references to the use of crossbows in Norway from a battle in the 10th century, and there is a picture of Frankians hunting in France from ca.600 ad. The crossbow (in Europe) was invented by the romans, the big brother -the arbalest is better known. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger Den raskeste veien mellom deg og dine venner From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Jul 1 18:35:18 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 09:35:18 +0100 Subject: Rapiers and Anchronisms was Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Message-ID: Bo (and list), I may have got out the wrong side of the bed this morning: I have gone over my comments below several times, but they still feel a bit grumpier than they should: neither you nor anyone on the list should take any of my comments to heart, I'm just feeling particularly curmudgeonly this morning. I apologise for the tone, and hope the reasoning can be discerned but if not feel free to ignore any or all it! (I must get some more dried frog pills... or possibly a new job). ;-) >At 01:50 AM 6/30/2004, you wrote: > >>>The Greeks had rapiers during the bronze age. I thought that they were a >>>later development as well until just recently. >>> >>>http://www.kroraina.com/thracia/hb/thrac_arms.html >>> >> >>Oh it's a thrusting sword undoubtedly, but I don't see that it falls inside >>any useful _gaming_ definition of 'rapier' as, given its cross section and >>material, it will behave differently to the rapier shown in the weapon >>silhouettes in the RQIII rules (which looks to be a 1500 - 1700 pattern >>blade and by inference steel)... >> >>The point was simply that the RQIII weapon list is eclectic (it's a fantasy >>roleplaying game and Glorantha, its original setting, is an invented >>world): MOST of what's on that list is anachronistic in that it is NOT a >>carefully chosen sub set of weapons available at a particular point in >>history (or a particular level of metallurgy or weapons technology). For >>most games it doesn't matter, and is easy enough to address if it does >>matter. But "rapier" in the modern sense cheek by jowl with "gladius" IS >>anachronistic in my book... >> >>Cheers, >> >>Nick Middleton > >Straight from the RQ II book (spelling error intact! <>): "RAPIER ? this is not the overlong, laborate weapon >of our Renaissance but it instead a basic cut-and-thrust weapon. Lighter than broadswords." > The same text (typo corrected) is used in the RQIII players book, which as I said uses a silhouette of a court sword (circa 1600 now I look at it) to illustrate the Rapier, but that text actually describes what I was always told was the early _renaissance_ rapier (the basket hilts, fiddly loops and guards etc came later). > >It isn't the one you are talking about Nick, but the one in the image at the web page supplied by Michael. > And I repeat: I DON'T care what pedantic archaeologists have decided to define "rapier" to mean, the term as generally used by both weapon historians and role players (as five minutes on Google will reveal) refers to post medieval weapons. And note that I also wasn't talking about "the overlong, elaborate weapon of our Renaissance" as that (I assume) is a reference to the later stages of the rapiers development - the early form (late 15th to early 16th century) was simply a 'lighter broadsword', which fits both what I said AND the RQII/III text you quoted. Archaeologists appear to have appropriated 'rapier' to designate ANY sword like weapon optimised more (or predominantly) for thrusting, which is NOT the usage of either weapons historians or most role players, IMO. > >What ever Avalon Hill did to RQ was not in keeping with the game as originally stated. It is a suggestion of system >improvements, and can not be taken as a serious attempt to improve Glorantha (at least not until the Glorantha >specific boxes and books began to flow). > Avalon Hill didn't "do" anything to RQ, other than publish its third edition and foist a couple of atrociously bad supplements on it# : Chaosium wrote RQIII, and promoted it as a generic FRP, one possible setting of which was Glorantha. > >And arguing about the anachronisms of a world in a bronze age with a people using rifles is just plain silly. >Especially when you consider that at any time a god can alter reality... > I wasn't arguing about anachronisms particularly: Matt asked about things that might strike one as anachronistic in RQ (I assumed he meant RQIII it must be said): I suggested the rapier, because I think it is an example of why the RQIII weapons list doesn't fit iff you want to use the rules for a game that is trying to evoke a specific point in real world history or technological development i.e. a game that avoids anachronisms (in part because the term rapier is tricky to use precisely: weapons historians, archaeologists and role-players all use it to mean different things). I thought I also made it pretty clear that I was referring to RQIII (which claimed to be generic) and that for most fantasy settings and Glorantha in specific I don't personally care about anachronisms particularly and don't think it matters... But apparently the second paragraph of mine you quoted is invisible (or more likely, badly phrased on my part)... I still think that using the standard RQIII weapons list for a game striving for historical verisimilitude, say for example one set in post Roman Britain, will be less successful unless the GM addresses the "anachronisms" on that weapon list: does anyone seriously think that a Roman British warrior should face the Saxons with a "rapier" in his hands _in such a game_? Would anybody run a game striving for such historical verisimilitude and NOT draw up their own list of weapons that are and are not available in the setting they are trying to evoke? My answers would be no to both. Would anyone care one fig about such things in a game loosely based on Fritz Leiber's Lankhmar, China Mieville's Perdido Street Station and / or Rush's seminal album Hemispheres? Because I wouldn't... Cheers, Nick Middleton # and then abandon it for half a decade, do really well by it for a while, abandon it again and then try to flog another game using the same name, before going bust and letting it be acquired by the owner of its biggest rival... but I digress. And they did, IIRC have some overall input into the shape of RQIII: the generic slant was done at their request I believe, but it _was_ designed by Chaosium and (given it helped cover the West etc) didn't flatly contradict Glorantha (as then conceived anyway...) From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Jul 1 18:55:11 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 09:55:11 +0100 Subject: Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat Message-ID: >There are loads of weapons that didn't exist in the bronze age, like the >longsword, greatsword, katana, nodachi, ball'n chain, etc. I asume everybody >adds and removes stuff they don't seem fit in their personal settings. > Thank you Bjorn; my point in a nutshell. Cheers, Nick Middleton From mattley at gmail.com Thu Jul 1 22:53:25 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:53:25 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:03 +0000, Bjorn Stolen wrote: > > > > >Having a big empire doesn't sound very Bronze age, but having the > > There existed several bronze -age empires, the Sumerian is the only one I > can remember just now. There is several indications that trade in bronze age > was very extensive,(bronze found in Norway originating from the baltic) -and > for all we know; europe could allso have had empires prior to the etruskians > and kelts. Oh, good lord. Thanks for the pointer. Looks like I'm going to need to do some reading if I want to get a feel for real Bronze Age atmosphere. (By the way, my goal here is not to be a historical accuracy Nazi. I think a non-medieval setting sounds fun, and I'd like to capture the feeling of that setting for my game, that's all.) Does anyone have recommendations for reading about Bronze Age societies? I have Bibby's 4000 Years Ago, but I'm not getting into it. Is there any good historical fiction that captures the feeling of Bronze Age societies? It's a little embarrasing to admit, but I'm more likely to actually finish fiction than non-fiction. I'll stilll take non-fiction suggestions, though. Matt From talmeta at talmeta.net Thu Jul 1 23:23:45 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 09:23:45 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... Message-ID: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> I'm simply flabbergasted at the price it has risen to. Sight unseen, and name of designer unknown! (I'm tempted to do something similar now.....) -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - bow down before the one you serve From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 2 00:38:18 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 07:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> Message-ID: <20040701143818.15161.qmail@web41105.mail.yahoo.com> Why bother if all of it available on web. --- Tal Meta wrote: > I'm simply flabbergasted at the price it has risen > to. Sight unseen, and > name of designer unknown! > > (I'm tempted to do something similar now.....) > > -- > talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & > God-Machine > AIM - talmeta > ICQ - 12594453 > Homepage - > > bow down before the one you serve __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Fri Jul 2 01:00:04 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:00:04 -0700 Subject: Rapiers and Anchronisms was Crossbows: was Re: [RQ-Rules] Archery - Missile Combat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040701075416.02103ec0@incoming.verizon.net> At 01:35 AM 7/1/2004, you wrote: ># and then abandon it for half a decade, do really well by it for a while, >abandon it again and then try to flog another game using the same name, >before going bust and letting it be acquired by the owner of its biggest >rival... but I digress. And they did, IIRC have some overall input into the >shape of RQIII: the generic slant was done at their request I believe, but >it _was_ designed by Chaosium and (given it helped cover the West etc) >didn't flatly contradict Glorantha (as then conceived anyway...) Nick, et all... No problem with your comments. The point of a historical setting was lost on me. Just as I guess the point that the base game was my point. AH tired to make it GURPS and ended up making it usable, but lacking IMO. A slim volume on Glorantha is not very useful. The later supplements were very Glorantha, but the basic game wasn't. And if I remember what I heard before you are correct in the statement that AH forced the generic approach to RQ III. As for the other points... I guess I am old school about RPGs... That being that anyone who wants to run a game in a particular setting had better do his homework and get the basic equipment right. And if not, better be ready for the laughter. So, I agree with you on that point, and would not have made any comment had I realized it was out of Glorantha context. My bad. Bo From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Fri Jul 2 01:05:11 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:05:11 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> References: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040701080311.020e3ec0@incoming.verizon.net> At 06:23 AM 7/1/2004, you wrote: >I'm simply flabbergasted at the price it has risen to. Sight unseen, and name of designer unknown! > >(I'm tempted to do something similar now.....) It is clearly a rip off, if not of other peoples work, then just under the principle that they do not have licence to "sell" they work in the RQ name. Besides, from the look of it the best written part is the eBay add! LOL If you think it is your work in it Tal, go get them. Bo From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Jul 2 01:33:56 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:33:56 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040701080311.020e3ec0@incoming.verizon.net> References: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> <6.1.1.1.0.20040701080311.020e3ec0@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <40E42EE4.4000301@talmeta.net> Bo Whitten wrote: > If you think it is your work in it Tal, go get them. Can't say it's worth it to me at this point. For $2.99, maybe... -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - I want to do terrible things to you From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 2 03:12:33 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 10:12:33 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> References: <40E41061.6060408@talmeta.net> Message-ID: <40E44601.2090909@concentric.net> Tal Meta wrote: > I'm simply flabbergasted at the price it has risen to. Sight unseen, and > name of designer unknown! > > (I'm tempted to do something similar now.....) Looking at the other bidder's recent bidding histories and where things stand in the auction (the bidding history is weird) I can either believe they're very VERY na?ve collectors or (I think more likely) they're shilling for the seller. That's illegal by eBay policy of course, but how to prove it? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 2 03:22:11 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 10:22:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E44601.2090909@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > That's illegal by eBay policy of course, but how to > prove it? I think if we make eBay aware of what is going on, they will take action. Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 2 04:08:51 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 11:08:51 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Stephen Posey wrote: > > >>That's illegal by eBay policy of course, but how to >>prove it? > > > > I think if we make eBay aware of what is going on, > they will take action. The current high bidder MAY be just a na?ve RQ afficionado, looking at his recent other eBay acquisitions. Should we warn him? (we could invite him to come play on the list too while we're at it ;-)) Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Jul 2 04:12:11 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 14:12:11 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> References: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> Message-ID: <40E453FB.7080707@talmeta.net> Stephen Posey wrote: > Should we warn him? (we could invite him to come play on the list too > while we're at it ;-)) Be my guest. I hate to pimp, though. :) -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - Give him an evasive answer. From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 2 04:20:39 2004 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:20:39 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> References: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> Message-ID: <40E455F7.6070209@sbcglobal.net> Stephen Posey wrote: > > The current high bidder MAY be just a na?ve RQ afficionado, looking at > his recent other eBay acquisitions. > > Should we warn him? (we could invite him to come play on the list too > while we're at it ;-)) 1) We haven't really established that the person offering the item is doing so in bad faith; the item might be quite legitemate. 2) Interfering in an auction seems a bit unethical, even if the item is bogus. 3) eBay probably has procedures for dealing with this type of thing. If we want to interfere we should contact them. 4) Caveat emptor. I hope the high bidder doesn't get taken, but it's up to him if he wants to buy a pig in a poke. Or to poke a pig, for all I know. Guy From andrew at crashbox.com Fri Jul 2 04:39:59 2004 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew Mellinger) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 11:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: <40E455F7.6070209@sbcglobal.net> References: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> <40E455F7.6070209@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: Okay, Somewhere I missed the auction in particular. Anybody want to supply the URL? -Andrew On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Guy Hoyle wrote: > Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:20:39 -0500 > From: Guy Hoyle > Reply-To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... > > Stephen Posey wrote: > >> >> The current high bidder MAY be just a na?ve RQ afficionado, looking at his >> recent other eBay acquisitions. >> >> Should we warn him? (we could invite him to come play on the list too >> while we're at it ;-)) > > 1) We haven't really established that the person offering the item is doing > so in bad faith; the item might be quite legitemate. > > 2) Interfering in an auction seems a bit unethical, even if the item is > bogus. > > 3) eBay probably has procedures for dealing with this type of thing. If we > want to interfere we should contact them. > > 4) Caveat emptor. I hope the high bidder doesn't get taken, but it's up to > him if he wants to buy a pig in a poke. Or to poke a pig, for all I know. > > Guy From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 2 05:09:27 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 12:09:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <40E455F7.6070209@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20040701190927.31563.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Does any one know what the price of 2enc pts of silk would be? (In a none-silk producing area like Pavis in Glorantha) ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 2 05:12:28 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:12:28 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] That eBay auction... In-Reply-To: References: <20040701172211.4676.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> <40E45333.6020405@concentric.net> <40E455F7.6070209@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <40E4621C.6070108@concentric.net> Andrew Mellinger wrote: > Okay, > > Somewhere I missed the auction in particular. Anybody want to supply > the URL? http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5906167975&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT Better hurry, it's only got about an hour left!! ;-) Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Fri Jul 2 01:15:32 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:15:32 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows Message-ID: <410-22004741151532984@earthlink.net> Northern Europe had a really vibrant Bronze Age with some really cool stuff (lur-horns, horned priest helmets, & the like) P.V. Glob 's book "The Mound People" is an excellent starting point. Here's a good url on the Hjortspring boat http://home6.inet.tele.dk/hjortspr/ . See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1234529.stm for one 4000 years old. Tho the find was Iron Age the boat was of a style used in the Bronze Age. Both the Germanics & the Kelts had amazing Bronze Age cultures. The Funnel Beaker culture for one. Here's one on their tattoos http://tattoos.com/bronze.htm. Lot's of great stuff if you look. BTW if you need miniatures for your games. Foundry not only has their Trojan War eries, they also have Northern European Bronze Age figures. > [Original Message] > From: Matt Conrad > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 7/1/2004 5:53:34 AM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows > > On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:03 +0000, Bjorn Stolen > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Having a big empire doesn't sound very Bronze age, but having the > > > > There existed several bronze -age empires, the Sumerian is the only one I > > can remember just now. There is several indications that trade in bronze age > > was very extensive,(bronze found in Norway originating from the baltic) -and > > for all we know; europe could allso have had empires prior to the etruskians > > and kelts. > > Oh, good lord. > > Thanks for the pointer. Looks like I'm going to need to do some > reading if I want to get a feel for real Bronze Age atmosphere. > > (By the way, my goal here is not to be a historical accuracy Nazi. I > think a non-medieval setting sounds fun, and I'd like to capture the > feeling of that setting for my game, that's all.) > > Does anyone have recommendations for reading about Bronze Age > societies? I have Bibby's 4000 Years Ago, but I'm not getting into > it. Is there any good historical fiction that captures the feeling of > Bronze Age societies? It's a little embarrasing to admit, but I'm > more likely to actually finish fiction than non-fiction. I'll stilll > take non-fiction suggestions, though. > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Fri Jul 2 11:00:11 2004 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael.Christian at corbis.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 18:00:11 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927410941FCA@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> It's been a long time since I've read the books, but Gene Wolfe's Soldier in the Mist, Soldier of Arete (Just reprinted as a single volume Latro in the Mist) is about a Roman mercenary who is able to see and speak with the gods due to a head wound he receives. Not quite Bronze age, but closer than most fantasy gets. Wolfe is a great writer as well and these are some of his best. Non-fiction: Europe Before History - Kristian Kristiansen, Cambridge University Press It's a pretty ambitious and thorough overview of Bronze age cultures around Europe and the Mediterranean. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Matt Conrad Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 5:53 AM To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:03 +0000, Bjorn Stolen wrote: > > > > >Having a big empire doesn't sound very Bronze age, but having the > > There existed several bronze -age empires, the Sumerian is the only one I > can remember just now. There is several indications that trade in bronze age > was very extensive,(bronze found in Norway originating from the baltic) -and > for all we know; europe could allso have had empires prior to the etruskians > and kelts. Oh, good lord. Thanks for the pointer. Looks like I'm going to need to do some reading if I want to get a feel for real Bronze Age atmosphere. (By the way, my goal here is not to be a historical accuracy Nazi. I think a non-medieval setting sounds fun, and I'd like to capture the feeling of that setting for my game, that's all.) Does anyone have recommendations for reading about Bronze Age societies? I have Bibby's 4000 Years Ago, but I'm not getting into it. Is there any good historical fiction that captures the feeling of Bronze Age societies? It's a little embarrasing to admit, but I'm more likely to actually finish fiction than non-fiction. I'll stilll take non-fiction suggestions, though. Matt _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Fri Jul 2 13:32:14 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 20:32:14 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows References: Message-ID: <00ad01c45fe5$2b63d950$68417442@wizard> Try things like the Tritonian Ring by L. Sprague de Camp, and for that matter his historicals like An Elephant for Aristotle. Of course, since his death, his books are going out of print fast, but you might be able to find one or two. You have to watch out for the fantasies, though, since he covers everything from pre-Roman to late Medieval, depending on the book. Steve Perrin All the Words You Need ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Conrad" To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 5:53 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows > On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 08:35:03 +0000, Bjorn Stolen > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Having a big empire doesn't sound very Bronze age, but having the > > > > There existed several bronze -age empires, the Sumerian is the only one I > > can remember just now. There is several indications that trade in bronze age > > was very extensive,(bronze found in Norway originating from the baltic) -and > > for all we know; europe could allso have had empires prior to the etruskians > > and kelts. > > Oh, good lord. > > Thanks for the pointer. Looks like I'm going to need to do some > reading if I want to get a feel for real Bronze Age atmosphere. > > (By the way, my goal here is not to be a historical accuracy Nazi. I > think a non-medieval setting sounds fun, and I'd like to capture the > feeling of that setting for my game, that's all.) > > Does anyone have recommendations for reading about Bronze Age > societies? I have Bibby's 4000 Years Ago, but I'm not getting into > it. Is there any good historical fiction that captures the feeling of > Bronze Age societies? It's a little embarrasing to admit, but I'm > more likely to actually finish fiction than non-fiction. I'll stilll > take non-fiction suggestions, though. > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jul 2 16:49:26 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 08:49:26 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <20040701190927.31563.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040701190927.31563.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1088750966.40e5057615de7@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Leon Kirshtein : > Does any one know what the price of 2enc pts of silk > would be? (In a none-silk producing area like Pavis in > Glorantha) If you want to parallel Glorantha with RW, the price should be HIGH. The Chinese sold their silk for ridiculous prices before a Chinese princess was betrothed against her will to a Central Asian king. She took some silkworms in her hairdo to took revenge against her father. The price of silk fell sharply when the Chinese monopoly was broken by this central Asian kingdom (forgot the name). Cheers Gianni http://www.basicrps.com/chine/ From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jul 2 17:09:35 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 09:09:35 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <1088750966.40e5057615de7@imp.webhuset.no> References: <20040701190927.31563.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> <1088750966.40e5057615de7@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <1088752175.40e50a2f18522@imp.webhuset.no> > > Does any one know what the price of 2enc pts of silk > > would be? (In a none-silk producing area like Pavis in > > Glorantha) > > If you want to parallel Glorantha with RW, the price should be HIGH. These articles might give you some ideas: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/activities/16/ http://depts.washington.edu/uwch/silkroad/exhibit/trade/silkae.html G. From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Jul 2 22:01:32 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 05:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Fwd: Re: Question for item #5906167975 - New Unique RuneQuest Magic System - Fantastic Spells! Message-ID: <20040702120132.46253.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com> After seeing all the concern about the ebay auction, I decided to email the seller... Below is the questionsI sent as well as his reply. Gregory --- Brian Done wrote: > Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:54:13 -0700 (PDT) > From: Brian Done > Subject: Re: Question for item #5906167975 - New > Unique RuneQuest Magic System - Fantastic Spells! > To: grogthing at yahoo.com > > grogthing, > > Thanks for the heads up. I appreciate your advice > and concern, and will definetly look into doing > dutch auctions. The new system is definetly my own > creation. Thanks again. > > mastertrillions > >> grogthing at yahoo.com wrote: >> Dear mastertrillions, >> >> I'm wondering why you are not selling this as a >> dutch auction? >> >> If it is an html document you can >> sell as many copies as you want. You could have just >> set a $5.00 price then seen how many you could sell. >> >> You are losing money on all the people who are being >> out bid. 3 people paying $5.00 would be better than >> 1 winner paying $10, which is way to high for an >> unknown document. >> >> As it is currently set up I'm not >> going to pay over $5.00 for homebrewed rules sight >> unseen. >> >> I am on a rune quest rules mailing list and >> several people possibly would have bought your >> rules if you had gone the fixed price dutch auction >> route. >> >> Also are these rules completely your own creation? >> Several of the people on the mailing list have magic >> rule sets posted on the internet, and they have seen >> people trying to sell their work before. I'm not >> accusing you, just making sure. >> >> grogthing ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From talmeta at talmeta.net Fri Jul 2 22:57:08 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 08:57:08 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Fwd: Re: Question for item #5906167975 - New Unique RuneQuest Magic System - Fantastic Spells! In-Reply-To: <20040702120132.46253.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040702120132.46253.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40E55BA4.5080208@talmeta.net> grogthing wrote: > After seeing all the concern about the ebay auction, I > decided to email the seller... Of course, you need 10 positive feedback before you can do dutch auctions... -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - "Hey kids, start jumping up and down like idiots!" From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 2 23:33:53 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 06:33:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <1088752175.40e50a2f18522@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040702133353.40541.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gianni wrote: > > > Does any one know what the price of 2enc pts of > silk > > > would be? (In a none-silk producing area like > Pavis in > > > Glorantha) > > > > If you want to parallel Glorantha with RW, the > price should be HIGH. > > These articles might give you some ideas: > > http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/activities/16/ > > http://depts.washington.edu/uwch/silkroad/exhibit/trade/silkae.html Very cool links, thanks. However, I am still not sure how much it would be worth. Would a bolt of silk be worth 2000L? Does this sound reasonable? Too litle ? Too much? Leon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gianni at basicrps.com Sat Jul 3 01:08:53 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 17:08:53 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <20040702133353.40541.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040702133353.40541.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1088780933.40e57a852bd73@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Leon Kirshtein : > Very cool links, thanks. However, I am still not sure > how much it would be worth. Would a bolt of silk be > worth 2000L? Does this sound reasonable? Too litle ? > Too much? I guess it depends on whence the silk comes. If it is Kralorelan silk, 2000L seems reasonable, even cheap -- after all IIRC sea voyages are cut between Kralorela and Prax, and a caravan would face enormous costs to travel through the Wastes. If it is spider-woven silk from the Uz in Dragon Pass or Dagori Inkarth (sp?), 2000L seems very expensive. I would say 500L in Dragon Pass, 600L in Pavis, 700L in Corflu. Gianni From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Sat Jul 3 02:10:54 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 18:10:54 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2260@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Hi its me Tiberius in the guise of my work e-mail. I am working on a new spell. Herewith a first try: Divine magic Blend - Touch - Temporal (1/5/5) Allows an affected person or thing to blend in with any other object it is placed against, to look like a part of such an object. E.G. A person blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the viewer to be part of the tree trunk. The affected party must be touching the item it is blending with and the total SIZ points of the affected party must be less than those of the item it is blending with. Multiple items of different appearances/textures cannot be blended with. One magic point will cover 5 SIZ points or part thereof for a total of 5 minutes. Thus, to make a SIZ 13 human blend with a cliff face for 10 minutes will cost 6 MP (3 for SIZ x 2 for duration (10/5 minutes = 2). Looking like an object does not make the affected party invisible to someone searching. Treat Blend as a special success Hide roll. A successful Hide roll together with Blend will be the equivalent of a critical success Hide roll. T?ny __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Jul 3 02:18:07 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 09:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <1088780933.40e57a852bd73@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040702161807.123.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gianni wrote: > I guess it depends on whence the silk comes. > > If it is Kralorelan silk, 2000L seems reasonable, > even cheap -- after all IIRC > sea voyages are cut between Kralorela and Prax, and > a caravan would face > enormous costs to travel through the Wastes. > > If it is spider-woven silk from the Uz in Dragon > Pass or Dagori Inkarth (sp?), > 2000L seems very expensive. I would say 500L in > Dragon Pass, 600L in Pavis, > 700L in Corflu. Are you saying there is a big difference in quality between Kralorelan and spider-woven silk? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gianni at basicrps.com Sat Jul 3 06:33:43 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 22:33:43 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Cost of silk In-Reply-To: <20040702161807.123.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040702161807.123.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1088800423.40e5c6a74e052@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Leon Kirshtein : > --- Gianni wrote: > > I guess it depends on whence the silk comes. > > > > If it is Kralorelan silk, 2000L seems reasonable, > > even cheap -- after all IIRC > > sea voyages are cut between Kralorela and Prax, and > > a caravan would face > > enormous costs to travel through the Wastes. > > > > If it is spider-woven silk from the Uz in Dragon > > Pass or Dagori Inkarth (sp?), > > 2000L seems very expensive. I would say 500L in > > Dragon Pass, 600L in Pavis, > > 700L in Corflu. > > Are you saying there is a big difference in quality > between Kralorelan and spider-woven silk? Who knows... after all we do not use spider-woven silk in the RW. Fact is, scarcity makes prices, not quality. When I went to Sydney, I could have either lobster or 'bay bug' in the restaurant. I found the latter had far better taste, yet it was way cheaper! Why? Because bay bugs (as the name implies) are plentiful in Sydney bay. G. From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Sat Jul 3 20:49:06 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 10:49:06 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows Message-ID: You could allso search for Tacitus on the net, if you're interested in barbarian cultures in the roman iron age (0 - 500 AD) He was a historian that wrote a lot about germanic tribes, their war tactics and their war religion (odin worshipping) Some of the northern germantic tribes he mentiones (the ryges, the egdes and the hords are tribes that have given three counties in Norway their name; Agder, Hordaland and Rogaland. >It's been a long time since I've read the books, but Gene Wolfe's Soldier >in >the Mist, Soldier of Arete (Just reprinted as a single volume Latro in the >Mist) is about a Roman mercenary who is able to see and speak with the gods >due to a head wound he receives. Not quite Bronze age, but closer than most >fantasy gets. Wolfe is a great writer as well and these are some of his >best. > >Non-fiction: >Europe Before History - Kristian Kristiansen, Cambridge University Press >It's a pretty ambitious and thorough overview of Bronze age cultures around >Europe and the Mediterranean. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner From leonbk at yahoo.com Sun Jul 4 03:52:33 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 10:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2260@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <20040703175233.55880.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> I like the spell, but I think it needs some work. What do you think about this version: Blend Touch, Temporal, 1pt, non-stackable This camouflages a person or an object by blending in with another object it is placed against. So a person blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the viewer to be part of the tree trunk. The affected item must be touching the item it is blending with, and the total SIZ points of the affected item must be not greater then the item it is blending with. Multiple items of different appearances or textures cannot be blended with, however one can blend with sand or pebbles on a beach. Blending does not make one invisible. Treat Blend as a special success Hide or Conceal roll. A successful Hide or Conceal roll in conjunction with Blend spell will be the equivalent of a critical success. --- "Den, Tony T" wrote: > Hi its me Tiberius in the guise of my work e-mail. > > I am working on a new spell. Herewith a first try: > > Divine magic > Blend - Touch - Temporal (1/5/5) > > Allows an affected person or thing to blend in with > any other object it is > placed against, to look like a part of such an > object. E.G. A person > blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the > viewer to be part of the tree > trunk. The affected party must be touching the item > it is blending with and > the total SIZ points of the affected party must be > less than those of the > item it is blending with. Multiple items of > different appearances/textures > cannot be blended with. One magic point will cover 5 > SIZ points or part > thereof for a total of 5 minutes. Thus, to make a > SIZ 13 human blend with a > cliff face for 10 minutes will cost 6 MP (3 for SIZ > x 2 for duration (10/5 > minutes = 2). Looking like an object does not make > the affected party > invisible to someone searching. Treat Blend as a > special success Hide roll. > A successful Hide roll together with Blend will be > the equivalent of a > critical success Hide roll. > > > > T?ny > > > __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > For information about the Standard Bank group visit > our web site > __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Disclaimer and confidentiality note > Everything in this e-mail and any attachments > relating to the official business of Standard Bank > Group Limited is proprietary to the group. > It is confidential, legally privileged and protected > by law. > Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other > content. Views and opinions are those of the sender > unless clearly stated as being that of the group. > The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole > authorised recipient. Please notify the sender > immediately if it has unintentionally reached you > and do not read, > disclose or use the content in any way. > Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of > this communication has been maintained nor that it > is free of errors, virus, interception or > interference. > ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Sun Jul 4 05:13:10 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 12:13:10 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <20040703175233.55880.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040703175233.55880.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40E70546.6070308@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I like the spell, but I think it needs some work. > What do you think about this version: > > Blend > Touch, Temporal, 1pt, non-stackable > > This camouflages a person or an object by blending in > with another object it is placed against. So a person > blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the viewer > to be part of the tree trunk. > > The affected item must be touching the item it is > blending with, and the total SIZ points of the > affected item must be not greater then the item it is > blending with. > > Multiple items of different appearances or textures > cannot be blended with, however one can blend with > sand or pebbles on a beach. > > Blending does not make one invisible. Treat Blend as a > special success Hide or Conceal roll. A successful > Hide or Conceal roll in conjunction with Blend spell > will be the equivalent of a critical success. I might add something about the character must remain motionless or the spell's effect is broken? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From leonbk at yahoo.com Sun Jul 4 07:43:43 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 14:43:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <40E70546.6070308@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040703214343.19030.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > I might add something about the character must > remain motionless or the spell's effect is broken? Well, the spell only benefits Hide and Conceal skills, which work only if the subject is not moving. I also like the idea of someone sprinting from rock to tree and belnding in with the background. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Sun Jul 4 07:56:01 2004 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael.Christian at corbis.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 14:56:01 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C791927410941FDB@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> Blackmask (which is sort of an e-book library) has the complete annals of Tacitus (200pg PDF) available for download - http://www.blackmask.com/page.php?do=search&query=tacitus Lots of other good free books under their classics section. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Bjorn Stolen Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 3:49 AM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows You could allso search for Tacitus on the net, if you're interested in barbarian cultures in the roman iron age (0 - 500 AD) He was a historian that wrote a lot about germanic tribes, their war tactics and their war religion (odin worshipping) Some of the northern germantic tribes he mentiones (the ryges, the egdes and the hords are tribes that have given three counties in Norway their name; Agder, Hordaland and Rogaland. >It's been a long time since I've read the books, but Gene Wolfe's Soldier >in >the Mist, Soldier of Arete (Just reprinted as a single volume Latro in the >Mist) is about a Roman mercenary who is able to see and speak with the gods >due to a head wound he receives. Not quite Bronze age, but closer than most >fantasy gets. Wolfe is a great writer as well and these are some of his >best. > >Non-fiction: >Europe Before History - Kristian Kristiansen, Cambridge University Press >It's a pretty ambitious and thorough overview of Bronze age cultures around >Europe and the Mediterranean. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger http://www.msn.no/computing/messenger - Den korteste veien mellom deg og dine venner _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From slposey at concentric.net Sun Jul 4 10:54:39 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 17:54:39 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <20040703214343.19030.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040703214343.19030.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40E7554F.60300@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Stephen Posey wrote: > > >>I might add something about the character must >>remain motionless or the spell's effect is broken? > > > Well, the spell only benefits Hide and Conceal skills, > which work only if the subject is not moving. I also > like the idea of someone sprinting from rock to tree > and belnding in with the background. Okay, so perhaps the spell isn't broken, but perhaps the character retains the coloration and texture of the previous background when he starts moving, POTENTIALLY making him very obvious? Then perhaps it takes a moment after the character stops moving for the effect to reassert itself after the movement, like how a Flounder takes a moment to change its color to match after it moves? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jul 5 14:24:37 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 21:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <40E7554F.60300@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040705042437.30014.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > Okay, so perhaps the spell isn't broken, but perhaps > the character > retains the coloration and texture of the previous > background when he > starts moving, POTENTIALLY making him very obvious? > > Then perhaps it takes a moment after the character > stops moving for the > effect to reassert itself after the movement, like > how a Flounder takes > a moment to change its color to match after it > moves? Divine magic is supposed to be powerful. I do not see the need for this limitation. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mattley at gmail.com Mon Jul 5 14:30:47 2004 From: mattley at gmail.com (Matt Conrad) Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 23:30:47 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Rapiers/Crossbows In-Reply-To: <00ad01c45fe5$2b63d950$68417442@wizard> References: <00ad01c45fe5$2b63d950$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: Thanks to everyone who replied with reading suggestions. Matt From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 5 18:24:45 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 09:24:45 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: >--- Stephen Posey wrote: > >> I might add something about the character must >> remain motionless or the spell's effect is broken? > >Well, the spell only benefits Hide and Conceal skills, >which work only if the subject is not moving. I also >like the idea of someone sprinting from rock to tree >and belnding in with the background. > Erm, not strictly true IIRC: If you move and attempt to Hide, it halves your Hide skill, but it's not impossible. But I agree with Stephen, I think the spell should work with what you touch when it's cast, so you have to stay still, or at least against _that_ 'background'. Otherwise it becomes a Predator camo' field and gets a bit silly IMO; albeit for a God Learner or Tech paradigm game... Plus, this isn't an invisibility spell, it's a Blend, and I don't like the idea of a _spell_ being 'intelligent' ( i.e. constantly adapting to a changing environment - shades of Monsters Inc :D ). So I would allow movement (e.g. along a wall) at an _additional_ penalty on top of halving the Hide skill of say -5/meter moved, but I'm not sure I'd allow movement from one 'background' to another (From a brick wall to a wooden palisade for example). Given these restrictions (and Leon's re-jigging) I think it would then compare reasonably with Illusory Sight, the nearest "standard" spell. My copy of Gods of Glorantha is at home, so I'm not sure if there is anything comparable in their, ditto my copy of Leon's database (sadly, I can't get at his site from work due to a port conflict at my end...). On the other hand, I quite like the idea of a Shaman having for example an allied Spirit of the Forest that can cloak him in the appearance of the woodland, granting him a bonus to Hide and Sneak whilst in it's domain... Or possibly a Leshy (Plant Elemental)... but maybe I've been reading too much Swamp Thing recently! Cheers, Nick Middleton From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Jul 6 19:11:21 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:11:21 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2275@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Sounds good, reckon I will post it as such on my site. Are you going to add it to your database? -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein [mailto:leonbk at yahoo.com] Sent: 03 July 2004 07:53 To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend I like the spell, but I think it needs some work. What do you think about this version: Blend Touch, Temporal, 1pt, non-stackable This camouflages a person or an object by blending in with another object it is placed against. So a person blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the viewer to be part of the tree trunk. The affected item must be touching the item it is blending with, and the total SIZ points of the affected item must be not greater then the item it is blending with. Multiple items of different appearances or textures cannot be blended with, however one can blend with sand or pebbles on a beach. Blending does not make one invisible. Treat Blend as a special success Hide or Conceal roll. A successful Hide or Conceal roll in conjunction with Blend spell will be the equivalent of a critical success. --- "Den, Tony T" wrote: > Hi its me Tiberius in the guise of my work e-mail. > > I am working on a new spell. Herewith a first try: > > Divine magic > Blend - Touch - Temporal (1/5/5) > > Allows an affected person or thing to blend in with > any other object it is > placed against, to look like a part of such an > object. E.G. A person > blending in with a tree trunk to appear to the > viewer to be part of the tree > trunk. The affected party must be touching the item > it is blending with and > the total SIZ points of the affected party must be > less than those of the > item it is blending with. Multiple items of > different appearances/textures > cannot be blended with. One magic point will cover 5 > SIZ points or part > thereof for a total of 5 minutes. Thus, to make a > SIZ 13 human blend with a > cliff face for 10 minutes will cost 6 MP (3 for SIZ > x 2 for duration (10/5 > minutes = 2). Looking like an object does not make > the affected party > invisible to someone searching. Treat Blend as a > special success Hide roll. > A successful Hide roll together with Blend will be > the equivalent of a > critical success Hide roll. > > > > T?ny > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ > > For information about the Standard Bank group visit > our web site > ____________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ > > Disclaimer and confidentiality note > Everything in this e-mail and any attachments > relating to the official business of Standard Bank > Group Limited is proprietary to the group. > It is confidential, legally privileged and protected > by law. > Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other > content. Views and opinions are those of the sender > unless clearly stated as being that of the group. > The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole > authorised recipient. Please notify the sender > immediately if it has unintentionally reached you > and do not read, > disclose or use the content in any way. > Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of > this communication has been maintained nor that it > is free of errors, virus, interception or > interference. > ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jul 6 22:46:35 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 05:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2275@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <20040706124635.4982.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Den, Tony T" wrote: > Sounds good, reckon I will post it as such on my > site. Are you going to add > it to your database? Sure, just waiting for any more input and/or changes. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Jul 6 22:51:33 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 14:51:33 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2293@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Myself, didn't read all and sundries comments. Will collate the best of tthem and publish. Maybe add a wee subscript thanks to contributors:) -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein [mailto:leonbk at yahoo.com] Sent: 06 July 2004 02:47 To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend --- "Den, Tony T" wrote: > Sounds good, reckon I will post it as such on my > site. Are you going to add > it to your database? Sure, just waiting for any more input and/or changes. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Wed Jul 7 00:07:36 2004 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 15:07:36 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E9811E@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Nick Middleton: >Or possibly a Leshy (Plant Elemental)... The Plant rune is a form, not an element! It therefore does not have elementals, being as it is, NOT AN ELEMENT! :-) Phil Hibbs Sorry about the disclaminer, please ignore -- Our name has changed. Please update your address book to the following format: "recipient at capgemini.com". This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Jul 7 00:12:19 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 15:12:19 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: > >Nick Middleton: >>Or possibly a Leshy (Plant Elemental)... > >The Plant rune is a form, not an element! It therefore does not have >elementals, being as it is, NOT AN ELEMENT! :-) > I wasn't talking about Glorantha (or indeed any specific world) so plants can be elementals if I want them to be. Regards, Nick Middleton From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 7 05:02:43 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 12:02:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040706190243.80688.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > > ... it is, NOT AN ELEMENT! :-) > > > > ... so plants can be elementals if I want them to be. > Keep this up Nick and you'll be drafted to run for office in the next election. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Wed Jul 7 15:49:15 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 07:49:15 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F22AD@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Ha ha, so true. Thats why I have my own world. Don't want anyone telling me I can't have orcs and lizardmen etc. -----Original Message----- From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com > I wasn't talking about Glorantha (or indeed any specific world) so plants can be elementals if I want them to be. Regards, Nick Middleton __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Jul 7 17:43:17 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 08:43:17 +0100 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: >--- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >> > ... it is, NOT AN ELEMENT! :-) >> > >> >> ... so plants can be elementals if I want them to >>be. >> > >Keep this up Nick and you'll be drafted to run for >office in the next election. > Well, my Dad always prefaces his tirades about some idiocy of modern times with "When I'm King of the World...", so if I bump off my brother and sister, I'm next in line: mind I'll have to spend years ripping up all the slow, smelly, inefficient steam railways Dad will have put back... Being, if not more serious then at least more pedantic for a moment, "elemental" is defined at dictionary.com as follows: adj. 1. Of, relating to, or being an element. 2. a. Fundamental or essential; basic. b. Of or relating to fundamentals; elementary. c. Constituting an integral part; inborn. 3. Of such character as to resemble a force of nature in power or effect: elemental violence. n. In certain occult systems, an inhabitant of one of the four elements, especially any of the beings described by Paracelsus as intermediate in corporeality between humans and spirits. So I see nothing unreasonable in using the term the way I did, even if it doesn't fit a particular worlds cosmology (I did point out I'd been re-reading Swamp Thing recently). And anyway, when I'm king of the world plants WILL be elements. And so will marzipan (hmmm, marzipan...). Possibly I should go and lie down for a bit... Cheers, Nick Middleton From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Jul 7 17:07:10 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:07:10 +0200 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1089184029.40eba11e04ca3@imp.webhuset.no> Hi gang I agree with the idea that anything is eligible to 'element' status in a non- Gloranthan setting. The Chinese, for instance, have five elements* in their cosmology, one of which is "wood" -- pretty close to plant. Gianni *Even though 'element' is a very bad translation of the Chinese word _xing_, it is what we Westerners use because it is reminiscent of Greek 'elements'. From lancelot at inetnebr.com Wed Jul 7 22:45:19 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:45:19 -0500 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <1089184029.40eba11e04ca3@imp.webhuset.no> References: <1089184029.40eba11e04ca3@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <40EBF05F.7060306@inetnebr.com> Gianni wrote: >Hi gang > >I agree with the idea that anything is eligible to 'element' status in a non- >Gloranthan setting. >The Chinese, for instance, have five elements* in their cosmology, one of which >is "wood" -- pretty close to plant. > >Gianni > > Hmmm the 5 elements that I had heard of...include Void as the fifth. A fun (for me) almost Scientific Parralel with Elementalism could be the following "states of matter" gaseous = air liquid = water solid = earth energy = fire void = space They probably don't match exactly what was in your high school text book . . ;-) and you could throw time into the above without blinking. Space Time and Matter... a continuum eh, The above doesnt mean I don't think a cosm with plants/wood as the 5th Element is anything but cool. It does indeed have mythic precidence. Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying -- Lance Dyas Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds From grogthing at yahoo.com Wed Jul 7 23:21:58 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 06:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <40EBF05F.7060306@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <20040707132158.33347.qmail@web41501.mail.yahoo.com> 5 Chinese elements air fire water wood metal gregory --- lance dyas wrote: > Gianni wrote: > > >Hi gang > > > >I agree with the idea that anything is eligible to > 'element' status in a non- > >Gloranthan setting. > >The Chinese, for instance, have five elements* in > their cosmology, one of which > >is "wood" -- pretty close to plant. > > > >Gianni > > > > > > Hmmm the 5 elements that I had heard of...include > Void as the fifth. > > A fun (for me) almost Scientific Parralel with > Elementalism > could be the following "states of matter" > gaseous = air > liquid = water > solid = earth > energy = fire > void = space > > They probably don't match exactly what was in your > high school text book > . . ;-) > and you could throw time into the above without > blinking. Space Time > and Matter... a continuum eh, > > The above doesnt mean I don't think a cosm with > plants/wood as the 5th > Element is anything but > cool. It does indeed have mythic precidence. > > > Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying > > -- Lance Dyas > Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven > Gaming Center > http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Jul 7 23:02:03 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:02:03 +0200 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <40EBF05F.7060306@inetnebr.com> References: <1089184029.40eba11e04ca3@imp.webhuset.no> <40EBF05F.7060306@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <1089205323.40ebf44b26f53@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting lance dyas : > Hmmm the 5 elements that I had heard of...include Void as the fifth. 'Taint traditional Chinese -- it is Buddhist cosmology you're talking of. Don't mix 'em up. See http://www.friesian.com/elements.htm for an interesting development. G. From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 8 01:02:12 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 08:02:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Divine Magic In-Reply-To: <1089205323.40ebf44b26f53@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040707150212.91100.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com> One of the problems in making new Divine (Rune) spells is the fact that they become available to a very small number of gods in your world. I am thinkning of changing that. That I propose to do is sort all divine magic by runes and then give initiates of major dieties access to all spells associated with their runes. Major diety - Common divine, Rune spells (all divine spells associated with their runes), spells unique to the god, spells granted by their allied cults Minor diety - Common divine, spells unique to the god, spells granted by their allied cults Spirit cults - spells unique to the god There will be exceptions, of course, but it should work. The major problem is that a lot of spells can be assigned to more than one rune, so for example what would be the correct rune to associate Blend with? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jurrubin at earthlink.net Thu Jul 8 07:02:01 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 16:02:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Divine Magic Message-ID: <20724645.1089234121597.JavaMail.root@huey.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Illusion? David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Jul 7, 2004 10:02 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: [RQ-Rules] Divine Magic One of the problems in making new Divine (Rune) spells is the fact that they become available to a very small number of gods in your world. I am thinkning of changing that. That I propose to do is sort all divine magic by runes and then give initiates of major dieties access to all spells associated with their runes. Major diety - Common divine, Rune spells (all divine spells associated with their runes), spells unique to the god, spells granted by their allied cults Minor diety - Common divine, spells unique to the god, spells granted by their allied cults Spirit cults - spells unique to the god There will be exceptions, of course, but it should work. The major problem is that a lot of spells can be assigned to more than one rune, so for example what would be the correct rune to associate Blend with? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Jul 8 11:36:13 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 18:36:13 -0700 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend References: Message-ID: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard> As far as my SPQR rules are concerned, anything can be an element, and have elementals. Some of them are not much good in a fight, but they have their uses... In Gloranthan terms, if it has a rune, it can have elementals. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 12:43 AM Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend > >--- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >> > ... it is, NOT AN ELEMENT! :-) > >> > > >> > >> ... so plants can be elementals if I want them to > >>be. > >> > > > >Keep this up Nick and you'll be drafted to run for > >office in the next election. > > > > Well, my Dad always prefaces his tirades about some idiocy of modern times > with "When I'm King of the World...", so if I bump off my brother and > sister, I'm next in line: mind I'll have to spend years ripping up all the > slow, smelly, inefficient steam railways Dad will have put back... > > Being, if not more serious then at least more pedantic for a moment, > "elemental" is defined at dictionary.com as follows: > > adj. > 1. Of, relating to, or being an element. > 2. a. Fundamental or essential; basic. > b. Of or relating to fundamentals; elementary. > c. Constituting an integral part; inborn. > 3. Of such character as to resemble a force of nature in power or > effect: elemental violence. > > n. > In certain occult systems, an inhabitant of one of the four elements, > especially any of the beings described by Paracelsus as intermediate in > corporeality between humans and spirits. > > > So I see nothing unreasonable in using the term the way I did, even if it > doesn't fit a particular worlds cosmology (I did point out I'd been > re-reading Swamp Thing recently). > > And anyway, when I'm king of the world plants WILL be elements. And so will > marzipan (hmmm, marzipan...). Possibly I should go and lie down for a > bit... > > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From lancelot at inetnebr.com Thu Jul 8 13:27:00 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 22:27:00 -0500 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend In-Reply-To: <1089205323.40ebf44b26f53@imp.webhuset.no> References: <1089184029.40eba11e04ca3@imp.webhuset.no> <40EBF05F.7060306@inetnebr.com> <1089205323.40ebf44b26f53@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <40ECBF04.4040503@inetnebr.com> Gianni wrote: >Quoting lance dyas : > > > >>Hmmm the 5 elements that I had heard of...include Void as the fifth. >> >> > >'Taint traditional Chinese -- it is Buddhist cosmology you're talking of. Don't >mix 'em up. > > Thats fine the Chinese people I have known were generally budhists ;-) , ie.gained this lore via word of mouth rather than reading material >See http://www.friesian.com/elements.htm for an interesting development. > >G. > WOW thanks for that link very cool page. -- Lance Dyas Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying -- Lance Dyas Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Thu Jul 8 17:04:05 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 09:04:05 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Divine Magic Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F22E1@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Interesting - I would like to se ehow this develops. My group jippos the magic a bit, we allow all divine spells in the magic book to divine magic practitioners - but cult spells in gods of glorantha have to be substantiated, as the world we use is our own so glorantha gods can't really be represented. My rule when I GM is if you want to use a cuklt specific spell, give me a write up of an alternative cult for my world. Unfortunatly this usually has the affect of the character using a different spell rather than what I wanted (a write up of a "new" religion). We also play some sells by ear. One character is an Initiate of the Moon Goddess and is on her way to becoming a priestess. She uses Sun Spear, but from general consensus,we have changed it to Moon Spear and put some limitations on, like the moon has to be visable etc. Mus still hash out some stuff re this and will publish my findings. Tony -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein One of the problems in making new Divine (Rune) spells is the fact that they become available to a very small number of gods in your world. I am thinkning of changing that. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Jul 8 17:22:50 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 08:22:50 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Divine Magic Message-ID: >My group jippos the magic a bit, we allow all divine spells in the magic >book to divine magic practitioners - but cult spells in gods of glorantha >have to be substantiated, as the world we use is our own so glorantha gods >can't really be represented. My rule when I GM is if you want to use a cuklt >specific spell, give me a write up of an alternative cult for my world. I also allowed plausible justifications for why an existing God (or a subcult there of) would have it, as many of the Gods in my old RQII world were (at least in OOC origin) from Glorantha with a few tweaks. >Unfortunatly this usually has the affect of the character using a different >spell rather than what I wanted (a write up of a "new" religion). albeit, too great a proliferation of gods/religions can swamp a setting: hence for example my preference for the RQ era Glorantha where the number of Gods I needed to worry about seemed to be finite, and part of my lack of enthusiasm for HW/HQ Glorantha (which appears to be drowning in the pesky things)... >We also play some sells by ear. One character is an Initiate of the Moon >Goddess and is on her way to becoming a priestess. She uses Sun Spear, but >from general consensus,we have changed it to Moon Spear and put some >limitations on, like the moon has to be visable etc. Did that all the time, seemed to me part and parcel of adapting the base RQIII generic Gods to a particular setting. > Mus still hash out some >stuff re this and will publish my findings. Cool, will look forward to that. Cheers, Nick Middleton From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Thu Jul 8 22:06:44 2004 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:06:44 +0100 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: Well, Didn't you all see the movie ? The 5th element is LOVE ;-) Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] Envoy? : jeudi 8 juillet 2004 05:27 ? : RuneQuest rules discussion. Objet : Re: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Gianni wrote: >Quoting lance dyas : > > > >>Hmmm the 5 elements that I had heard of...include Void as the fifth. >> >> > >'Taint traditional Chinese -- it is Buddhist cosmology you're talking >of. Don't mix 'em up. > > Thats fine the Chinese people I have known were generally budhists ;-) , ie.gained this lore via word of mouth rather than reading material >See http://www.friesian.com/elements.htm for an interesting development. > >G. > WOW thanks for that link very cool page. -- Lance Dyas Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying -- Lance Dyas Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Jul 8 22:30:21 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:30:21 +0100 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: >Well, Didn't you all see the movie ? What, that one with Milajajovich (or whatever she's called) babbling incomprehensively whilst wrapped in implausibly neatly position bandages? How he persuaded ANYONE to fund what is quite patently a sexually frustrated 15-year olds idea of an SF epic, I do not know. But the world is a richer and funnier place for it... >The 5th element is LOVE ;-) Oh, you mean 'Krull', no I loathed that film... Cheers, Nick Middleton From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Fri Jul 9 00:36:55 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:36:55 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard> References: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums site and checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my surprise, found two new items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. From the descriptions it seems like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and 'Divine-Magic'. Does anyone know anything more about these books? From vhaag at rim.com Fri Jul 9 00:57:00 2004 From: vhaag at rim.com (Viktor Haag) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 10:57:00 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> References: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard><200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <16621.24764.302240.428319@suldrun.rim.net> Peter Brink writes: > While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums > site and checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my > surprise, found two new items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic > Book. From the descriptions it seems like they contain RQ-like > stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions > 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and > 'Divine-Magic'. > > Does anyone know anything more about these books? It appears that what they are in fact doing is providing a set of BRP rules for use with Rick Meint's 'Moon Design' RQ2 reprints. I find this most interesting especially since I had heard that Stafford had denied permission for Meints to reprint the old RQ2 rulebook as part of his series. Hrm. What will interest me is how they manage to "genericize" the rules in the players and magic book, since I'm sure they won't be able to print anything specific to Glorantha in them. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ Disclaimer mandated by employer: "This transmission may contain confidential or privileged material. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful." From vhaag at rim.com Fri Jul 9 01:07:00 2004 From: vhaag at rim.com (Viktor Haag) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 11:07:00 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> References: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard><200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <16621.25364.362050.873975@suldrun.rim.net> Peter Brink writes: > While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums > site and checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my > surprise, found two new items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic > Book. From the descriptions it seems like they contain RQ-like > stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions > 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and > 'Divine-Magic'. > > Does anyone know anything more about these books? After reading the descriptions, it seems most likely that they're reprints of the text contained in RQ3's "Players Book" and "Magic Book". The page counts are even almost identical. What's a bit disappointing about this is the claim that the works are "fully compatible" with the Moon Design books, because I wouldn't call RQ3's mechanics "fully compatible" with the RQ2 material in Meints' books. Especially in the magic systems. Ah well. It'd be nice to be proven wrong. 8( -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ Disclaimer mandated by employer: "This transmission may contain confidential or privileged material. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful." From Alain.RAMEAU at total.com Fri Jul 9 01:31:07 2004 From: Alain.RAMEAU at total.com (Alain.RAMEAU at total.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:31:07 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Non-element elementals Message-ID: This reminds me an article in White Dwarf, or may be Heroes, long time ago, regarding non-element elementals. Some where pretty interesting : Chaos elemental, giving chaos features, Movement elemental, allowing sort of teleportation, ... >Steve Perrin : > >As far as my SPQR rules are concerned, anything can be an element, and have >elementals. Some of them are not much good in a fight, but they have their >uses... > >In Gloranthan terms, if it has a rune, it can have elementals. > >Steve From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 00:48:47 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 15:48:47 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosium's site and >checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my surprise, found two new >items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. Oh Ho! Shame I can't check the site through works Internet screening... > From the descriptions it seems >like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions >'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and 'Divine-Magic'. Well, they may be trying to re-write RQ in their own words as "Advanced BRP", or possibly its the rules elements of Elfquest (which, along with Worlds of Wonder they still own IIRC). >Does anyone know anything more about these books? Yes, please do tell...! Cheers, Nick Middleton From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 02:18:11 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 09:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040708161811.69914.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> I just ordered them online. I should get them next week. I will give a review after I look them over. Gregory --- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >While casually roaming the net I had a short look > at Chaosium's site and > >checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my > surprise, found two new > >items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. > > Oh Ho! Shame I can't check the site through works > Internet screening... > > > From the descriptions it seems > >like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description of > the Players Book > mentions > >'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' > and 'Divine-Magic'. > > Well, they may be trying to re-write RQ in their own > words as "Advanced > BRP", or possibly its the rules elements of Elfquest > (which, along with > Worlds of Wonder they still own IIRC). > > >Does anyone know anything more about these books? > > Yes, please do tell...! > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 9 02:40:41 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 09:40:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> References: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard> <200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <40ED7909.3050309@concentric.net> Peter Brink wrote: > While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums site and > checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my surprise, found two new > items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. From the descriptions it seems > like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions > 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and 'Divine-Magic'. > > Does anyone know anything more about these books? How very interesting. This segues into a topic I'd been mulling over for the last several weeks. I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all of us as afficionados of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP rules were made "open source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System Reference Document" for Dungeons and Dragons. The one fly in that ointment that I was stumbling over was WotC's model where they didn't open source certain portions of the rules (in particular the character generation and advancement rules) in order to assure a market for their core D20 Player's Handbooks. Anyone wanting to use the D20 licence had to respect that restriction. However, Chaosium had no equivalent "Player's Manual" for BRP to point to. The basic BRP book is too simple, and the core CoC or Stormbringer books are too genre specific to suit. Now that threre's effectively a "generic" Player's Handbook for the "Chaosium System" available, I think it might be possible to convince Chaosium to agree to treat some portion of the BRP rules as an OGL BRP-SRD and open them up to outside game designers. So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of an open source ruleset and require purchase of the Player's Handbook in order to use a "Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible with Basic Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC has done. Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious competition. What do others on the list think about this? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 02:47:32 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 09:47:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <40ED7909.3050309@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040708164732.77365.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> That would be awsome if they were willing. Gregory --- Stephen Posey wrote: > Peter Brink wrote: > > > While casually roaming the net I had a short look > at Chaosiums site and > > checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my > surprise, found two new > > items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. From > the descriptions it seems > > like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description > of the Players Book mentions > > 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' > and 'Divine-Magic'. > > > > Does anyone know anything more about these books? > > How very interesting. This segues into a topic I'd > been mulling over for > the last several weeks. > > I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all > of us as afficionados > of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP > rules were made "open > source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System > Reference Document" for > Dungeons and Dragons. > > The one fly in that ointment that I was stumbling > over was WotC's model > where they didn't open source certain portions of > the rules (in > particular the character generation and advancement > rules) in order to > assure a market for their core D20 Player's > Handbooks. > > Anyone wanting to use the D20 licence had to respect > that restriction. > However, Chaosium had no equivalent "Player's > Manual" for BRP to point > to. The basic BRP book is too simple, and the core > CoC or Stormbringer > books are too genre specific to suit. > > Now that threre's effectively a "generic" Player's > Handbook for the > "Chaosium System" available, I think it might be > possible to convince > Chaosium to agree to treat some portion of the BRP > rules as an OGL > BRP-SRD and open them up to outside game designers. > > So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of > an open source > ruleset and require purchase of the Player's > Handbook in order to use a > "Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible > with Basic > Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC > has done. > > Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious > competition. > > What do others on the list think about this? > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 03:48:53 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 10:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <20040708164732.77365.qmail@web41502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040708174853.23046.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> If only we get them to redo the sorcery rules before that!! Leon --- grogthing wrote: > That would be awsome if they were willing. > > Gregory > > --- Stephen Posey wrote: > > Peter Brink wrote: > > > > > While casually roaming the net I had a short > look > > at Chaosiums site and > > > checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my > > surprise, found two new > > > items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. From > > the descriptions it seems > > > like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description > > of the Players Book mentions > > > 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' > > and 'Divine-Magic'. > > > > > > Does anyone know anything more about these > books? > > > > How very interesting. This segues into a topic I'd > > been mulling over for > > the last several weeks. > > > > I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all > > of us as afficionados > > of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP > > rules were made "open > > source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System > > Reference Document" for > > Dungeons and Dragons. > > > > The one fly in that ointment that I was stumbling > > over was WotC's model > > where they didn't open source certain portions of > > the rules (in > > particular the character generation and > advancement > > rules) in order to > > assure a market for their core D20 Player's > > Handbooks. > > > > Anyone wanting to use the D20 licence had to > respect > > that restriction. > > However, Chaosium had no equivalent "Player's > > Manual" for BRP to point > > to. The basic BRP book is too simple, and the core > > CoC or Stormbringer > > books are too genre specific to suit. > > > > Now that threre's effectively a "generic" Player's > > Handbook for the > > "Chaosium System" available, I think it might be > > possible to convince > > Chaosium to agree to treat some portion of the BRP > > rules as an OGL > > BRP-SRD and open them up to outside game > designers. > > > > So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out > of > > an open source > > ruleset and require purchase of the Player's > > Handbook in order to use a > > "Compatible with the Chaosium System" or > "Compatible > > with Basic > > Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as > WotC > > has done. > > > > Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some > serious > > competition. > > > > What do others on the list think about this? > > > > Stephen Posey > > slposey at concentric.net > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > ===== > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal > hostility against every > form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas > Jefferson > > "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there > are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my > pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson > > "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be > purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid > it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may > take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me > death!" - Patrick Henry > > "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon > devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive > of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider > god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 9 04:16:24 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:16:24 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <20040708174853.23046.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040708174853.23046.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40ED8F78.60906@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > If only we get them to redo the sorcery rules before > that!! I don't think that would be strictly necessary, IMO that would be an area that Chaosium would be well advised NOT to put a lot of energy into "fixing". Sorcery is one of those systems (much like D&D Magic) that pretty much EVERYONE has their own ideas of how best to implement it; and IMO would be much better served by putting some very basic core rules (maybe Magic World's?, maybe some simplified RQ spirit magic?) out in the BRP-SRD and then just letting folks just come up with their own variants or new systems. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From vhaag at rim.com Fri Jul 9 04:23:05 2004 From: vhaag at rim.com (Viktor Haag) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 14:23:05 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <40ED8F78.60906@concentric.net> References: <20040708174853.23046.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com><40ED8F78.60906@concentric.net> Message-ID: <16621.37129.177969.856750@suldrun.rim.net> Stephen Posey writes: > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > If only we get them to redo the sorcery rules before > > that!! > > I don't think that would be strictly necessary, IMO that would > be an area that Chaosium would be well advised NOT to put a > lot of energy into "fixing". > > Sorcery is one of those systems (much like D&D Magic) that > pretty much EVERYONE has their own ideas of how best to > implement it; and IMO would be much better served by putting > some very basic core rules (maybe Magic World's?, maybe some > simplified RQ spirit magic?) out in the BRP-SRD and then just > letting folks just come up with their own variants or new > systems. This may seem crazy, but since they're at least advertising that they want to make the rules compatible with Rick Meint's republications, I think they'd get much better mileage out of a "modernification and generification" of RQ2's magic system: i.e. Battle Magic and Rune Magic. The cynical part of me says that very little work at all went into these two "mimeograph" works, and that they're basically just a reprinting of RQ3 text. However, I have NO PROOF that this is the case, and I'd love to see that this isn't the case and that more thought went into making these books into something really (a) generic, and (b) directly usable with Meint's republished works. -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ Disclaimer mandated by employer: "This transmission may contain confidential or privileged material. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful." From slposey at concentric.net Fri Jul 9 04:51:36 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:51:36 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: <16621.37129.177969.856750@suldrun.rim.net> References: <20040708174853.23046.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com><40ED8F78.60906@concentric.net> <16621.37129.177969.856750@suldrun.rim.net> Message-ID: <40ED97B8.2060802@concentric.net> Viktor Haag wrote: > Stephen Posey writes: > > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > If only we get them to redo the sorcery rules before > > > that!! > > > > I don't think that would be strictly necessary, IMO that would > > be an area that Chaosium would be well advised NOT to put a > > lot of energy into "fixing". > > > > Sorcery is one of those systems (much like D&D Magic) that > > pretty much EVERYONE has their own ideas of how best to > > implement it; and IMO would be much better served by putting > > some very basic core rules (maybe Magic World's?, maybe some > > simplified RQ spirit magic?) out in the BRP-SRD and then just > > letting folks just come up with their own variants or new > > systems. > > This may seem crazy, but since they're at least advertising that > they want to make the rules compatible with Rick Meint's > republications, I think they'd get much better mileage out of a > "modernification and generification" of RQ2's magic system: > i.e. Battle Magic and Rune Magic. > > The cynical part of me says that very little work at all went > into these two "mimeograph" works, and that they're basically > just a reprinting of RQ3 text. However, I have NO PROOF that > this is the case, and I'd love to see that this isn't the case > and that more thought went into making these books into > something really (a) generic, and (b) directly usable with > Meint's republished works. I'm cynical about all this too. And I concur with your assessment. My first guess is that these are very minimal reformattings of the RQ3 texts. Which would be in line with the overall thrust of the "monograph" works to-date. This isn't meant to be a condemnation really; just a recognition of Chaosium's recent difficulties and their doing the best they can with the limited resources currently at their disposal (I presume everyone here is aware that they've been semi-quietly auctioning some of the more obsucure items from their game library off on eBay? Mostly foreign language stuff.) I love their products, and I desperately want to see them succeed and prosper, but they have a history of missing opportunities and shooting themselves in the foot . I'd like to think that the OGL approach with a BRP-SRD document opened up to 3rd party rules developers and their licensing a "Chaosium System Compatible" label (a la "D20"), along with a set of BRP Core manuals, would ultimately be good for their bottom line. But there's no 100% guarantees, and it might get worse before it gets better, and it has to be done RIGHT. :-/ Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From soltakss at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 06:07:56 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 21:07:56 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elementals In-Reply-To: <20040708150713.B9C9F2226FA@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040708200756.62069.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Steve Perrin: > As far as my SPQR rules are concerned, anything can be an element, and have > elementals. Some of them are not much good in a fight, but they have their > uses... > > In Gloranthan terms, if it has a rune, it can have elementals. Best not to mention the Toenail Clippings Elemental or the Cut Hair Elemental again, otherwise Phil will explode.... ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jul 9 05:24:35 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 21:24:35 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Non-element elementals In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1089314675.40ed9f7322133@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Alain.RAMEAU at total.com: > This reminds me an article in White Dwarf, or may be Heroes, long time > ago, regarding non-element elementals. > Some where pretty interesting : Chaos elemental, giving chaos features, > Movement elemental, allowing sort of teleportation, ... It was in Heroes. There was something similar (in French) in one of the early issues of Tatou. Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From comogatas at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 08:16:46 2004 From: comogatas at yahoo.com (Eddy) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 15:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ resurrected? Open Source Market In-Reply-To: <20040708185153.1E836222709@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040708221646.69697.qmail@web40504.mail.yahoo.com> The reason the D20 core rules are open source (and also why some of their other stuff isn't) is a purely marketing reason. When TSR was bought out the new accountants found that the #1 seller by far was the PHB so the new owners adopted the open source idea to sell their #1 seller. If Chaosium wants to follow suit they would need to: a. have a #1 seller of core rules similar to the PHB b. have other products that pushed the sales of the #1 seller I don't work for either company (my business has nothing to do with RPGs, damn) but I do study businesses in the industry (including their history) when I have time. Only Chaosium would know if they even have the answer to the first part, but it seems to me their sales model is different. I like SPQR and similar "homebrew" rules and variants myself. More democratic and easier to tweak and pick apart for ideas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all of us as afficionados of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP rules were made "open source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System Reference Document" for Dungeons and Dragons. The one fly in that ointment that I was stumbling over was WotC's model where they didn't open source certain portions of the rules (in particular the character generation and advancement rules) in order to assure a market for their core D20 Player's Handbooks. Anyone wanting to use the D20 licence had to respect that restriction. However, Chaosium had no equivalent "Player's Manual" for BRP to point to. The basic BRP book is too simple, and the core CoC or Stormbringer books are too genre specific to suit. Now that threre's effectively a "generic" Player's Handbook for the "Chaosium System" available, I think it might be possible to convince Chaosium to agree to treat some portion of the BRP rules as an OGL BRP-SRD and open them up to outside game designers. So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of an open source ruleset and require purchase of the Player's Handbook in order to use a "Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible with Basic Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC has done. Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious competition. What do others on the list think about this? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. From MurfNMurf at aol.com Fri Jul 9 09:56:22 2004 From: MurfNMurf at aol.com (MurfNMurf at aol.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 19:56:22 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elementals Message-ID: <11.2db02bb9.2e1f3926@aol.com> In a message dated 7/8/2004 3:08:51 PM Central Standard Time, soltakss at yahoo.com writes: Best not to mention the Toenail Clippings Elemental or the Cut Hair Elemental again, otherwise Phil will explode.... Aha! Toenail Clippings Elemental! -Ken- From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 18:07:42 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:07:42 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >>Peter Brink writes: >> While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums >> site and checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my >> surprise, found two new items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic >> Book. From the descriptions it seems like they contain RQ-like >> stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions >> 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and >> 'Divine-Magic'. >> >> Does anyone know anything more about these books? > >After reading the descriptions, it seems most likely that >they're reprints of the text contained in RQ3's "Players Book" >and "Magic Book". The page counts are even almost identical. > Phew! No need to foam at the mouth in irritation over them being "Monographs" and thus priced out of reach (thanks to shipping) of non-US purchasers, as I have the RQIII rules (embarrassingly, FIVE copies I realised when I bothered to count 'em!) >What's a bit disappointing about this is the claim that the >works are "fully compatible" with the Moon Design books, because >I wouldn't call RQ3's mechanics "fully compatible" with the RQ2 >material in Meints' books. Especially in the magic systems. I'm currently playing in a Pavis game where we are using the RQIII rules and the GM's source material is the Moon Design reprint of Pavis & the Big Rubble. The only thing the GM has muttered about is some npc/monster stat conversions (I think he's acutely aware that the RQII stats are all 12SR's/round, as opposed to RQIII's 10SR/round, which the PC's a re calculated on...). Magic has yet to be a problem. >Ah well. It'd be nice to be proven wrong. 8( Considering how bleak the RQ Rules scene was in terms of currently published support pretty much until Peter drew are attention to this, I don't think we should be too despondent. In many ways, a reissue in monograph format of the rules formally known as RQIII to gauge interest is a sensible move. If all the colonials buy it, it may well provide the springboard for Chaosium to issue a "Complete, Revised Chaosium Role Playing System" that is what RQIV _could_ have been... Makes it even more depressing I can't make it to Continuum this year to hear Charlie Krank's talk. Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 18:09:14 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:09:14 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >I just ordered them online. I should get them next >week. I will give a review after I look them over. > >> >Does anyone know anything more about these books? >> >> Yes, please do tell...! >> Cheers Greg, I think we'll all be fascinated to see what is actually in them. Best, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 18:35:04 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:35:04 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >Peter Brink wrote: > >> While casually roaming the net I had a short look at Chaosiums site and >> checked their Basic Roleplaying stuff and, to my surprise, found two new >> items: BRP Players Book and BRP Magic Book. From the descriptions it seems >> like they contain RQ-like stuff. The description of the Players Book mentions >> 'Strike-Ranks' and the Magic Book 'Spirit-Magic' and 'Divine-Magic'. >> >> Does anyone know anything more about these books? > >How very interesting. This segues into a topic I'd been mulling over for >the last several weeks. > >I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all of us as afficionados >of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP rules were made "open >source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System Reference Document" for >Dungeons and Dragons. > >The one fly in that ointment that I was stumbling over was WotC's model >where they didn't open source certain portions of the rules (in >particular the character generation and advancement rules) in order to >assure a market for their core D20 Player's Handbooks. > >Anyone wanting to use the D20 licence had to respect that restriction. >However, Chaosium had no equivalent "Player's Manual" for BRP to point >to. The basic BRP book is too simple, and the core CoC or Stormbringer >books are too genre specific to suit. > >Now that threre's effectively a "generic" Player's Handbook for the >"Chaosium System" available, I think it might be possible to convince >Chaosium to agree to treat some portion of the BRP rules as an OGL >BRP-SRD and open them up to outside game designers. > >So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of an open source >ruleset and require purchase of the Player's Handbook in order to use a >"Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible with Basic >Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC has done. For Chaosium, I think it would have to be less open: supplements like Darcsyde's Corum or Stephane's original PDF version of Dark Age Cthulhu would be OK, but I think Chaosium would be fools to allow any sort of stand alone BRP games that didn't license the BRP rules off them for a fee. >Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious competition. Whilst it is a lovely dream Stephen, respectfully I think you are letting your enthusiasm get the better of you. It would, if done right, help secure CoC, Stormbringer and Chaosium's future, and provid a proper footing for a BRP alternative to the mainstream of paper and pencil RPGs, but given the marketing might and market presence of Ha$bro, Witless W*nkers, and SJG, it won't be BRP that derails d20 (it'll probably do it itself actually). And given that the nature of that market is largely strangling originality and innovation in favour of crass lowest common denominator mass marketing# I seriously hope that Chaosium steer well clear of trying to engage the mainstream head on. >What do others on the list think about this? As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it would be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. But on the whole this is great news. One question: one therefore assumes that the net scuttlebut regarding the _copyright_ on the RQIII rules wasn't strictly true. Speculation: AH didn't own it, but perhaps had the rights to it for a number of years after the severance agreement with Chaosium came into force? Cheers, Nick Middleton (curently resisting the urge to text all my role-playing mates, get up and start singing etc etc.) # for every Mutants and Masterminds, there are a hundred quintessential This, ultimate That books; all shoddily edited, garishly illustrated and gone form the shelves within weeks of arriving. Mongoose churn out bucket loads of rushed, vacuous, soul-less rubbish at five to ten times the rate Malhavoc release their stunningly well crafted gems... Now whilst Sturgeon's Law applies##, I have always believed that Chaosium bucked the trend considerably and since the only way to engage the mainstream RPG market is to go the same way, I hope they don't bother... although someone paying thema big fat license fee to do a stand alone BRP rules based game would be cool... ## To paraphrase: "Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud, but 90% of everything of _everything_ is crud" From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 18:59:02 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 09:59:02 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >> The cynical part of me says that very little work at all went >> into these two "mimeograph" works, and that they're basically >> just a reprinting of RQ3 text. However, I have NO PROOF that >> this is the case, and I'd love to see that this isn't the case >> and that more thought went into making these books into >> something really (a) generic, and (b) directly usable with >> Meint's republished works. > >I'm cynical about all this too. And I concur with your assessment. My >first guess is that these are very minimal reformattings of the RQ3 >texts. Which would be in line with the overall thrust of the "monograph" >works to-date. Really gentleman, the petulance of the Internet generation! A month ago our beloved RQ Rules system had been out print for nigh on a decade and there was no prospect of it seeing print again as far as any of us knew. The news that it is back is less than a day old here and already people are carping! >This isn't meant to be a condemnation really; just a recognition of >Chaosium's recent difficulties and their doing the best they can with >the limited resources currently at their disposal (I presume everyone >here is aware that they've been semi-quietly auctioning some of the more >obsucure items from their game library off on eBay? Mostly foreign >language stuff.) One should read too much in to that however, I have regularly bought RPG's books on eBay from Matt Sprange (head honcho of Mongoose Publishing), and there is no sign of Mongoose being in trouble... >I love their products, and I desperately want to see them succeed and >prosper, but they have a history of missing opportunities and shooting >themselves in the foot . Yes, but they also have a tradition of quality in their RPG books that for all Lightning Print and recent vicissitudes blemished it, is still intact (BtMoM for example) and which I would hate to see them throw away in an unseemly scramble for probably fickle mainstream market share. >I'd like to think that the OGL approach with a BRP-SRD document opened >up to 3rd party rules developers and their licensing a "Chaosium System >Compatible" label (a la "D20"), along with a set of BRP Core manuals, >would ultimately be good for their bottom line. I think a better model would be an 'open' "BRP Compatible License" for supplements and a reasonable license fee for using the full BRP rules in a stand a lone game, but a full open release on the scale of the d20 SRD of the BRP rules would kill Chaosium stone dead as an RPG publisher in my opinion. >But there's no 100% guarantees, and it might get worse before it gets >better, and it has to be done RIGHT. :-/ Indeed. And on the whole, a cautious approach, which this mongraph release appears to be the first steps of, is a far better (and safer) bet than rushing in to any sort of "open gaming" approach before they have thoroughly thought it through. I _REALLY_ wish I could get to Continuum... Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 19:02:28 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 10:02:28 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elementals Message-ID: >Steve Perrin: > >> As far as my SPQR rules are concerned, anything can be an element, and have >> elementals. Some of them are not much good in a fight, but they have their >> uses... >> >> In Gloranthan terms, if it has a rune, it can have elementals. > >Best not to mention the Toenail Clippings Elemental or the Cut Hair Elemental >again, otherwise Phil will explode.... > *shudder* possibly I was young and impressionable, but ever since reading some bit of the Norse saga's with Hela's ship in it at about age 8, the idea of ANYTHING made out of bits of people (dead men's fingernails, what DOES the tooth fairy do with all those teeth exactly?) has creeped me out... The bit it Neil Gaiman's "Coraline" about buttons freaked me out a bit as well... Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 19:19:12 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 10:19:12 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ resurrected? Open Source Market Message-ID: >The reason the D20 core rules are open source (and also why some of their other stuff isn't) is a purely marketing >reason. When TSR was bought out the new accountants found that the #1 seller by far was the PHB so the new owners >adopted the open source idea to sell their #1 seller. If Chaosium wants to follow suit they would need to: >a. have a #1 seller of core rules similar to the PHB >b. have other products that pushed the sales of the #1 seller Not strictly true in my opinion. A more limited 'Open License'# would allow others to publish games without developing their own rules system and still promote Chaosium's published books by the same synergy of interests (what was the buzzword? "network externiality"?), i.e. reducing the risks to both parties, without Chaosium having a huge market presence. The benefits would be commensurately smaller, but I think there would be sufficient positive effect to make it worth it. But as I mentioned in another post, it could also be dangerous. >I don't work for either company (my business has nothing to do with RPGs, damn) but I do study businesses in the >industry (including their history) when I have time. Only Chaosium would know if they even have the answer to the >first part, but it seems to me their sales model is different. But other people producing material for their rules boosts their rules' sales, and market presence, which means their own supplements sales would benefit. It wouldn't be the snowball/avalanche effect of d20, but neither is it open to the sort of short term faddishness that drives the d20 market and may in general offer greater long term stability. >I like SPQR and similar "homebrew" rules and variants myself. More democratic and easier to tweak and pick apart >for ideas. I agree in principle but I'm too old (i.e. have too little free time) to produce material myself as freely as when I was a skiving arts student, so _some_ commercial support is preferable to none. Which of course is where we were pretty much RQ rules wise a month ago... Cheers, Nick Middleton # As a rough summary/ suggestion: Anyone can put compatible with BRP and the BRP logo on their RPG scenario or supplement provide it a) is not a stand alone game, i.e. does not contain _complete_ Character Creation, Combat or Magic rules and b) clearly states "Requires the Chasium Basic Role Playing Players Book, Magic Book and GM's Book## to play" . One would probably want further stipulations to the effect that the _rules_ remain Chaosium's and that any product identity remains the publishers etc. ##Assuming they get round to issuing that as well at some point... From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Fri Jul 9 20:08:38 2004 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 11:08:38 +0100 Subject: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend Message-ID: No I mean the film the 5th element, I'd seen Krull, but the only thing I liked in it was the weapon. Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] Envoy? : jeudi 8 juillet 2004 14:30 ? : RuneQuest rules discussion. Objet : RE: OT, was Re: [RQ-Rules] New Spell - Blend >Well, Didn't you all see the movie ? What, that one with Milajajovich (or whatever she's called) babbling incomprehensively whilst wrapped in implausibly neatly position bandages? How he persuaded ANYONE to fund what is quite patently a sexually frustrated 15-year olds idea of an SF epic, I do not know. But the world is a richer and funnier place for it... >The 5th element is LOVE ;-) Oh, you mean 'Krull', no I loathed that film... Cheers, Nick Middleton _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Fri Jul 9 20:10:28 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:10:28 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? References: <004a01c4648c$04e76890$68417442@wizard><200407081636.56165.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> <40ED7909.3050309@concentric.net> Message-ID: <003901c4659d$3f4d2df0$9d2aa8c0@skadebyran.se> Stephen Posey wrote > I think it would be good for Chaosium, and for all of us as afficionados > of RQ and the derived systems if a core set of BRP rules were made "open > source" like the Wizards of the Coast "System Reference Document" for > Dungeons and Dragons. < snip> > What do others on the list think about this? I have to agree with Nick on this - Chaosium should be a bit careful with going "open content". The ideas presented in BRP, and RQ, are (as have been explained several times before on this list) free for all to express in their own way. The way the rules are expressed in the various Chaosium publications are one of the company's greatest assets, and not one to give away lightly. If I was Chaosium I would rather go for a proprietary license. Even better, use two licenses: one commercial and one non-commercial. The commercial license would be a copyright license in the normal sense while the non-commercial license could be a open content license. The commercial license would be targeted at other parties in the industry while the non-commercial license would be designed for use by the fans, allowing them to use the verbatim BRP mechanics (or parts of it) in their publications. As for which open content license to use, I would suggest using the Creative Commons Share Alike - Attribution - Non-Commercial open content license (see www.creativecommons.org for more details on said license), rather than WotC's OGL. However, one should remember that, as opposed to TSR/WotC, Chaosium have never made any outlandish claims of copyright on fan created material, which makes the need of a non-commercial license less important for our community than it is for the D&D community. From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Fri Jul 9 20:16:22 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:16:22 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ resurrected? Open Source Market Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F230E@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> I would personally be very interested in seeing what develops here. While it would be nice to obtan all the necessary trademark/copyright/licence stuff to publish RQ, tha is unlikley unless one of us wins teh lotto, so a good second prise is what you are referring to. Just to check that i have got it straight (assuming what you refer to comes true). Someone coupld publish RQ stuff - including additional rules that would be compatible with the Chaosium BRP open source books. So a user would only have to get the chaoiseum sgear and could then pcik and choose what eh would like to use from possible a range of companies publishing scenarios, campaigns and special rules? Tony aka tiberius at runequest.za.org -----Original Message----- From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Not strictly true in my opinion. A more limited 'Open License'# would allow others to publish games without developing their own rules system and still promote Chaosium's published books by the same synergy of interests (what was the buzzword? "network externiality"?), i.e. reducing the risks to both parties, without Chaosium having a huge market presence. The benefits would be commensurately smaller, but I think there would be sufficient positive effect to make it worth it. But as I mentioned in another post, it could also be dangerous. Nick Middleton # As a rough summary/ suggestion: Anyone can put compatible with BRP and the BRP logo on their RPG scenario or supplement provide it a) is not a stand alone game, i.e. does not contain _complete_ Character Creation, Combat or Magic rules and b) clearly states "Requires the Chasium Basic Role Playing Players Book, Magic Book and GM's Book## to play" . One would probably want further stipulations to the effect that the _rules_ remain Chaosium's and that any product identity remains the publishers etc. ##Assuming they get round to issuing that as well at some point... __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Fri Jul 9 20:19:52 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:19:52 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] River of Cradles Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2310@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Does anyone on this list have a complete copy of River of Cradles by Avalon Hill for sale or know of anyone selling one. Its all I need to complete my AH RQ collection *(unless I want to be really nyaff and buy the deluxe box to go with my deluxe perfect bound book and players and GM's and Basic boxes). I can pay via PayPal or can arrange a bankers draft in whatever currency you prefer. T?ny __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From comogatas at yahoo.com Fri Jul 9 20:53:43 2004 From: comogatas at yahoo.com (Eddy) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 03:53:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Open Source Market In-Reply-To: <20040709091916.9C68C2226F2@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040709105343.18415.qmail@web40510.mail.yahoo.com> I wrote If Chaosium wants to follow suit they would need to: >a. have a #1 seller of core rules similar to the PHB >b. have other products that pushed the sales of the #1 seller nick wrote Not strictly true in my opinion. I should have stressed: If Chaosium wanted to copycat WotC's marketing strategy. The PHB alone is that game system's cash cow and it's sales far eclipse even the DMG or MM. I wasn't offering a marketing strategy, just a reason why they do things their way. I do admire the original honesty of the guy's (I forget his name) intent; too bad for them (and good for every one else) that the rest of company just doesn't get it and a lot of their stuff is needlessly 'closed content.' The only thing more ridiculous is their whining over their own open content actually being used by others. Someone at the top there is really clueless. I do need to study Chaosium more. Which 3rd parties are producing new material based on the BRP? I don't own a lot of Chaosium material but I do know that one of Chaosium's hallmarks is quality and creativity over quantity. D20's mass produced feel, is well, for the masses. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Jul 9 20:32:36 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:32:36 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1089369156.40ee7444a85ae@imp.webhuset.no> Folks, > Phew! No need to foam at the mouth in irritation over them being > "Monographs" and thus priced out of reach (thanks to shipping) of non-US > purchasers, as I have the RQIII rules (embarrassingly, FIVE copies I > realised when I bothered to count 'em!) WHAT ON EARTH is a 'monograph'? Cheers Gianni From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Fri Jul 9 21:34:37 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:34:37 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >Folks, > >> Phew! No need to foam at the mouth in irritation over them being >> "Monographs" and thus priced out of reach (thanks to shipping) of non-US >> purchasers, as I have the RQIII rules (embarrassingly, FIVE copies I >> realised when I bothered to count 'em!) > >WHAT ON EARTH is a 'monograph'? > Basically, they do minimal layout and its cheaper binding - have a look at the Miskatonic University Library Association monographs they do for CoC: the original authors do most of the layout and illustration work, Chaosium supply a cover (IIRC) and print it with tape binding (rather true perfect binding or saddle stitching etc). Makes the books a much smaller financial risk for Chaosium as they are much cheaper to produce, and as they are only available direct from Chaosium they make more on each book whilst being able to offer them (in the US anyway...) at reasonable price as their is no distributor chain to pay. Unfortunately, to get them outside the US, one has to fork out for shipping them across the Atlantic (for us Europeans) or the pacific (for our antipodean colleagues), which rather hikes the price... (and that sides steps the whole issues of methods of payment...). Cheers, Nick Middleton From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Sat Jul 10 00:19:05 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 16:19:05 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2319@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Hmm, I take issue with you inferring packages for Africa will come via the pacific, we are also Atlantic people!! :)) Are we talking that dodgy plastic spine thingie through many holes? (Monograph) If so, that's prob the way I saw (pirate) RQ rules for the first time. Personally I dunno why yosue bitch so much about postage (shipping for Americans). Global Priority is USD9.50 which, due to the dollars recent slide, is near nothing compared to GBP or EUR Even for us blokes in weak currency third world countries its reasonable. Cioa tony aka tiberius at runequest.za.org -----Original Message----- From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com > >WHAT ON EARTH is a 'monograph'? > Basically, they do minimal layout and its cheaper binding - have a look at the Miskatonic University Library Association monographs they do for CoC: the original authors do most of the layout and illustration work, Chaosium supply a cover (IIRC) and print it with tape binding (rather true perfect binding or saddle stitching etc). Makes the books a much smaller financial risk for Chaosium as they are much cheaper to produce, and as they are only available direct from Chaosium they make more on each book whilst being able to offer them (in the US anyway...) at reasonable price as their is no distributor chain to pay. Unfortunately, to get them outside the US, one has to fork out for shipping them across the Atlantic (for us Europeans) or the pacific (for our antipodean colleagues), which rather hikes the price... (and that sides steps the whole issues of methods of payment...). Cheers, __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Sat Jul 10 01:20:33 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 16:20:33 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ resurrected? Open Source Market Message-ID: >I would personally be very interested in seeing what develops here. While it >would be nice to obtan all the necessary trademark/copyright/licence stuff >to publish RQ, tha is unlikley unless one of us wins teh lotto, so a good >second prise is what you are referring to. But it is nice to dream... :-) >Just to check that i have got it straight (assuming what you refer to comes >true). Someone coupld publish RQ stuff - including additional rules that >would be compatible with the Chaosium BRP open source books. So a user would >only have to get the chaoiseum sgear and could then pcik and choose what eh >would like to use from possible a range of companies publishing scenarios, >campaigns and special rules? I am NOT a legal expert, so this is all just speculation and personal opinion: It really depends on the wording of the license, which would be up to Chaosium. What I was suggesting was that a free license (i.e. one that did not require payment of a fee to Chaosium) that allowed other publishers to publish scenarios or supplements (setting type books) that met certain criteria (basically that they advertised Chaosium's "core" rule books, and were not stand alone games in their own right) could work. Like with d20, where I only have to buy a core d20 book (the D&D Players Handbook, d20 Modern, CoC d20, Star Wars d20) and then can use whatever d20 compatible books I want. But unlike d20, where what is actually required from that core book is a tiny fraction of the contents (basically a couple of paragraphs explaining a particular table...), I think Chaosium would need to make quite large chunks required, in order to make it work. As I said, the Corum supplement for Elric!/Stormbringer 5th edition is a good model: it contains variant character creation, combat and magic rules to allow one to run in the Corum setting, but really does require a copy of Elric/Stormbringer to be usable; contrast with Traveller d20 which carries the disclaimer about "requires a WotC core d20 rulebook", but actually doesn't (it contains the XP table just not the explanation of how you apply it and use it to level characters) - anything like that being possible for a proposed BRP license would be catastrophically bad for Chaosium. In fact, they should probably steer well clear until such time e as they can afford very good legal advice on the minutiae of such licenses... Cheers, Nick Middleton From tom at zunder.org.uk Sat Jul 10 01:10:32 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:10:32 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> Why has Chaosium only done them as 'monographs'? Is this a deliberate copyright/trademark holding position rather than a proper relaunch? With great game like Savage World and the ole WEG d6 getting nice hardback core book releases, they'd better do something better than this. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From aelarsen at mac.com Sat Jul 10 01:28:43 2004 From: aelarsen at mac.com (Andrew Larsen) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 10:28:43 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Daughters of Darkness In-Reply-To: <20040709091916.9C68C2226F2@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: > From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? > To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >> What do others on the list think about this? > > As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do > Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it would > be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality > material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the > carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. Wow. You actually still have a copy of that stinker? I thought RQ fans had managed to destroy all known copies. We'll have to do something about this... Seriously, though. I remember looking at that a few years ago, back when I still owned it. I came the conclusion that there was *nothing* of value it and that it really was the proverbial waste of space. Andrew E. Larsen From tom at zunder.org.uk Sat Jul 10 01:10:32 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:10:32 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> Why has Chaosium only done them as 'monographs'? Is this a deliberate copyright/trademark holding position rather than a proper relaunch? With great game like Savage World and the ole WEG d6 getting nice hardback core book releases, they'd better do something better than this. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From Alain.RAMEAU at total.com Sat Jul 10 01:43:29 2004 From: Alain.RAMEAU at total.com (Alain.RAMEAU at total.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 17:43:29 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What an imagination ! Message-ID: I am very impressed by the rq-rules 'digesters' imagination ! A few sybillin lines on a Chaosium web page was enough to give rise to dozens of theories and projects : BRP open-content scheme, RQA resurrected, and other worldwide evil conspiracies ;-), not to mention complains about "what Chaosium have not yet done but should do if they have to do it even if there is nothing to do " or so Well, let's calm down and wait for the feedback we will get from the purchasers of those "heretic" documents. I hope there will be a forest behind the tree, but I guess it's a bit too early to tell. Alain. http://karamo.nexenservices.com/glowar/rq.htm From slposey at concentric.net Sat Jul 10 03:11:06 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 10:11:06 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40EED1AA.7070205@concentric.net> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >>So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of an open source >>ruleset and require purchase of the Player's Handbook in order to use a >>"Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible with Basic >>Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC has done. > > For Chaosium, I think it would have to be less open: supplements like > Darcsyde's Corum or Stephane's original PDF version of Dark Age Cthulhu > would be OK, but I think Chaosium would be fools to allow any sort of stand > alone BRP games that didn't license the BRP rules off them for a fee. I was specifically NOT speaking of "stand alone BRP games" just as WotC doesn't allow for "stand alone D20 games" that fall fully under the D20 license without special negotiation, that was why I alluded to reserving some critical portion of the rules from the SRD. Conversely I want to open up some kind of commercial legitimacy for efforts like Stephane's (sans the core character generation rules) without having to negotiate the full and awkward formal licencing pathway with Chaosium if there's no trademarked or copyrighted materials involved. >>Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious competition. > > Whilst it is a lovely dream Stephen, respectfully I think you are letting > your enthusiasm get the better of you. It would, if done right, help secure > CoC, Stormbringer and Chaosium's future, and provid a proper footing for a > BRP alternative to the mainstream of paper and pencil RPGs, but given the > marketing might and market presence of Ha$bro, Witless W*nkers, and SJG, it > won't be BRP that derails d20 (it'll probably do it itself actually). And > given that the nature of that market is largely strangling originality and > innovation in favour of crass lowest common denominator mass marketing# I > seriously hope that Chaosium steer well clear of trying to engage the > mainstream head on. Perhaps I am feeling overly enthusiastic about a system that I feel is technically superior. And perhaps "competition" isn't quite where I meant to go with this so much as suggesting an alternative schema that would open up easier commerical avenues for all of us to "get the word out" as it were. >>What do others on the list think about this? > > As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do > Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it would > be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality > material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the > carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. Chaosium as a corporate entity consists of only so many people, only so many "hands", that limits how much they can practically do. What I'm proposing would get more people involved, people who generally care about the company and the product. If some of the fabulous materials I know of on the web were worked up into inexpensive .PDF documents and given the "Chaosium System Compatible" imprimatur, the system's support library could increase ten fold almost overnight. I know Chaosium is sitting on other materials that could be similarly handled. And there's licensed materials from Europe that could easily be translated. I have to believe this would help Chaosium, and put some bucks into the author's pockets. Would that be a bad thing? Granted there might be some schlock (as in most endeavors), but I think the cream will rise to the top. > # for every Mutants and Masterminds, there are a hundred quintessential > This, ultimate That books; all shoddily edited, garishly illustrated and > gone form the shelves within weeks of arriving. Mongoose churn out bucket > loads of rushed, vacuous, soul-less rubbish at five to ten times the rate > Malhavoc release their stunningly well crafted gems... Now whilst > Sturgeon's Law applies##, I have always believed that Chaosium bucked the > trend considerably and since the only way to engage the mainstream RPG > market is to go the same way, I hope they don't bother... although someone > paying thema big fat license fee to do a stand alone BRP rules based game > would be cool... Mongoose is an odd bird, they produce a few gems of their own. Their Conan RPG is very cool, and I recently acquire their Ancients RPG which is also pretty nifty. Seems like when they aren't trying to shoehorn themselves into the D20 mold they do pretty well. Maybe we should try to turn them to the Chaosium "Dark Side"? ;-) I really thought that Hyboria was better suited for a Call of Cthulhu/Stormbringer crossover setting myself. >>I'm cynical about all this too. And I concur with your assessment. My >>>first guess is that these are very minimal reformattings of the RQ3 >>>texts. Which would be in line with the overall thrust of the "monograph" >>>works to-date. > > Really gentleman, the petulance of the Internet generation! A month ago our > beloved RQ Rules system had been out print for nigh on a decade and there > was no prospect of it seeing print again as far as any of us knew. The news > that it is back is less than a day old here and already people are carping! "Internet generation"? And precisely which generation do you hail from sir? But, point taken. >>>This isn't meant to be a condemnation really; just a recognition of >>>Chaosium's recent difficulties and their doing the best they can with >>>the limited resources currently at their disposal (I presume everyone >>>here is aware that they've been semi-quietly auctioning some of the more >>>obsucure items from their game library off on eBay? Mostly foreign >>>language stuff.) > > One should read too much in to that however, I have regularly bought RPG's > books on eBay from Matt Sprange (head honcho of Mongoose Publishing), and > there is no sign of Mongoose being in trouble... Fair enough, though it does seem a recent development and smacks of needing cash. >>>I love their products, and I desperately want to see them succeed and >>>prosper, but they have a history of missing opportunities and shooting >>>themselves in the foot . > > Yes, but they also have a tradition of quality in their RPG books that for > all Lightning Print and recent vicissitudes blemished it, is still intact > (BtMoM for example) and which I would hate to see them throw away in an > unseemly scramble for probably fickle mainstream market share. I really have no desire to see them scramble for "mainstream" per se, rather just open channels for development by authors wanting to create support materials without having to go through as elaborate licensing gyrations as has historically been the case. I recognize quality as an issue. But I think that ultimately becomes self-policing, especially on-line with electronic publishing. >>>I'd like to think that the OGL approach with a BRP-SRD document opened >>>up to 3rd party rules developers and their licensing a "Chaosium System >>>Compatible" label (a la "D20"), along with a set of BRP Core manuals, >>>would ultimately be good for their bottom line. > > I think a better model would be an 'open' "BRP Compatible License" for > supplements and a reasonable license fee for using the full BRP rules in a > stand a lone game, but a full open release on the scale of the d20 SRD of > the BRP rules would kill Chaosium stone dead as an RPG publisher in my > opinion. That would be fine by me, I mainly just want to open the door for generic "Chaosium System Compatible" backgrounds, scenarios, and rules supplements. A required statement along the lines of "Requires the use of the BRP Player's Guide from Chaosium, Inc." in order to be able to use a "Chaosium System Compatible" labelling would be perfect IMO. >>>But there's no 100% guarantees, and it might get worse before it gets >>>better, and it has to be done RIGHT. :-/ > > Indeed. And on the whole, a cautious approach, which this mongraph release > appears to be the first steps of, is a far better (and safer) bet than > rushing in to any sort of "open gaming" approach before they have > thoroughly thought it through. The trouble with that, from my perspective, is the narrowness of the channel, everything has to pass through Chaosium's (rather limited set of) hands. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Sat Jul 10 05:00:20 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 12:00:20 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net> <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net> At 08:10 AM 7/9/2004, you wrote: >Why has Chaosium only done them as 'monographs'? >Is this a deliberate copyright/trademark holding position rather than a >proper relaunch? > >With great game like Savage World and the ole WEG d6 getting nice >hardback core book releases, they'd better do something better than >this. The monographs are cheap to make, and generate a small profit. It requires very little overhead, and allows the RQ community to get their hands on the info. As I understand it, when AH died the RQIII rules were still in their exclusive possession. Hasbro was contacted 6 months after they took possession of AH by a friend of mine. He was seeking to find out about the RQ rules, and if they were available. They offered to sell him the RQ rules... for $250,000! (Yes, I saw the letter... it is NOT an urban legend.) With that information taken into account, it could be that BRP is slipping the rules into the market without ever using the term RQ. If they can establish the rules as PRB rules there can me no attack from the Hasbro Legal Sharks over the rights to RQ. I don't know if RQ is still under Hasbro control, but I would venture a guess that it is disputable both ways at this time. As for Savage Worlds... it is not a great game... it isn't functional as either a RPG or as a miniatures rules set. More to the point, if you do a word count on it you will not that it has very few words for a book of its price. Using 2 inch margins and 14 point type, with a wide line spacing model allow them to publish what would fit on 30 pages on 90, back it into a hard bound book the cover won't stay onto, and claim that this cobbled together system from other systems is "Fast, Fun, and Furious!" It is not fast, it is not fun, and it is set up to feed people who love all the complexity of GURPS character generation and all of the old D&D level ideas. The books are not as good as armature releases of games on the Internet, and the system is about as useful sand paper in an outhouse. In short, I don't think you can defend the statement that it is a "great game." You can defend that YOU like it and think it is great. But not that it IS great. As for D6... glad to see it coming back, and seeing WEG struggle back from the grave is a real pleasure. I intend to buy the D6 Fantasy rules to see what the Spell Creation is like, and to help support WEG on their comeback. If I like Fantasy I will get Space. They will never do Star Wars again, but that is good... it is what almost killed them in the first place. But I think their experience with the genre will allow them to make a game that could rival Star Wars. I am hoping. Bo From ffilz-lists at mindspring.com Sat Jul 10 06:30:23 2004 From: ffilz-lists at mindspring.com (Frank Filz) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 13:30:23 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net><40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> <6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP> > As for Savage Worlds... it is not a great game... >You can defend that YOU like it and think it is great. But not that it IS great. Hmm, can you defend any game as a great game? Most people assume that when someone says "X is the greatest thing since sliced cheese." that they really mean "I think X is the greatest thing since sliced cheese." Frank From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Sat Jul 10 08:06:11 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 15:06:11 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP> References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net> <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> <6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net> <00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040709150007.0212d868@incoming.verizon.net> At 01:30 PM 7/9/2004, you wrote: >> As for Savage Worlds... it is not a great game... > >>You can defend that YOU like it and think it is great. But not that it IS >great. > >Hmm, can you defend any game as a great game? Most people assume that when >someone says "X is the greatest thing since sliced cheese." that they really >mean "I think X is the greatest thing since sliced cheese." > >Frank But the inverse is not true... there are bad games, and most people would agree... Savage Worlds is one of those... no really! It isn't just my opinion! it lacks all Aristotelian Qualities! It does! And it is not well made and bad to boot! (haha... sorry... had to!) Bo From steve at perrinworlds.com Sat Jul 10 12:13:52 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 19:13:52 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net><40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost><6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net><00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP> <6.1.1.1.0.20040709150007.0212d868@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> As far as I know, and my information is several months old. RuneQuest is currently owned, as a name, by Greg Stafford, who got it from Hasbro last year some time when Hasbro figured out it wasn't worth their time. When last I spoke to Greg (many months ago) he was still trying to figure out what to do with the name. Since, again this is as of the last time I talked to any of the various parties, Greg and the Chaosium are not on speaking terms, I imagine that the folks at Chaosium are going to stick to the BRP name and never mention RuneQuest. Rather funny, since Greg was the one who came up with BRP, wanting a simpler version of RuneQuest to suck folks in with... Steve Perrin From tom at zunder.org.uk Sat Jul 10 21:31:55 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:31:55 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Flames. In-Reply-To: <20040710021516.A746922254B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <40EFE1BB.5021.867CA27@localhost> Ooh, my fingers are all burnt and hurty.. IMHO Savage World is fast furious and fun, character gen is minutes, the feel is skirmishy tactical, games move along apace. It has few words in the rulebook which is a plus for me. It's proomoted well and lots of fun and funky settings book come out often and cheaply for it. It does have some very weird problems in combat, but that's solved by starting to roleplay combats, since that's how you get the decisive advantages to break through. It is very granular and the style is very pulpy. Having said that it is fun to play and my various player groups enjoy it as *one* of the systems I run. Anyhoo, I didn't want to have a row about SW, it was more the fact that PEG are out there, promoting a core book in hardback, supporting it with a deluge of products, free materials and a very strong fan base converting materiel. I think that Chaosium need to commit. A hardback BRP, a bestiary, a setting or two (something new to BRP like piracy or renaissance), and then worry about licensing once the fan base get's going again. It's what WEG and PEG and others are doing. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From tom at zunder.org.uk Sat Jul 10 21:42:04 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:42:04 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP Players and Magic Books Message-ID: <40EFE41C.28122.8711657@localhost> I'd say, partially because of the comment re Moon Design publications, and partially 'cos I have been previously told that they've been typeset for years, that these are structurally RQ2 rules. Pity they can't put their money where their mouth is and print em properly. Come on Charlie! -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Sat Jul 10 23:29:31 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 15:29:31 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Proposal for an entry to a RQ FAQ References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net><40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost><6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net><00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP><6.1.1.1.0.20040709150007.0212d868@incoming.verizon.net> <00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <002f01c46682$36aff7a0$209ce151@skadebyran.se> On Saturday, July 10, 2004 4:13 AM, "Steve Perrin" wrote: > As far as I know, and my information is several months old. RuneQuest is > currently owned, as a name, by Greg Stafford, who got it from Hasbro last > year some time when Hasbro figured out it wasn't worth their time. When > last I spoke to Greg (many months ago) he was still trying to figure out > what to do with the name. > > Since, again this is as of the last time I talked to any of the various > parties, Greg and the Chaosium are not on speaking terms, I imagine that > the folks at Chaosium are going to stick to the BRP name and never mention > RuneQuest. > > Rather funny, since Greg was the one who came up with BRP, wanting a > simpler version of RuneQuest to suck folks in with... Given that the subject of who owns what (intellectual property wise) when it comes to RuneQuest comes up fairly frequently, for example I found three or four threads from the last few years in the archive, wouldn't it be a good idea to add something about it on a FAQ? Which brings up a question - is there a well established RuneQuest FAQ? Anyhow, here's how I understand the situation about the ownership of RuneQuest, a little something to (possibly) base a FAQ entry on: The copyright to RuneQuest remained with Chaosium while the deal with Avalon Hill lasted. AH licensed the copyright from Chaosium but owned the (US) trademark 'RuneQuest'. The copyright to the RuneQuest (3?) publications were handed over to Avalon Hill when Chaosium and AH made a split back in 1996. The copyright to all Glorantha publications became the property of Chaosium, and later became the property of Greg Stafford when he left Chaosium. The (US) trademark 'RuneQuest' remained with Avalon Hill but the company failed to keep it alive so it became defunct. The (US) trademark 'RuneQuest' now (as of September 2003) belongs to Issaries, INC. I found a pressrelease about the split up between Chaosium and AH from march 1996 on http://www.msu.edu/user/moulinfr/RuneQuest.html, which sheds a bit more light on that deal. What I'm a bit unsure of is if the copyright to all editions of RQ were transfered to AH rather than only RQ3. Any comments or additions? From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Sat Jul 10 23:25:21 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 15:25:21 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP References: <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> Message-ID: <002e01c46682$3655c9b0$209ce151@skadebyran.se> On Friday, July 09, 2004 5:10 PM, "Tom Zunder" wrote: > Is this a deliberate copyright/trademark holding position rather than a > proper relaunch? < snip> As I have not yet seen the new BRP publications, I don't know how Chaosium have done it but they do indisputably own expressions of rules which are very similar or even identical to those expressions that were published in the RQ3 rules. I would assume that the new BRP publications are not identical to the RQ3 players and magic books - but I'll know for sure in a week or so... :-) The copyright needs no tending to, it will last for many a year to come. 'Basic Roleplaying' is not an trademark but BRP is (a common law trademark). Chaosium needs to tend to its trademarks and establishing BRP as a generic rules system will of course also confirm the ownership of the trademark. We can safely assume that this release is part of some overall strategy, it would be interesting to get a Chaosium comment on it though. From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Sun Jul 11 09:13:53 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:13:53 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net> <40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost> <6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net> <00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP> <6.1.1.1.0.20040709150007.0212d868@incoming.verizon.net> <00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040710161323.020f3a60@incoming.verizon.net> At 07:13 PM 7/9/2004, you wrote: >As far as I know, and my information is several months old. RuneQuest is >currently owned, as a name, by Greg Stafford, who got it from Hasbro last >year some time when Hasbro figured out it wasn't worth their time. When last >I spoke to Greg (many months ago) he was still trying to figure out what to >do with the name. > >Since, again this is as of the last time I talked to any of the various >parties, Greg and the Chaosium are not on speaking terms, I imagine that the >folks at Chaosium are going to stick to the BRP name and never mention >RuneQuest. > >Rather funny, since Greg was the one who came up with BRP, wanting a simpler >version of RuneQuest to suck folks in with... > >Steve Perrin Thanks for the update Steve... and yes, it is ironic. Bo From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Sun Jul 11 09:30:04 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:30:04 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Flames. In-Reply-To: <40EFE1BB.5021.867CA27@localhost> References: <20040710021516.A746922254B@boomstick.screwheads.net> <40EFE1BB.5021.867CA27@localhost> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040710161719.020f3918@incoming.verizon.net> At 04:31 AM 7/10/2004, you wrote: >Anyhoo, I didn't want to have a row about SW, it was more the fact that >PEG are out there, promoting a core book in hardback, supporting it with >a deluge of products, free materials and a very strong fan base >converting materiel. > >I think that Chaosium need to commit. A hardback BRP, a bestiary, a >setting or two (something new to BRP like piracy or renaissance), and >then worry about licensing once the fan base get's going again. > >It's what WEG and PEG and others are doing. On this I agree. On SW... I was there from the start... one of the first 50 to get the book... it sucks. It has MAJOR flaws in the combat system that are unsurmountable except through outright cheating by the GM, not minor modifications... out right cheating. No thanks. The concept is good, the product can't hold a candle to RQ or BRP. Would not have mentioned it, but you are using language that encourages its sales, and I respect these people too much to let them think it is all rosy. They may like it, but they need to know it is a rip off before they buy. You love it. I don't. They have a valid base of opinions. Now, back to RQ! hahaha I think Chaosium would benefit from this idea, but it is a long way from the way to go for them IMO. Without Glorantha, and with the situation as it stands there is no reason to believe that RQ and Glorantha will ever meet except in our memories, this Core book idea makes it (and I am quoting a source that does major purchases here) "just one more Steve Jackson wanabe approach to the industry. The D20 thing has burned people out on the core book rip off plan. People are tired of paying $30 to $50 dollars for books that only support a small area of a game in concept. It just doesn't sell." If they did a world and supported it with supplements (the way games used to be) it would be worth it, but a new world each month to pay the bills with just is not worth the effort. A small core of 50 to 100 people will buy the core, but that doesn't even hit the break even point. D20 does it with cheap marketing ploys that are jading the buyer. It won't last. SJG can do it because they always have. I don't think Chaosium would make it work. Bo From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Sun Jul 11 09:35:06 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:35:06 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP Players and Magic Books In-Reply-To: <40EFE41C.28122.8711657@localhost> References: <40EFE41C.28122.8711657@localhost> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040710163129.02229fe0@incoming.verizon.net> At 04:42 AM 7/10/2004, you wrote: >Pity they can't put their money where their mouth is and print em >properly. > >Come on Charlie! I still think this is not a "Cheap Charlie" issue, as you infer. I believe it is an attempt to both put this out to the group that want them, and a fishing expedition to gauge interest. Chaosium is not in the best fiscal stand... but in the game marked that WoC has created even they are on shaky footing. It is the best way to get it out, and the best "vote for more" that can be done in the market for free. I think it is a sound choice, business and fan related. Bo From slposey at concentric.net Sun Jul 11 16:01:51 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 23:01:51 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Flames. In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040710161719.020f3918@incoming.verizon.net> References: <20040710021516.A746922254B@boomstick.screwheads.net> <40EFE1BB.5021.867CA27@localhost> <6.1.1.1.0.20040710161719.020f3918@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <40F0D7CF.3040402@concentric.net> Bo Whitten wrote: > Now, back to RQ! hahaha > > I think Chaosium would benefit from this idea, but it is a long way > from the way to go for them IMO. Without Glorantha, and with the > situation as it stands there is no reason to believe that RQ > and Glorantha will ever meet except in our memories, this Core book > idea makes it (and I am quoting a source that does major purchases > here) "just one more Steve Jackson wanabe approach to the industry. I'll agree RQ without Glorantha is probably doomed, OTOH if Chaosium is selling the Glorantha reprints, can't they negotiate to offer a "Glorantha System" or something? > The D20 thing has burned people out on the core book rip off plan. > People are tired of paying $30 to $50 dollars for books that only > support a small area of a game in concept. It just doesn't sell." Who says they have to cost that much? The whole thing's overblown to the point of absurdity. > If they did a world and supported it with supplements (the way games > used to be) it would be worth it, but a new world each month to pay > the bills with just is not worth the effort. A small core of 50 to > 100 people will buy the core, but that doesn't even hit the break > even point. D20 does it with cheap marketing ploys that are jading > the buyer. I can well imagine they're jaded, which is precisely why I'd like to move on to other things before the backlash starts in that market. I'd like to take the best ideas of the OGL/D20 marketing approach and apply them to a game I believe to be technically superior and give it the sort of leg up that I think it deserves. I think the on-line community would help the ball rolling, and the differences between Chaosium and WotC would lead to their being rather more appreciated and revered than reviled and scorned as WotC often tends to be. > It won't last. SJG can do it because they always have. > I don't think Chaosium would make it work. SJG isn't doing "it", not what I'm envisioning. There isn't really anybody outside of SJG proper making anything "GURPS compatible" to speak of, AFAIK. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 12 17:46:28 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 08:46:28 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Daughters of Darkness Message-ID: >> From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com >> Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? >> To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." > >>> What do others on the list think about this? >> >> As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do >> Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it would >> be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality >> material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the >> carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. > >Wow. You actually still have a copy of that stinker? I thought RQ fans >had managed to destroy all known copies. We'll have to do something about >this... And Eldarad. In my defence, Daughters was cheap, and Eldarad I didn't realise I was getting: a copy of the Deluxe Boxed Set was going ludicrously cheaply on eBay and (as a supplement/alternate to the perfect bound book which was my only other copy at the time) it seemed worth the price. When it arrived, I discovered it had Eladarad inside as well... I don't think they are entirely useless (if only as cautionary example...) but I also am pathologically incapable of throwing away or deliberately damaging books. The last time I caused deliberately harm to a book was hurling a copy of Farnham's Freehold at the wall when I was about 12. Since then, no matter how awful the book or game (I have FGU's Freedom Fighters...) I have only ever managed to sell books and games, and only then to a "good home"... Pathetic, isn't it? ;-> >Seriously, though. I remember looking at that a few years ago, back >when I still owned it. I came the conclusion that there was *nothing* of >value it and that it really was the proverbial waste of space. I know, but I just can't see the point in destroying them... Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 12 17:51:52 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 08:51:52 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] What an imagination ! Message-ID: >I am very impressed by the rq-rules 'digesters' imagination ! >A few sybillin lines on a Chaosium web page was enough to give rise to >dozens of theories and projects : BRP open-content scheme, RQA >resurrected, and other worldwide evil conspiracies ;-), not to mention >complains about "what Chaosium have not yet done but should do if they >have to do it even if there is nothing to do " or so > >Well, let's calm down and wait for the feedback we will get from the >purchasers of those "heretic" documents. > >I hope there will be a forest behind the tree, but I guess it's a bit too >early to tell. [joke mode] But, but, but the whole _point_ of the internet is to fuel wild, ill-informed speculation in advance of the facts to whip up a frenzy of protest and pointless posturing over misinformation and half-truths... isn't? [/joke mode] It would perhaps have helped matters if Chaosium could manage something as breathtakingly revolutionary as a press release or banner headline at their catalogue (I mean, website), rather than just adding things to the catalogue and letting word of mouth spread... Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 12 19:57:58 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:57:58 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: >Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >>>So, Chaosium could keep certain core portions out of an open source >>>ruleset and require purchase of the Player's Handbook in order to use a >>>"Compatible with the Chaosium System" or "Compatible with Basic >>>Roleplaying" trademarking or something just as WotC has done. >> >> For Chaosium, I think it would have to be less open: supplements like >> Darcsyde's Corum or Stephane's original PDF version of Dark Age Cthulhu >> would be OK, but I think Chaosium would be fools to allow any sort of stand >> alone BRP games that didn't license the BRP rules off them for a fee. > >I was specifically NOT speaking of "stand alone BRP games" just as WotC >doesn't allow for "stand alone D20 games" that fall fully under the D20 >license without special negotiation, that was why I alluded to reserving >some critical portion of the rules from the SRD. That's the theory behind WotC's d20 System Trademark License, but Traveller d20 is _effectively_ stand alone: it doesn't contain the critical material (explaining how you roll a character up in terms of raw basic stats nor how you apply experience to level them up) but it DOES contain the XP table and everything else you need to run T20. And in practice, only a complete FRP novice would need anything other than the T20 book, and even then, five minutes at the T20 publishers website would put them in touch with fans who could tell them the missing information. And WotC have _not_ to my knowledge objected (and it's been about for a couple of years now). My point was that Chaosium would have to work on a MUCH more restrictive model of BRP 'open' license. >Conversely I want to open up some kind of commercial legitimacy for >efforts like Stephane's (sans the core character generation rules) >without having to negotiate the full and awkward formal licencing >pathway with Chaosium if there's no trademarked or copyrighted materials >involved. If it is a BRP compatible game and is going to say so, it is plausibly going to use a Chaosium trademark, and if one were to want to include any rules adaptations or additions one would probably be classed as doing derivative work from Chaosium's copyright work, which would also require a license. I don't think (although you'd have to ask Stephane to be sure...) it was particulalrly arduous or difficult for him actually: since Stephane's PDF version was NOT a commercial release (so he wasn't attempting to make money from it) the only stipulations were presumably the same that technically should apply to ANY fan material made publicly available: correct declarations of copyright and the receipt of the original copyright/trademark holders permission to use their material. That websites (and fanzines before them) flagrantly ignored this requirement never made it legal (or ethical), but since most not-for profit fan work is not a threat (if anything, it helps promote the original work) I would hope that Chaosium would, in addition to some sort of commercial licensing programme for publsihers, would come up with some reasonable noncommercial usage license for fan created not-for-profit works: even if it's just a formal statement of the current approach... >>>Then the D20 juggernaut could be in for some serious competition. >> >> Whilst it is a lovely dream Stephen, respectfully I think you are letting >> your enthusiasm get the better of you. It would, if done right, help secure >> CoC, Stormbringer and Chaosium's future, and provid a proper footing for a >> BRP alternative to the mainstream of paper and pencil RPGs, but given the >> marketing might and market presence of Ha$bro, Witless W*nkers, and SJG, it >> won't be BRP that derails d20 (it'll probably do it itself actually). And >> given that the nature of that market is largely strangling originality and >> innovation in favour of crass lowest common denominator mass marketing# I >> seriously hope that Chaosium steer well clear of trying to engage the >> mainstream head on. > >Perhaps I am feeling overly enthusiastic about a system that I feel is >technically superior. And perhaps "competition" isn't quite where I >meant to go with this so much as suggesting an alternative schema that >would open up easier commerical avenues for all of us to "get the word >out" as it were. > That sounds eminently sensible! The fear for all of us must be that, given their current precarious circumstances and problems in the last decade, a radical Chaosium expansion plan now could (if it failed) kill the company once and for all; something none of us want. But if they _can_ exploit this opportunity (and we both, along with many on this list, I think see this as a genuine opportunity), it could do Chaosium, their existing lines and the wider RPG market nothing but good... >>>What do others on the list think about this? >> >> As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do >> Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it would >> be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality >> material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the >> carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. > >Chaosium as a corporate entity consists of only so many people, only so >many "hands", that limits how much they can practically do. What I'm >proposing would get more people involved, people who generally care >about the company and the product. > >If some of the fabulous materials I know of on the web were worked up >into inexpensive .PDF documents and given the "Chaosium System >Compatible" imprimatur, the system's support library could increase ten >fold almost overnight. > Agreed. Which is of course where _some_ sort of Open Game / "BRP System Trademark" Lcienses would be of huge assistance. If people could publish BRP based material and sell it through RPGNow in PDF form easily, it _would_ boost Chaosium sales. The crucial thing is whether the boost would outweigh the potential loss of sales of Chaosium's own BRP supplements... but then they don't actually have any of those, do they? ;-) I really think that this could work, but that Chaosium MUST do it in a fashion that protects themselves such that it can't harm them. > >I know Chaosium is sitting on other materials that could be similarly >handled. Ooh, do tell! > And there's licensed materials from Europe that could easily be >translated. > This I'm sad to say is I think a red herring: translation (decent, accurate translation) is expensive (You have to pay the original copyright holder in whatever language, you then also have to pay the translator) unless you are the copyright holder. If Pegasus or Oriflam wanted to do English language versions of their own material, it might be economical, but I can't see Chaosium or a third party having the money (or market) to take on that sort of financial risk - why pay, effectively, twice for a work that will ultimately still belong to someone else, when you could pay one person to create a new work already in english that would be wholly yours? > >I have to believe this would help Chaosium, and put some bucks into the >author's pockets. Would that be a bad thing? Granted there might be >some schlock (as in most endeavors), but I think the cream will rise to >the top. > Oh I agree, but my point is that we should temper our enthusiasm with the reality that tabletop RPG's are not, and have never been, a hugely profitable field. Chaosium still owe people money as a result of their dire financial situation a few years back - whilst they have begun to turn things around, they will only make money themselves and be able to pay existing creditors and new authors if they stay in business. And, sadly, cream is not the only thing that floats to the top... >> # for every Mutants and Masterminds, there are a hundred quintessential >> This, ultimate That books; all shoddily edited, garishly illustrated and >> gone form the shelves within weeks of arriving. Mongoose churn out bucket >> loads of rushed, vacuous, soul-less rubbish at five to ten times the rate >> Malhavoc release their stunningly well crafted gems... Now whilst >> Sturgeon's Law applies##, I have always believed that Chaosium bucked the >> trend considerably and since the only way to engage the mainstream RPG >> market is to go the same way, I hope they don't bother... although someone >> paying thema big fat license fee to do a stand alone BRP rules based game >> would be cool... > >Mongoose is an odd bird, they produce a few gems of their own. Their >Conan RPG is very cool, and I recently acquire their Ancients RPG which >is also pretty nifty. Seems like when they aren't trying to shoehorn >themselves into the D20 mold they do pretty well. My fundamental problem with Mongoose is their arrogance: or more specifically, Matt Sprange's belief that, having paid for a license, everything he publishes under that license must be an automatic purchase for fans of the licensed property, IRRESPECTIVE of its quality or value for money. And that suggesting otherwise allows him to call people part timers. Add to that the bland, rote page layout of most Mongoose Books, their at times appalling editing and proof reading and the garish, hyperactive kids magazine use of colour and illustrations and their basic approach to marketing (they have done more than any other single publisher to foster the "front-list" obsession of the d20 market and thus the whole RPG market) I really can't be doing with them. Which is a shame, as Ian Sturrock (one of their main writers, and IIRC one of the folk behind Conan) is a decent writer and designer. > >Maybe we should try to turn them to the Chaosium "Dark Side"? ;-) I >really thought that Hyboria was better suited for a Call of >Cthulhu/Stormbringer crossover setting myself. > Possibly, albeit given Mongooses agressive approach I think they are in many ways the last company Chaosium should go near. If Chaosium could poach Ian Sturrock for some free lance work maybe... >>>I'm cynical about all this too. And I concur with your assessment. My >>>>first guess is that these are very minimal reformattings of the RQ3 >>>>texts. Which would be in line with the overall thrust of the "monograph" >>>>works to-date. >> >> Really gentleman, the petulance of the Internet generation! A month ago our >> beloved RQ Rules system had been out print for nigh on a decade and there >> was no prospect of it seeing print again as far as any of us knew. The news >> that it is back is less than a day old here and already people are carping! > >"Internet generation"? And precisely which generation do you hail from >sir? But, point taken. > 37 in August (but playing RPG's since 1979 and, according to most of my friends, born in a tweed jacket with leather elbows and smoking a pipe...!). More seriously: I didn't get online (despite _many_ years as a student) until the very late nineties/early 2000 and frankly remain deeply sceptical that the internet / WWW has achieved anything worthy of all the hype (presuming that one discounts the boom in hard core pornography and the terrifying volume of misinformed personal opinion masquerading as informed debate...). Something like this list (a small group of fans "chewing the cud" over a specific, mutually shared field of interest) is one thing, but the bulk of the 'net is filled with posturing and lies on a truely prodigous scale and, because of the underlying technology, is transmitted faster than anyone can correct it... "Always On" "On Demand" means, as far as I can tell "Inaccurate, inappropriate and rushed, with no time to pause, take stock and do the job properly" >>>>I'd like to think that the OGL approach with a BRP-SRD document opened >>>>up to 3rd party rules developers and their licensing a "Chaosium System >>>>Compatible" label (a la "D20"), along with a set of BRP Core manuals, >>>>would ultimately be good for their bottom line. >> >> I think a better model would be an 'open' "BRP Compatible License" for >> supplements and a reasonable license fee for using the full BRP rules in a >> stand a lone game, but a full open release on the scale of the d20 SRD of >> the BRP rules would kill Chaosium stone dead as an RPG publisher in my >> opinion. > >That would be fine by me, I mainly just want to open the door for >generic "Chaosium System Compatible" backgrounds, scenarios, and rules >supplements. > >A required statement along the lines of "Requires the use of the BRP >Player's Guide from Chaosium, Inc." in order to be able to use a >"Chaosium System Compatible" labelling would be perfect IMO. > I would add a stipulation that the publication so licensed must not contain complete alternatives to the systems presented in the BRP Players Book either, only additions, exceptions, modifications and omissions to tailor the BRP rules to the particular style, setting or scenario contained in the publication... >>>>But there's no 100% guarantees, and it might get worse before it gets >>>>better, and it has to be done RIGHT. :-/ >> >> Indeed. And on the whole, a cautious approach, which this mongraph release >> appears to be the first steps of, is a far better (and safer) bet than >> rushing in to any sort of "open gaming" approach before they have >> thoroughly thought it through. > >The trouble with that, from my perspective, is the narrowness of the >channel, everything has to pass through Chaosium's (rather limited set >of) hands. > By first step, I meant just that . If the mongraphs do well, I hope the NEXT step would be a hard back "Chaosium Basic Role Playing" (in the style of the new Dreamlands hardback) that includes the Players, Magic, Gamemasters and Creatures Book from RQ III with ideally some tech material adapted from Future World/ Ringworld with one setting outlined in the book. And simultaneously with that, the announcement of some sort of BRP licensing scheme as we've been discussing, and possibly some more supplements in monograph form if necessary. But if the restrict this to the monogrpahs, they are bascially excluding the non-US markets entirely as they are too expensive to obtain outside the US without jumping through too many hoops... I await developments (and reports of Charlie Kranks talk at Continuum) with interest... Cheers, Nick Middleton From kruch7 at cox.net Mon Jul 12 20:02:41 2004 From: kruch7 at cox.net (Joseph Elric Smith Mormon Minion of Arioch) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 06:02:41 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? References: Message-ID: <00ee01c467f7$5ed00290$1208a8c0@kenneith93j41k> Or you could just use he OGL, and include character creation rules. Like TLG is doing for C&C like S&S did with the EQRPG, and like Monte cook did with AU. Ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ? http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html From aelarsen at mac.com Tue Jul 13 00:53:56 2004 From: aelarsen at mac.com (Andrew Larsen) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:53:56 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Daughters of Darkness In-Reply-To: <20040712075520.90E04222738@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: > From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com >>> As I said, I think it is beautiful dream, and handled right could do >>> Chaosium a lot of good and, from a selfish BRP/RQ Rules fan POV, it > would >>> be great provided it didn't tarnish Chaosium/RQ's record of high quality >>> material (he said, hastily kicking Daughters of Darkness etc under the >>> carpet...) nor jeopardise the game's future. >> >> Wow. You actually still have a copy of that stinker? I thought RQ fans >> had managed to destroy all known copies. We'll have to do something about >> this... > > And Eldarad. In my defence, Daughters was cheap, and Eldarad I didn't > realise I was getting: a copy of the Deluxe Boxed Set was going ludicrously > cheaply on eBay and (as a supplement/alternate to the perfect bound book > which was my only other copy at the time) it seemed worth the price. When > it arrived, I discovered it had Eladarad inside as well... I don't think > they are entirely useless (if only as cautionary example...) but I also am > pathologically incapable of throwing away or deliberately damaging books. > The last time I caused deliberately harm to a book was hurling a copy of > Farnham's Freehold at the wall when I was about 12. Since then, no matter > how awful the book or game (I have FGU's Freedom Fighters...) I have only > ever managed to sell books and games, and only then to a "good home"... > > Pathetic, isn't it? > > ;-> Well, far be it from me to condemn such a noble sentiment, but I tend to think of DoD as the exception that proves the rule. Although, I must admit, I think I sold my copy. >> Seriously, though. I remember looking at that a few years ago, back >> when I still owned it. I came the conclusion that there was *nothing* of >> value it and that it really was the proverbial waste of space. > > I know, but I just can't see the point in destroying them... Lost City of Elderad does actually contain a few nuggets of vaguely useful stuff in it. I decided to keep that, just in case there might come a day when I might want to pick through it. But damn, did those two suck mightily. Andrew E. Larsen From vhaag at rim.com Tue Jul 13 04:15:57 2004 From: vhaag at rim.com (Viktor Haag) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:15:57 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP Players and Magic Books In-Reply-To: <40EFE41C.28122.8711657@localhost> References: <40EFE41C.28122.8711657@localhost> Message-ID: <16626.54621.258892.776365@suldrun.rim.net> Tom Zunder writes: > I'd say, partially because of the comment re Moon Design > publications, and partially 'cos I have been previously told > that they've been typeset for years, that these are > structurally RQ2 rules. Then why the mention of four magic systems including: Spirit Magic, Divine Magic, Sorcery, and Ritual Magic? These were the systems, and the terms, used in RQ3. In RQ2, there were two magic systems: Battle Magic and Rune Magic, no? > Pity they can't put their money where their mouth is and print > em properly. They may not have any money to place in front of their mouths... And it's not as if their gums are flapping a lot anyway. I say good for them for providing a set of rules that might go well with Rick's reprints. I just wish that said rules actually dovetail well with the reprints, and IMHO, the RQ2 rules as a base would fit that bill better than using the RQ3 rules as a base. Start with the RQ2 rules, and then modernize them with improvements that have resulted in Stormbringer and CoC. (Dispense with SRs, make attack/parry into one skill roll, etc, etc.) -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ Disclaimer mandated by employer: "This transmission may contain confidential or privileged material. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful." From vhaag at rim.com Tue Jul 13 04:17:31 2004 From: vhaag at rim.com (Viktor Haag) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:17:31 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] BRP In-Reply-To: <00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> References: <20040709091917.15C512226F3@boomstick.screwheads.net><40EEC378.26899.90CDF2@localhost><6.1.1.1.0.20040709114435.021d1510@incoming.verizon.net><00b801c465f3$a562cb30$ce182f09@IBMSKFUWSTXPIP><6.1.1.1.0.20040709150007.0212d868@incoming.verizon.net><00a801c46623$9c0db8d0$68417442@wizard> Message-ID: <16626.54715.118185.494358@suldrun.rim.net> Steve Perrin writes: ... > Since, again this is as of the last time I talked to any of > the various parties, Greg and the Chaosium are not on speaking > terms, I imagine that the folks at Chaosium are going to stick > to the BRP name and never mention RuneQuest. That's a shame. I wonder if Greg is on speaking terms with Pete Corless and Green Knight, since they currently own another of Greg's "great inventions"... Pendragon. (I think Pendragon is a wonderful game, and so do many others; however, I place it in quotes as I know that it also has detractors.) -- Viktor Haag : Software & Information Design : Research In Motion +--+ Disclaimer mandated by employer: "This transmission may contain confidential or privileged material. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful." From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jul 13 05:18:30 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:18:30 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Daughters of Darkness Message-ID: <130.3164a572.2e243e06@aol.com> I think Eldarad at least had some smeblances of redeeming value in bits and buggets. I found the barter system therein acceptable, and a few of the tombs nicely designed as one-offs transplanted elsewhere. DoD I never used. Devin From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jul 13 05:38:11 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 12:38:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Daughters of Darkness In-Reply-To: <130.3164a572.2e243e06@aol.com> Message-ID: <20040712193811.3949.qmail@web41108.mail.yahoo.com> --- DevinC at aol.com wrote: > I think Eldarad at least had some smeblances of > redeeming value in bits and > buggets. I found the barter system therein > acceptable, and a few of the tombs > nicely designed as one-offs transplanted elsewhere. > > DoD I never used. I must admit I used both supplements for ideas and as well as some maps and situations. Overall I would I would have to say Eldarad is heads and shoulders above DoD, and considering the poor quality of Eldarad, its not saying much for DoD. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Mon Jul 12 23:21:59 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:21:59 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? References: <00ee01c467f7$5ed00290$1208a8c0@kenneith93j41k> Message-ID: <002a01c46850$9892dad0$dcbfb5d4@skadebyran.se> On Monday, July 12, 2004 12:02 PM, "Joseph Elric Smith Mormon Minion of Arioch" wrote: > Or you could just use [t]he OGL, and include character creation rules. Like TLG > is doing for C&C like S&S did with the EQRPG, and like Monte cook did with > AU. I hope that Chaosium would consider a license arrangement which makes it easy for small publishers to enter such an agreement, i.e. issue a license that you can take or leave. As others have already said, I think such an arrangement would benefit Chaosium. OGL is, however, not a very good alternative - IMHO. I find it a next to useless solution for any publisher of RPG related material (except WotC). My main reasons for having this opinion are: 1) OGL is written and controlled by WotC. 2) OGL is a sloppily and poorly written legal document. 3) Because of the sloppy language it has a very fluid nature, making it difficult to know how to interpret it. 4) It does not deal with international issues, such as choice of law. (This last point is of course less important to potential US users but not to us non-us users.) From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Tue Jul 13 06:17:35 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:17:35 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? References: Message-ID: <002b01c46850$98e9fb80$dcbfb5d4@skadebyran.se> On Monday, July 12, 2004 11:57 AM, wrote: < snip > > > Conversely I want to open up some kind of commercial legitimacy for > > efforts like Stephane's (sans the core character generation rules) > > without having to negotiate the full and awkward formal licencing > > pathway with Chaosium if there's no trademarked or copyrighted > > materials involved. > > If it is a BRP compatible game and is going to say so, it is plausibly > going to use a Chaosium trademark, and if one were to want to include > any rules adaptations or additions one would probably be classed as > doing derivative work from Chaosium's copyright work, which would also > require a license. > > I don't think (although you'd have to ask Stephane to be sure...) it > was particulalrly arduous or difficult for him actually: since > Stephane's PDF version was NOT a commercial release (so he wasn't' > attempting to make money from it) the only stipulations were > presumably the same that technically should apply to ANY fan material > made publicly available: correct declarations of copyright and the > receipt of the original copyright/trademark holders permission to use > their material. That websites (and fanzines before them) flagrantly > ignored this requirement never made it legal (or ethical), but since > most not-for profit fan work is not a threat (if anything, it helps > promote the original work) I would hope that Chaosium would, in > addition to some sort of commercial licensing programme for > publsihers, would come up with some reasonable noncommercial usage > license for fan created not-for-profit works: even if it's just a > formal statement of the current approach... While I can't really agree with Nick on why one would need a license to produce a BRP compatible product, I do agree with that you are probably better of with one. I do agree with the general statement that one should (must) when necessary obtain permission to publish derivative material, but... There are many myths floating around on the net about copyrights and trademark rights, and in most cases people needs to be educated about what they _cannot_ do, but in some cases one need to make clear what one _can_ do. The knowledge about this last point is sadly lacking, in my experience, among creators of RPG fan-material and small scale publishers. The following few comments are thus my opinion on a few legal issues - related to copyrights and trademark right, and although I'm not a legal professional I believe I stand on solid ground when I make these comments. However, as always, never consider opinions on legal matters you find on the net to be legal advice. First, I would like to remind everyone of one crucial point about copyrights: they are strictly national. It is, IMO, a very common misunderstanding (especially - I have to say - among US commentators on the net), that because of various international agreements the rules regulating copyright issues are the same all across the globe - nothing could be more wrong. Every nation has its own copyright laws, with their own definitions of what might be copyrighted and by whom. Without any international treaties this would mean that, for example, an US author would not be able to defend his work(s) against infringement abroad. Now, of course, there are international treatises regulating these issues, the most important of those is the Berne Convention, which most nations (including the US) has signed. Now, my main reason for even commenting on Nick's post is the confusing I see time and time again about derivative works, especially when dealing with RPG material. What it comes down to is the subject matter of a copyright protection, and this is always the way an idea has been expressed, and never the idea itself. A derivative work is a work that shares a part of the way it is expressed with another work. Sharing the same ideas does not make a work a derivative work. IMO a rules adaptation is, in most cases, not a derivative work and a rules addition is even less a derivative work. If someone reads a game rule and comes up with an adaptation or variant and expresses this variant rule in his own words, then that rules adaptation cannot be said to be a derivative of the original rule. The new rule does not share the same expression, only the same idea - and that is quite OK. An addition to a rule is a new component of a rules system - a new idea. If this addition is written as an addition or expansion, not using the original expression but extending it, then it does not use the same expression or the same idea; in this case the addition is a _new_ work. I would also like to point out that one can, under certain circumstances, make use of someone else's Trademark. Again, it's important to realize that Trademarks, just as are copyrights, are strictly national. There is no international convention allowing trademarks registered in one nation protection in another nation, but one can register an international trademark. To my knowledge no RPG company has made any such registrations - not even WotC. The rules for fair use of other companies Trademarks are different in the US and in the EU. The European rules are fairly straight forward: usage of other company's trademark is allowed, if it's necessary in the light of the market's need of proper information and if it's done according to good practice. The US has rules of fair usage which allows for compatibility statements, provided that it's combined with a disclaimer. It should also be noted that in some jurisdictions the use of Trademarks by private persons are not regulated by the law at all. What all this boils down to is IMO that licenses to create or market supplements to RPG's are not really warranted, copyright law wise and trademark law wise. You need a license if you want to make extensive use of someone else's Trademark or publish derivative works. A license agreement can still be a good idea for a third-party producer - even when not strictly necessary, because then you _know_ that the other party is not going to try and sue you, and in jurisdictions where one can go to court on a whim such knowledge can make you sleep better... A license in these circumstances is a way to buy you peace. Wealthy and aggressive parties, such as WotC, are obviously better equipped to intimidate others into accepting license agreements. As for fan-based material, the issue is mainly one of proper attribution and to remind people of what they cannot do. Beyond that I don't think a RPG company should try and make claims that wouldn't necessarily hold up in court. I've seen some strange, even outlandish claims on the net and it's not pretty - besides it only alienates the company's greatest asset, the fans. From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jul 13 09:02:32 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 19:02:32 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: <39.4a242ce3.2e247288@aol.com> In a message dated 7/12/2004 1:42:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, peter.brink at brinkdata.se writes: <> And yet, despite the above many publishers are blossoming under OGL, including international ones... Devin From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jul 13 09:05:11 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 19:05:11 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ resurrected? Message-ID: <1e0.25302fec.2e247327@aol.com> In a message dated 7/12/2004 1:42:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, peter.brink at brinkdata.se writes: <> With all due respect and without trying to impune the author of the above, if I were to follow his implied advice in his first paragraph I would be very inclined to ignore his advice in the second, defacto. Just a little strange that a person cautions us about the suspect copyright advice being spouted by RPG-ers on the internet, and then goes on to say that he is not a legal professional, and then goes on to give us copyright advice. Devin From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 13 17:40:30 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 08:40:30 +0100 Subject: Pendragon, was Re: [RQ-Rules] BRP Message-ID: >> Since, again this is as of the last time I talked to any of >> the various parties, Greg and the Chaosium are not on speaking >> terms, I imagine that the folks at Chaosium are going to stick >> to the BRP name and never mention RuneQuest. > >That's a shame. I wonder if Greg is on speaking terms with Pete >Corless and Green Knight, since they currently own another of >Greg's "great inventions"... Pendragon. Well, given that Green Knight make Chaosium look like Mongoose in terms of output, it's possible that Green Knight is sleeping in Avalon... >(I think Pendragon is a wonderful game, and so do many others; >however, I place it in quotes as I know that it also has >detractors.) Not me. I think Pendragon is a brilliant rule system (for quite different purposes to RQ) - indeed, if I was ever to attempt to do a non-RQ Glorantha it would be on the lines of Pendragon Pass, not HW/HQ which in equal parts frustrated, irritated and baffled me to the point where it sits on the shelf (alongside similar games such as Everway...). A mate and I have talked about using Pendragon to do a game set amongst the first houses of men at the time they entered Beleriand (from Tolkein's Silmarillion), which I keep "hearing" rumuours someone has done on the net, but can never track down... But I have enough ideas to be working on anyway, up to him to track down. Cheers, Nick Middleton From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 14 03:45:42 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Items - Database In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040713174542.75571.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> I want to add magic items to my online database and I am looking for ideas as to what people like to see in regards to the structure of the data and the layout of the database. Currently, I have created several entries in my database. I would like to get some feed back on the current design and know if i should add some other fields. To look at the database please go to http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/ and follow the links to Rune Quest -> Encyclopedia -> Magic items. Thanks , ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Fri Jul 16 21:52:47 2004 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:52:47 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Just catching up... haven't read everyone's replies... Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much metal). An element surely has to be something essential and low-level, a building block that more complex substances (e.g. plants, animals, tools, etc.) are made. Summoning an elemental is invoking the raw power of the unadulterated essence of matter. Begonias are not a raw, unadulterated essence of anything, so anything that creates an animated begonia is not an elemental summoning spell, IMNSHO. Be my guest, and use the same game mechanics for simplicity, but call it an elemental and I shall mock thee. Even if you are Steve Perrin, world-famous game designer and hero to us all. I suppose I'd better :-) so that no-one thinks I'm being too serious. Phil Hibbs Capgemini Aston, UK Our name has changed. Please update your address book to the following format: "recipient at capgemini.com". This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From lancelot at inetnebr.com Fri Jul 16 22:52:35 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 07:52:35 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Primals and Meta-Primals In-Reply-To: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Message-ID: <40F7CF93.8040709@inetnebr.com> OK in a fantasy cosmology you can restrict however you like ;-) I personally like Elementals as analogs to states of matter and energy as well as space - time time - space - fire - wind - water - earth these are distinct and separate from.... Primals, these are ins some sense optimal versions of the species they are primals of. A primal squirrel is the best a squirrel a squirel can be, additionally a primal has natural magical/mystical influence over the species they are primal of and a duty to protect and guide that species. There may also be Meta Primals that go beyond species into more general category Such as a "plant elemental" alah Swamp Thing. Hibbs, Phil wrote: >Just catching up... haven't read everyone's replies... > >Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could >understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as >it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & >water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much >metal). An element surely has to be something essential and low-level, a >building block that more complex substances (e.g. plants, animals, tools, >etc.) are made. Summoning an elemental is invoking the raw power of the >unadulterated essence of matter. Begonias are not a raw, unadulterated >essence of anything, so anything that creates an animated begonia is not an >elemental summoning spell, IMNSHO. Be my guest, and use the same game >mechanics for simplicity, but call it an elemental and I shall mock thee. >Even if you are Steve Perrin, world-famous game designer and hero to us all. > >I suppose I'd better :-) so that no-one thinks I'm being too serious. > >Phil Hibbs >Capgemini >Aston, UK > >. > > > -- Lance Dyas Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying -- Lance Dyas Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds From jellen at ameritech.net Sat Jul 17 01:01:07 2004 From: jellen at ameritech.net (J and/or Ellen) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:01:07 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Message-ID: <017101c46b45$b9692e10$2d004d44@DCNL6S01> Anything that can be reduced by fire can hardly be an element. But I did appreciate D&D's concepts of para-elementals & such, i.e. entities that are hybrids of two elements. To open another can of worm-headed Lovecraftian hellspawn, does anyone have specific rules differentiating semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? I Are the latter necessarily the stuff of Chaos? If so, can they themselves be said to be chaos elementals? And if that too is so, do you have stats on law elementals? --J ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hibbs, Phil" To: Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 6:52 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals Just catching up... haven't read everyone's replies... Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much metal). An element surely has to be something essential and low-level, a building block that more complex substances (e.g. plants, animals, tools, etc.) are made. Summoning an elemental is invoking the raw power of the unadulterated essence of matter. Begonias are not a raw, unadulterated essence of anything, so anything that creates an animated begonia is not an elemental summoning spell, IMNSHO. Be my guest, and use the same game mechanics for simplicity, but call it an elemental and I shall mock thee. Even if you are Steve Perrin, world-famous game designer and hero to us all. I suppose I'd better :-) so that no-one thinks I'm being too serious. Phil Hibbs Capgemini Aston, UK Our name has changed. Please update your address book to the following format: "recipient at capgemini.com". This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From rico at ricosweb.com Fri Jul 16 23:38:40 2004 From: rico at ricosweb.com (Rich Allen) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 07:38:40 -0600 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals In-Reply-To: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.uk> Message-ID: <200471673840.996433@laptop> But "earth" is made of particles of different minerals and bits of organic matter. Even if you argue against the organic bits, you still have lots of bits of different minerals. Air is also composed of different gasses, and the composition will change by altitude, proximity to settlements, etc! Water can be salty or fresh, or polluted. Even fire is different depending on the fuel source. :P :) Rich Allen On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:52:47 +0100, Hibbs, Phil wrote: >?Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could >?understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as >?it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & >?water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much >?metal). From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jul 16 22:38:32 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?ASHLEY=20MUNDAY?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:38:32 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Continuum RQ? In-Reply-To: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Message-ID: <20040716123832.99513.qmail@web86210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Afternoon all, At Continuum in a couple of weekends time I'm (hopefully, barring acts of God and interest in the idea) attempting to run a RQ II retro-scenario. Anyone interested blow the cobwebs off yer rules and feel to join me. Cheers, Ash From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Jul 17 01:29:57 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons In-Reply-To: <017101c46b45$b9692e10$2d004d44@DCNL6S01> Message-ID: <20040716152957.6431.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> -- J wrote: > To open another can of worm-headed Lovecraftian > hellspawn, That is why we are here. :) > does anyone have specific rules differentiating > semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the > aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? Why bother, no matter what you call it, it is still out to kill you. > I Are the latter necessarily the stuff of Chaos? Only if you want them to be. > If so, can they themselves be said to be chaos > elementals? I would say what a chaos elemental is any elemental tainted by chaos. Example: A gnome summoned from the ground consecrated to a Chaos. > And if that too is so, do you have stats on law elementals? No, but I use Virtues from Stormbringer. So I can have a Salamander infused with a Virtue that would always do 18 then engulfing and would match its power vs. any demon to destroy it on contact. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Sat Jul 17 01:32:17 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Continuum RQ? In-Reply-To: <20040716123832.99513.qmail@web86210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040716153217.84856.qmail@web41105.mail.yahoo.com> --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > Afternoon all, > > At Continuum in a couple of weekends time I'm > (hopefully, barring acts of God and interest in the > idea) attempting to run a RQ II retro-scenario. > Anyone > interested blow the cobwebs off yer rules and feel > to > join me. > > Cheers, > > Ash Sure, as long as you provide a round trip ticket.:) ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Sat Jul 17 02:42:57 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 09:42:57 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons In-Reply-To: <017101c46b45$b9692e10$2d004d44@DCNL6S01> References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> <017101c46b45$b9692e10$2d004d44@DCNL6S01> Message-ID: <40F80591.3080801@concentric.net> J and/or Ellen wrote: > Anything that can be reduced by fire can hardly be an element. But I did > appreciate D&D's concepts of para-elementals & such, i.e. entities that are > hybrids of two elements. > > To open another can of worm-headed Lovecraftian hellspawn, does anyone have > specific rules differentiating semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the > aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? I Are the latter necessarily > the stuff of Chaos? If so, can they themselves be said to be chaos > elementals? And if that too is so, do you have stats on law elementals? The one thing I always remember when thinking about such taxonomies is that while they're sometimes useful for GMs and scholars, they rarely go very far in the "real world" (whether ours or that of the PCs). Your average NPC farmer or townsperson isn't going to much care if the "Demon" who burned his field/livestock/house/daughter was IN ACTUALITY: * a fiend from the pits of the fourth hell * a bound fire elemental * a chaos-spawn with an immolation ability * a lowly kobold with a torch Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Sat Jul 17 03:06:11 2004 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 18:06:11 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Primals and Meta-Primals Message-ID: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98144@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> In Glorantha, I think it is the case that there is one of every species that is fully sentient. For some cosmological reason there has to be - either the species will disappear if it is killed, or another one will arise, I'm not sure. Phil Hibbs Capgemini Aston, UK Our name has changed. Please update your address book to the following format: "recipient at capgemini.com". This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From steve at perrinworlds.com Sat Jul 17 13:49:05 2004 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 20:49:05 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals References: <993BE7B40B41D31193C50008C75F68F207E98142@exast02.capgemini.co.u k> Message-ID: <00bd01c46bb1$02a815d0$68417442@wizard> Ah, a mockery elemental. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hibbs, Phil" To: Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:52 AM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals > > Just catching up... haven't read everyone's replies... > > Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could > understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as > it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & > water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much > metal). An element surely has to be something essential and low-level, a > building block that more complex substances (e.g. plants, animals, tools, > etc.) are made. Summoning an elemental is invoking the raw power of the > unadulterated essence of matter. Begonias are not a raw, unadulterated > essence of anything, so anything that creates an animated begonia is not an > elemental summoning spell, IMNSHO. Be my guest, and use the same game > mechanics for simplicity, but call it an elemental and I shall mock thee. > Even if you are Steve Perrin, world-famous game designer and hero to us all. > > I suppose I'd better :-) so that no-one thinks I'm being too serious. > > Phil Hibbs > Capgemini > Aston, UK > > > Our name has changed. Please update your address book to the following format: "recipient at capgemini.com". > > This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 19 18:04:57 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 09:04:57 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules]Elementals and Primals Message-ID: Lance said: >I personally like >Elementals as analogs to states of matter and energy as well as space - >time >time - space - fire - wind - water - earth I'm very wary of this approach, as it does tie your underpinning cosmology to a very modern, post-enlightenment world view. If one is happy to impose our concepts of matter and energy on the world one is dealing with, fine, but it is easy to go to far and reduce the "magic" of the fantasy world to technology. Which can be enormous fun of course, but only if it's what was intended... >these are distinct and separate from.... >Primals, these are ins some sense optimal versions of the species they >are primals of. A primal squirrel is the best a squirrel a squirel can be, additionally >a primal has natural magical/mystical influence over the species they are primal of >and a duty to protect and guide that species. Ah, Moorcock's Beast Lords, yes? I've only tended to use them in Eternal Champion type games before but it would be fun to play with them a bit more. >There may also be Meta Primals that go beyond species into more general >category >Such as a "plant elemental" alah Swamp Thing. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In fact, as a result of a long convoluted series of plots I was involved with writing and running for the Lions Faction in the Gathering LARP a few years ago, I've got this idea for my "fantasy pseudo-mars" setting of these "Meta-Primal" forces/aspects of reality called the Red (That which lives in air and moves - animals), the Green (that which lives in air and does not move - Plants), the Black (that which grows on the remains of others and does not move - Fungi etc Saprophytes) and the Blue (that which lives in water and dies in air)... But part of what I'm going for there is a differentiation between using magic to manifest aspects of the world (the primals/elementals, minor enhancement magics like bladesharp that simply make an object more like it's ideal) and magic that breaks the world (Summoning demons, reality warping sorceries and such). Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 19 18:12:46 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 09:12:46 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons Message-ID: >J and/or Ellen wrote: > >> Anything that can be reduced by fire can hardly be an element. But I did >> appreciate D&D's concepts of para-elementals & such, i.e. entities that are >> hybrids of two elements. >> >> To open another can of worm-headed Lovecraftian hellspawn, does anyone have >> specific rules differentiating semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the >> aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? I Are the latter necessarily >> the stuff of Chaos? If so, can they themselves be said to be chaos >> elementals? And if that too is so, do you have stats on law elementals? > >The one thing I always remember when thinking about such taxonomies is >that while they're sometimes useful for GMs and scholars, they rarely go >very far in the "real world" (whether ours or that of the PCs). > >Your average NPC farmer or townsperson isn't going to much care if the >"Demon" who burned his field/livestock/house/daughter was IN ACTUALITY: >* a fiend from the pits of the fourth hell >* a bound fire elemental >* a chaos-spawn with an immolation ability >* a lowly kobold with a torch The NPC farmer may not care, but he _will_ use terms he understands and that make sense to him. So if there is no "hell" in his beliefs, the first option is out. More importantly, if it is a fact of life that Kobold tribes plague the hills, occasionally summoning the courage to raid and outlying farm, he may well us the latter, when it might well have been a bound fire elemental in the service of an unscrupulous neighbour or a marauding chaos spawn. In Glorantha, the explanation would probably be "Chaos" (quickly elaborated to "Broos"); in the Forgotten Realms, depending on the level of the PC's (and the Farmer!) it would either be Kobolds or Fiends... Cheers, Nick Middleton From lancelot at inetnebr.com Mon Jul 19 21:59:20 2004 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (lance dyas) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 06:59:20 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules]Elementals and Primals In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40FBB798.4020107@inetnebr.com> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >Lance said: > > >>I personally like >>Elementals as analogs to states of matter and energy as well as space - >>time >>time - space - fire - wind - water - earth >> >> > >I'm very wary of this approach, as it does tie your underpinning cosmology >to a very modern, post-enlightenment world view. If one is happy to impose >our concepts of matter and energy on the world one is dealing with, fine, >but it is easy to go to far and reduce the "magic" of the fantasy world to >technology. > Technology and Magic can be woven together using little tricks like that. Another would be describing CPR and general trauma treatment in terms of restoring the balance of elements within the treated individual. (Keeping them warm - maintains the fires, blowing air in, keeping the body fluids up via water and binding of wounds etc) > Which can be enormous fun of course, but only if it's what was >intended... > > Seems like it might be hard to do it accidentally ;-) >>these are distinct and separate from.... >>Primals, these are ins some sense optimal versions of the species they >>are primals of. A primal squirrel is the best a squirrel a squirel can be, >> >> >additionally > > >>a primal has natural magical/mystical influence over the species they are >> >> >primal of > > >>and a duty to protect and guide that species. >> >> > >Ah, Moorcock's Beast Lords, yes? > Yup but we can also use them as the source of "totemic" powers Totemic ties can range from barbarous warriors painting there faces with symbols of the beasts because their shamans taught them to exploit the animal within whose personality most complements there own, all the way through the Knights associating themselves with beasts of power by stitching there visages into there clothing and making them parts of their family crests. In totemic visions the beast represents you ... and in portents it acts as a guide etc. Or we might invoke them when we bring their ideals upon the world when we need them. For instance in A magic which lends speed to my horse etc. >I've only tended to use them in Eternal >Champion type games before but it would be fun to play with them a bit >more. > > > Elrics use was limited ins some ways because it was too directly tied to summoning. >>There may also be Meta Primals that go beyond species into more general >>category >>Such as a "plant elemental" alah Swamp Thing. >> >> > >Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In fact, as a result of a long convoluted >series of plots I was involved with writing and running for the Lions >Faction in the Gathering LARP a few years ago, I've got this idea for my >"fantasy pseudo-mars" setting of these "Meta-Primal" forces/aspects of >reality called the Red (That which lives in air and moves - animals), the >Green (that which lives in air and does not move - Plants), > ah but the green martians did move ;-) > the Black (that >which grows on the remains of others and does not move - Fungi etc >Saprophytes) > as did the black men from the moon. > and the Blue (that which lives in water and dies in air)... >But part of what I'm going for there is a differentiation between using >magic to manifest aspects of the world (the primals/elementals, minor >enhancement magics like bladesharp that simply make an object more like >it's ideal) and magic that breaks the world (Summoning demons, reality >warping sorceries and such). > > >Cheers, > > >Nick Middleton > You do have some interesting ideas going on here and the fact that "Any Enhancement" could be seen as virtually a single magic... pushing a "thing" towards it Platonic/Artistolean ideal or some such. "enhance" could very well be one of the verbs in a noun verb system of magic. -- Lance Dyas Google Me under : Lost Worlds Roleplaying -- Lance Dyas Lost Worlds Roleplaying - at the Decision Driven Gaming Center http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/LostWorlds From slposey at concentric.net Tue Jul 20 02:40:24 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 09:40:24 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <40FBF978.40400@concentric.net> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >>J and/or Ellen wrote: >> >> >>>Anything that can be reduced by fire can hardly be an element. But I did >>>appreciate D&D's concepts of para-elementals & such, i.e. entities that > > are > >>>hybrids of two elements. >>> >>>To open another can of worm-headed Lovecraftian hellspawn, does anyone > > have > >>>specific rules differentiating semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the >>>aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? I Are the latter > > necessarily > >>>the stuff of Chaos? If so, can they themselves be said to be chaos >>>elementals? And if that too is so, do you have stats on law elementals? >> >>The one thing I always remember when thinking about such taxonomies is >>that while they're sometimes useful for GMs and scholars, they rarely go >>very far in the "real world" (whether ours or that of the PCs). >> >>Your average NPC farmer or townsperson isn't going to much care if the >>"Demon" who burned his field/livestock/house/daughter was IN ACTUALITY: > > >>* a fiend from the pits of the fourth hell >>* a bound fire elemental >>* a chaos-spawn with an immolation ability >>* a lowly kobold with a torch > > > The NPC farmer may not care, but he _will_ use terms he understands and > that make sense to him. So if there is no "hell" in his beliefs, the first > option is out. More importantly, if it is a fact of life that Kobold tribes > plague the hills, occasionally summoning the courage to raid and outlying > farm, he may well us the latter, when it might well have been a bound fire > elemental in the service of an unscrupulous neighbour or a marauding chaos > spawn. In Glorantha, the explanation would probably be "Chaos" (quickly > elaborated to "Broos"); in the Forgotten Realms, depending on the level of > the PC's (and the Farmer!) it would either be Kobolds or Fiends... Precisely my point, the event will be cast into whatever the prevailing "mythos" encompasses (whether that's a matter of practicality or supernatural agency). The locals will tend to use the terminology they're most familiar with and the detailed and precise taxonomy of the scholar will be irrelevant. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 20 18:15:04 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:15:04 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Elements & Elementals & Demons Message-ID: >>>Your average NPC farmer or townsperson isn't going to much care if the >>>"Demon" who burned his field/livestock/house/daughter was IN ACTUALITY: >> >> >>>* a fiend from the pits of the fourth hell >>>* a bound fire elemental >>>* a chaos-spawn with an immolation ability >>>* a lowly kobold with a torch >> >> >> The NPC farmer may not care, but he _will_ use terms he understands and >> that make sense to him. So if there is no "hell" in his beliefs, the first >> option is out. More importantly, if it is a fact of life that Kobold tribes >> plague the hills, occasionally summoning the courage to raid and outlying >> farm, he may well us the latter, when it might well have been a bound fire >> elemental in the service of an unscrupulous neighbour or a marauding chaos >> spawn. In Glorantha, the explanation would probably be "Chaos" (quickly >> elaborated to "Broos"); in the Forgotten Realms, depending on the level of >> the PC's (and the Farmer!) it would either be Kobolds or Fiends... > >Precisely my point, the event will be cast into whatever the prevailing >"mythos" encompasses (whether that's a matter of practicality or >supernatural agency). > >The locals will tend to use the terminology they're most familiar with >and the detailed and precise taxonomy of the scholar will be irrelevant. Although the comedy value in having an Imperial Scholar attempting to classify what's going on in a remote province running in to immovable peasant superstition is rather tempting... ;-) More importantly, in a world where these creatures are real, SOMEONE will know the difference. So taxonomies ARE of some value in character (the medieval scholars spent vast amounts of effort classifying everything irrespective of having anything trivial like proof of its existence...) and an awful lot from a GM perspective: getting these "behind the scenes" details consistent is what can give a world its sense of depth and 'reality'. Cheers, Nick Middleton From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 20 19:28:38 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:28:38 +0100 Subject: Magic, Cosmology's, "Mars" or possibly not, wandered a bit from Re: [RQ-Rules]Elementals and Primals Message-ID: >>Lance said: >> >>>I personally like >>>Elementals as analogs to states of matter and energy as well as space - >>>time >>>time - space - fire - wind - water - earth >>> >> >>I'm very wary of this approach, as it does tie your underpinning cosmology >>to a very modern, post-enlightenment world view. If one is happy to impose >>our concepts of matter and energy on the world one is dealing with, fine, >>but it is easy to go to far and reduce the "magic" of the fantasy world to >>technology. >> >Technology and Magic can be woven together using little tricks like that. >Another would be describing CPR and general trauma treatment in terms of >restoring the balance of elements >within the treated individual. (Keeping them warm - maintains the fires, >blowing air in, keeping the body fluids up >via water and binding of wounds etc) > >> Which can be enormous fun of course, but only if it's what was >>intended... >> >Seems like it might be hard to do it accidentally ;-) D&D? The whole underlying paradigm of magic in standard D&D is of a grammatically structured, repeatable _system_ and its game manifestation (a huge list of spells and ways of turning them in to items) reduces magic to a system of tinkering / bespoke technology (rather like fire-arms circa 1840). There is no "mystery", only lack of understanding, no sense of the alien or unknowable, merely the yet to be explained. All spell lists have this failing to some extent, but it's easier (for me) to cope with RQ's three-fold magic (Bladesharp makes perfect sense as a country charm to make a knife blade keen, or to grant a soldier luck and Sorcery and Divine are far less consistent and reproducible since each sorcerer and cult is very different) than D&D's huge list of spells... >>>these are distinct and separate from.... >>>Primals, these are ins some sense optimal versions of the species they >>>are primals of. A primal squirrel is the best a squirrel a squirel can be, >>>additionally a primal has natural magical/mystical influence over the species they are >>>primal of and a duty to protect and guide that species. >>> >> >>Ah, Moorcock's Beast Lords, yes? >> >Yup but we can also use them as the source of "totemic" powers >Totemic ties can range from barbarous warriors painting there faces >with symbols of the beasts because their shamans taught them to >exploit the animal within whose personality most complements there own, >all the way through the Knights associating themselves with beasts of power >by stitching there visages into there clothing and making them parts >of their family crests. > >In totemic visions the beast represents you ... and in portents it acts >as a guide etc. > >Or we might invoke them when we bring their ideals upon the world when >we need them. >For instance in A magic which lends speed to my horse etc. > There is some nice stuff in Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed about Totemic Spirits. I would certainly tend to use the Primals in this wider sense, albeit in some settings at least I don't think I'd have "protect and guide" as high priorities (a bit too anthropomorphic for some settings I feel). >>I've only tended to use them in Eternal >>Champion type games before but it would be fun to play with them a bit >>more. >> >Elrics use was limited ins some ways because it was too directly tied to >summoning. True, I was always a bit disappointed that SB/Elric didn't put more thought in to making the Beast Lords more accessible in play without full on summoning (which is really something only Elric, with the Actorious, should be capable of). >>>There may also be Meta Primals that go beyond species into more general >>>category >>>Such as a "plant elemental" alah Swamp Thing. >>> >> >>Yeah, that's what I was thinking. In fact, as a result of a long convoluted >>series of plots I was involved with writing and running for the Lions >>Faction in the Gathering LARP a few years ago, I've got this idea for my >>"fantasy pseudo-mars" setting of these "Meta-Primal" forces/aspects of >>reality called the Red (That which lives in air and moves - animals), the >>Green (that which lives in air and does not move - Plants), >> >ah but the green martians did move ;-) Ahem, yes. When I say "Mars" of course I don't actually mean "Mars", at least not exactly... the "Mars" bit, certainly in the current draft, refers to the fact that two of the main influences on the setting are Sky Galleons of Mars (GDW's aerial combat game for 1889 - specifically the pre-steam technologies) and MM's "Warlord of Mars" trilogy. Burroughs has no direct bearing (other than through the lens of Moorcock's pastiche, oh and I read the League of Extraordinary Gentleman recently...), in part because I haven't read much Burroughs and also because Barsoom has been done as an RPG setting (there's a D6 version out there somewhere), so if I wanted to reproduce it, I'd have ransacked that. I should probably stop referring to the setting as "Mars" in any way, as it is rather misleading really (the current draft map is vaguely based on Central Asia for example)... >> the Black (that >>which grows on the remains of others and does not move - Fungi etc >>Saprophytes) >> >as did the black men from the moon. See above! "The Black" in this instance is another lift from Swamp Thing (albeit later in the series than the graphic novel reprints currently go). In many ways, I've deliberately created this set up underpinning the background so that whilst it will support the exotic detail of a fantasy setting (e.g. there are two moons, and build the right aerial flyer and it should be possible to visit them), the mundane detail that players will find it hard not to make assumptions about (the general flora and fauna, the way the world "works") are earthlike, at least in terms of their gross qualities as they will bear on player character actions: Genetics may not exist, there probably aren't atoms and molecules and gravity is just the love of the Lady of Rock for all the Children of the Chain... but one can still breed a better horse or Ashant by stock selection, acids and alkali's exist and water still flows down hill. >> and the Blue (that which lives in water and dies in air)... >>But part of what I'm going for there is a differentiation between using >>magic to manifest aspects of the world (the primals/elementals, minor >>enhancement magics like bladesharp that simply make an object more like >>it's ideal) and magic that breaks the world (Summoning demons, reality >>warping sorceries and such). >> >You do have some interesting ideas going on here and the fact that "Any >Enhancement" could be seen as >virtually a single magic... pushing a "thing" towards it >Platonic/Artistolean ideal or some such. > >"enhance" could very well be one of the verbs in a noun verb system of >magic. Back in my University days (whilst playing Ars Magica) we tinkered with some ideas like that - I also had a hugely entertaining hour long debate in character at an Ars Magic free form with a fellow mage about the Platonic theory of forms and Hermetic magic (since we were both Philosophy students it got a bit abstruse, but we had fun)... And one could indeed produce quite an interesting, rigorous "magi-tech" system on the Platonic model. What I'm trying to do with the Yrth (crass and obvious name, but less misleading than Mars - I'll think of a better name later!) is make a distinction between Magic in the service of the Great Chain of Being, (the links of the Chain being everything that makes up the World, from the Elemental Lords and what we've been calling the Meta-Primals to the individual people and creatures), and Magic which is antithetical to the Chain. In RQ it would be easy: Spirit Magic is of the Chain, Sorcery is NOT. Divine would depend on what entity granted it. However, I'm basing this on Stombringer 5th edition/Elric!, so it's a bit trickier, but I want SB style demon summoning and Demon weapons and the more free flowing feel of Elric!/SB combat. Or I do this week... ;-> I always liked the Ars Magica spontaneous magic system - and there are some nice ideas on similar lines in the Elric! supplement Unknown East as well, but they can be ref intensive and the huge advantage of Spell list heavy systems is that it saves player and ref effort on being spontaneously creative and lets them concentrate on doing things in the game. IIRC someone mentioned spontaneous magic here a while back... Cheers, Nick Middleton From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Jul 20 22:08:43 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:08:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ? In-Reply-To: <20040719120232.2BB6E222785@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040720120843.27002.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Hibbs: > Sure, different cosmologies have different elements. I never could > understand how the Chinese could think that wood was an element, though, as > it is obviously created by the plant out of other constituents (earth & > water most obviously; also air, and fire in the form of sunlight; not much > metal). An element surely has to be something essential and low-level, a > building block that more complex substances (e.g. plants, animals, tools, > etc.) are made. Summoning an elemental is invoking the raw power of the > unadulterated essence of matter. Begonias are not a raw, unadulterated > essence of anything, so anything that creates an animated begonia is not an > elemental summoning spell, IMNSHO. Be my guest, and use the same game > mechanics for simplicity, but call it an elemental and I shall mock thee. > Even if you are Steve Perrin, world-famous game designer and hero to us > all. An element has to something raw and primal, but not necessarily unbreakable. So, if there is a lot of it and it can be seen as a primal force then why not have elementals and elements. In Glorantha, everyone know that there are only 5 elements (Darkness, Water, Earth, Fire, Storm) so there are only 5 elementals (Shades, Undines, Gnomes, Salamanders and Sylphs). Oh, then there are Lunes and Selenes, even though Moon is not an element. Weren't there also Void Elementals written up somewhere? And Ice is an element of sorts. Are Lunes and Selenes elementals? Well, they were called/dismissed by Summon/Dismiss (Size) Elemental in RQ2, so I would say yes. Outside of Glorantha, you have other Primal forces. Anyone who has seen a glacier of mountain knows that Ice and Rock/Stone are fairly primal and there is a lot of it, so they could be classed as elements. The Chinese have Metal and Wood, both of which are primal and there is a lot of them, but I am not sure what a Metal elemental looks like. It may seem obvious to us that Wood is made of different substances, but it wasn't to earlier cultures. Don't forget that chemists in the 15th and 16th centuries were doing experiments to find out what things were made of and they eventually got things down to basic building blocks - elements. Until then, wood was wood and metal was metal and they couldn't be changed, except by alchemists. The Norse deities built a ship out of all the untrimmed fingernails, so that is pretty primal, so it follows that toenails and hair cuttings are also fairly primal :-) > I suppose I'd better :-) so that no-one thinks I'm being too serious. Rich Allen: > But "earth" is made of particles of different minerals and bits of organic > matter. Even if you argue against the organic bits, you still have lots of > bits of different minerals. Air is also composed of different gasses, and > the composition will change by altitude, proximity to settlements, etc! > Water can be salty or fresh, or polluted. Even fire is different depending > on the fuel source. And elements can be broken down to sub-atomic particles and changed. I take the easier view - earth is earth, fire is fire, water is water and so on. No need to go any further. Leon Kirshtein: > > does anyone have specific rules differentiating > > semiquasipara-elementals (e.g. the > > aforementioned toenail elemental) from demons? > > Why bother, no matter what you call it, it is still > out to kill you. and Stephen Posey: > The one thing I always remember when thinking about such taxonomies is > that while they're sometimes useful for GMs and scholars, they rarely go > very far in the "real world" (whether ours or that of the PCs). > > Your average NPC farmer or townsperson isn't going to much care if the > "Demon" who burned his field/livestock/house/daughter was IN ACTUALITY: > * a fiend from the pits of the fourth hell > * a bound fire elemental > * a chaos-spawn with an immolation ability > * a lowly kobold with a torch Because if I have a Dismiss Medium Elemental spell then I would like to know if I can use it on the toenail elemental or fire elemental. Of course in RQ3 you just through a bucket of Magic Points in a Dispel, or something equally silly. I liked the old rules. Ashley: > At Continuum in a couple of weekends time I'm > (hopefully, barring acts of God and interest in the > idea) attempting to run a RQ II retro-scenario. Anyone > interested blow the cobwebs off yer rules and feel to > join me. Depending on time, that sounds like fun. I haven't played RQ for 7 years or so, so it should be pretty interesting. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jul 20 23:51:41 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ? In-Reply-To: <20040720120843.27002.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040720135141.15859.qmail@web41109.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: >>Because if I have a Dismiss Medium Elemental spell then I would like to know if I can use it on the toenail elemental or fire elemental. Of course in RQ3 you just through a bucket of Magic Points in a Dispel, or something equally silly. I liked the old rules. Actually there is no Dismiss Elemental spell in RQ3 and there is no way to Dispel one either. I have added Dimiss as a spell in my database, but as you will note it is element specific. It seems right to me that if Summon spells are specific then the Dismiss spells be so as well. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jul 21 00:56:37 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:56:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ? Message-ID: <15414020.1090335397776.JavaMail.root@dewey.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Really? I'd missed the lack. My players aren't up to using elementals yet and I hadn't come up with a situation in which they would have been useful to my "bad guy" NPCs. I need to poke through your database to see the details. Thanks for the heads up! David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Jul 20, 2004 8:51 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ? Actually there is no Dismiss Elemental spell in RQ3 and there is no way to Dispel one either. From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 21 01:29:33 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:29:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ? In-Reply-To: <15414020.1090335397776.JavaMail.root@dewey.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20040720152933.12293.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > Really? I'd missed the lack. My players aren't up to > using elementals yet and I hadn't come up with a > situation in which they would have been useful to my > "bad guy" NPCs. I ran across this a while ago then I ran a game, where the player, who were a bunch of Lunars were going to attack an Orlanthi temple. Before embarking on this task, they "hero quested" into the Young Kingdoms and helped to drive of a Pan Tangian raid on one of the cities on the Purple Isles?. During the battle they defended the temple to Lassa (elemental god of Air) and became initiates. They then sacrificed for several uses of Dismiss Sylph. Back in Glorantha this proved crucial then they had to contend with the temple elementals, as well as intesepting Orlanthi re-inforcements (Nothing is worse than having your Sylph dismissed from under you!). Of course at the end the entire site went up in a big bang but that is another story ... ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From tom at zunder.org.uk Wed Jul 21 01:56:33 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:56:33 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tavern re-opens Message-ID: <40FD4EC1.25081.2D695D@localhost> The Tavern re-opens! Sadly the demons that burnt it down managed to destroy all the members registrations, posts and forums. So come on by, register anew, visit the Bar and start to suggest how the new Tavern should look, do we want the same forums or a new structure? http://tavern.elric.org.uk Come on down. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jul 21 13:47:35 2004 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:47:35 -0500 Subject: Ideal Forms (was Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ?) In-Reply-To: <20040720152933.12293.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040720152933.12293.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40FDE757.1040001@sbcglobal.net> If you want to expand beyond "elementals", why not try the idea of Platonic ideal forms (I've also seen them called "essences")? These are perfect forms of Earthly objects and beings that exist on a higher plane of reality. All the plants, animals, etc, that we see here are rough, crude forms of these higher beings. You wouldn't have lots of different types of plants, but you'd have a "Plant Ideal" that encom[passes the total idea of plant, e.g. You might even have hierarchies, such as a Tree ideal, a Grass Ideal, etc. Guy (Hoyle) From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Wed Jul 21 16:17:59 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:17:59 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2469@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My group discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the punter who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) On the other hand, if ones culture is hugely into ancestral worship and powerful ancestors are deified on death, would this not lead to a type of divine magic. To whit many an ancient earth king/pharaoh became a god (sometimes while still alive). It could be very interesting to play. T?ny aka tiberius at runequest.za.org __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From talmeta at talmeta.net Wed Jul 21 20:57:30 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 06:57:30 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship Message-ID: <40FE4C1A.6000108@talmeta.net> > Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of > spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to > save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Wed Jul 21 22:21:26 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:21:26 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2480@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Izzit, never saw that section. Then again it has been a while since I cracked that box open. Will have a looksee. -----Original Message----- From: Tal Meta Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From pmj at comhem.se Thu Jul 22 01:58:08 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:58:08 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship In-Reply-To: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2480@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> References: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2480@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <40FE9290.2030302@comhem.se> There is also Daka Fal from (Cults of Prax?) that is a whole cult devoted to ancestor worship with spells like summon and incarnate ancestors. /Peter J Den, Tony T wrote: >Izzit, never saw that section. Then again it has been a while since I >cracked that box open. Will have a looksee. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tal Meta > > > >Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just >used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... > > From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 02:25:27 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 09:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship In-Reply-To: <40FE9290.2030302@comhem.se> Message-ID: <20040721162527.92369.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com> --- Peter Johansson wrote: > There is also Daka Fal from (Cults of Prax?) that is > a whole cult > devoted to ancestor worship with spells like summon > and incarnate ancestors. Daka Fal (RQ2) = Ancestor Worship (RQ3) ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From pmj at comhem.se Thu Jul 22 02:50:17 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:50:17 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship In-Reply-To: <20040721162527.92369.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040721162527.92369.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40FE9EC9.10103@comhem.se> Well, yes sort of. The Daka Fal cult in CoP is however more fully described than the general Ancestor Worship in GoG and since the question was for input on Ancestor worship I wanted to wave in that direction. :-) /Peter J Leon Kirshtein wrote: >Daka Fal (RQ2) = Ancestor Worship (RQ3) > > >===== >Leon Kirshtein >www.godlearner.d2g.com > > From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 03:04:45 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acolytes In-Reply-To: <40FE9EC9.10103@comhem.se> Message-ID: <20040721170445.61335.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> All of this talk about Ancestor Worship reminded me what I wanted to ask a question. I have decided what IMW, every cult has an Acolyte status (including Ancestor Worship). Now generally speaking to become an Acolyte one would need 5 Cult skills at 50% (some cults ask for specific skills and at greater %) and 10 pts of divine magic. This generally works fairly well except in cases there the cult in question does not have access to ALL common divine spells. What do you think should be the "general" requirements in such cases? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gianni at basicrps.com Thu Jul 22 04:34:03 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:34:03 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph Message-ID: <1090434842.40feb71b0fb9c@imp.webhuset.no> Hello all Anybody received their 'Advanced BRPS' monograph? I'm really curious! cheers Gianni From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 05:52:31 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:52:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <1090434842.40feb71b0fb9c@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040721195231.17579.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> Yes I recieved mine yesterday, and have not gone over it in detail yet. I have never seen RQ2 so I can't compare it to that, but It looks like the same system material as RQ3 without graphics or setting info. Even has good ole' Cormac as the example. Black tape and glue binding. All black, white and grey. No artwork other than the B&W cover. I guess it's good for BRP beginners who don't already have a version of RQ, CoC, or Elric!/Stormbringer as an advanced system to pull from as needed. But since I collect games, I'm happy with it. Any specific questions? I will try to answer. Gregory --- Gianni wrote: > Hello all > > Anybody received their 'Advanced BRPS' monograph? > I'm really curious! > > cheers > > Gianni > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 06:05:41 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <20040721195231.17579.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040721200541.94076.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> > Any specific questions? I will try to answer. > > Gregory Is it all RQ3 rules? Including Sorcery? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 06:54:44 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:54:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Ancestral Worship, Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040721200601.72A9922270B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040721205444.21169.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Tony: > Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My > group > discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of > spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the punter > who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just > to > save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:- We used the Daka Fal cult for simple ancestor worship. For trolls, we allowed shamans to contact ancestor spirits directly by going to Wonderhome. Small clans would have a spirit cult based on a single ancestor/founder. We also used the RQ2 version of Firshala who had a cult similar to Daka Fal but in a more organised cult. > On the other hand, if ones culture is hugely into ancestral worship and > powerful ancestors are deified on death, would this not lead to a type of > divine magic. To whit many an ancient earth king/pharaoh became a god > (sometimes while still alive). It could be very interesting to play. The Firshala cult is a good place to start in this. For Yelmic worshippers in Glorantha Dara Happa, I used a variation on Yelm which had some of the ancestor spells from Daka Fal but gained from a Hero ancestor. Tal Meta: > Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just > used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... The only problem with the Gods of Glorantha writeup is that ancestral spirits only ever worshipped the ancestral cult, so you could only get spirits with ancestral spells. It didn't have the concept of ancestors being in more than one cult or having ancestors from other traditions. I did use a variant of the cult tables which allowed me to roll up a random ancestor with a chance for rolling up a spirit in the ancestral cult or a spirit in a related tradition or a foreign spirit. Leon Kirshtein: > All of this talk about Ancestor Worship reminded me > what I wanted to ask a question. I have decided what > IMW, every cult has an Acolyte status (including > Ancestor Worship). Very reasonable. > Now generally speaking to become an Acolyte one would > need 5 Cult skills at 50% (some cults ask for specific > skills and at greater %) and 10 pts of divine magic. > This generally works fairly well except in cases there > the cult in question does not have access to ALL > common divine spells. What do you think should be the > "general" requirements in such cases? Not all cults have all Common Magic. I would say that, as a rule of thumb, the major cults have Common Divine: All, but Hero Cults would get only one point Common Divine and local cults would get Common Divine: 1 and 2 point spells. Also, there is nothing to stop the initiate sacrificing for cult special Divine Magic. This counts towards the 10 points required. In any case, once you have got Worship (Deity), Sanctify, Spellteaching and Warding then you are nearly at 10 poimts. Add a couple of points of Summon Ancestor and Divination and Bob's your uncle. Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 06:56:42 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <20040721200541.94076.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040721205642.32486.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> I have not pulled out my RQ3 book to compare deeply, but yes the Magic Book has Spirit magic, Divine Magic, and Sorcery, as well as Ritual magic which is usable by all three practioners. Gregory --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > Any specific questions? I will try to answer. > > > > Gregory > > Is it all RQ3 rules? Including Sorcery? > > ===== > Leon Kirshtein > www.godlearner.d2g.com > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From slposey at concentric.net Thu Jul 22 07:11:00 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:11:00 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <20040721205642.32486.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040721205642.32486.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40FEDBE4.60406@concentric.net> grogthing wrote: > I have never seen RQ2 so I can't compare it to that, > but It looks like the same system material as RQ3 > without graphics or setting info. Even has good ole' > Cormac as the example. ... > I have not pulled out my RQ3 book to compare deeply, > but yes the Magic Book has Spirit magic, Divine Magic, > and Sorcery, as well as Ritual magic which is usable > by all three practioners. > > Gregory Sounds pretty much like RQ3 warmed over. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, considering there hasn't been a version commercially available for nigh on 10 years. But why not say that's what it is rather than risk angering folks who may think they're getting something completely new? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 07:52:13 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <40FEDBE4.60406@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040721215213.65352.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> My guess is that since Mr. Stafford has the rights to "RuneQuest", that Chaosium is claiming the rights to the game "system" by reprinting the system info but replacing any mention of "RuneQuest" with the "Basic Role Playing". Gregory --- Stephen Posey wrote: > grogthing wrote: > > I have never seen RQ2 so I can't compare it to > that, > > but It looks like the same system material as RQ3 > > without graphics or setting info. Even has good > ole' > > Cormac as the example. > ... > > I have not pulled out my RQ3 book to compare > deeply, > > but yes the Magic Book has Spirit magic, Divine > Magic, > > and Sorcery, as well as Ritual magic which is > usable > > by all three practioners. > > > > Gregory > > Sounds pretty much like RQ3 warmed over. > > Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, considering > there hasn't been a > version commercially available for nigh on 10 years. > > But why not say that's what it is rather than risk > angering folks who > may think they're getting something completely new? > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From Mechashef at bigpond.com Thu Jul 22 07:54:32 2004 From: Mechashef at bigpond.com (Mechashef) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 07:54:32 +1000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Ancestral Worship, Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040721205444.21169.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040721215439.EF998222713@boomstick.screwheads.net> In my world, (based on a bastardized Mythic Australia) Ancestor worship is common in some areas. I based the cults on GOG ancestor worship, but changed the ancestor type divine spells to powerful Spirit Spells. Because many of the Ancestor worshipping shaman were also animists, I found that they sometimes had as many different Divine Spells as some priests! Also, it just seemed more in character for Spirit Magician specialists to have powerful spirit magics, not extensive Divine Magics From slposey at concentric.net Thu Jul 22 10:04:57 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:04:57 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <20040721215213.65352.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040721215213.65352.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <40FF04A9.1010005@concentric.net> grogthing wrote: > My guess is that since Mr. Stafford has the rights to > "RuneQuest", that Chaosium is claiming the rights to > the game "system" by reprinting the system info but > replacing any mention of "RuneQuest" with the "Basic > Role Playing". Perhaps they can't call the game RuneQuest, but it's disingenuous not to say the text is more or less a reformatting of the RQ3 rules. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Thu Jul 22 11:13:18 2004 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael.Christian at corbis.com) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:13:18 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C79192741094206C@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> It is quite possible that they don't have the legal right (or it was requested of them that they refrain) to use the name even in that context since it could be construed as using the name "Runequest" to market the product. Alternately they may just want to make a clean break from the name Runequest. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Stephen Posey Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 5:05 PM To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph grogthing wrote: > My guess is that since Mr. Stafford has the rights to > "RuneQuest", that Chaosium is claiming the rights to > the game "system" by reprinting the system info but > replacing any mention of "RuneQuest" with the "Basic > Role Playing". Perhaps they can't call the game RuneQuest, but it's disingenuous not to say the text is more or less a reformatting of the RQ3 rules. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 11:27:45 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:27:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <40FF04A9.1010005@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040722012745.8633.qmail@web41503.mail.yahoo.com> OK, I got my RQ3 deluxe softcover out. Comparing the BRP Magic Book with thr RQ3 Magic Book chapter.... so far as I can tell...It is word for word...paragraph for paragraph the same. Except everywhere "RuneQuest" was, has been replaced with "Basic Roleplaying" and all illustrations are removed. Gregory --- Stephen Posey wrote: > grogthing wrote: > > > My guess is that since Mr. Stafford has the rights > to > > "RuneQuest", that Chaosium is claiming the rights > to > > the game "system" by reprinting the system info > but > > replacing any mention of "RuneQuest" with the > "Basic > > Role Playing". > > Perhaps they can't call the game RuneQuest, but it's > disingenuous not to > say the text is more or less a reformatting of the > RQ3 rules. > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 12:43:31 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:43:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Ancestral Worship, Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040721205444.21169.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040722024331.41130.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: > > Now generally speaking to become an Acolyte one > would > > need 5 Cult skills at 50% (some cults ask for > specific > > skills and at greater %) and 10 pts of divine > magic. > > This generally works fairly well except in cases > there > > the cult in question does not have access to ALL > > common divine spells. What do you think should be > the > > "general" requirements in such cases? > > Not all cults have all Common Magic. I would say > that, as a rule of thumb, > the major cults have Common Divine: All, but Hero > Cults would get only one > point Common Divine and local cults would get Common > Divine: 1 and 2 point > spells. > > Also, there is nothing to stop the initiate > sacrificing for cult special > Divine Magic. This counts towards the 10 points > required. > > In any case, once you have got Worship (Deity), > Sanctify, Spellteaching and > Warding then you are nearly at 10 poimts. Add a > couple of points of Summon > Ancestor and Divination and Bob's your uncle. A lot of cults do not even have Sanctify, Spellteaching and Warding. That is why I think the skill requirements (two at 75% and one at 50%) and a Worship spell should sufice. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 16:23:23 2004 From: katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com (John Raner) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 23:23:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph In-Reply-To: <1090434842.40feb71b0fb9c@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040722062324.1820.qmail@web53703.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gianni wrote: > Anybody received their 'Advanced BRPS' monograph? > I'm really curious! I haven't :( and I ordered them two weeks ago...... Cheers, John ===== "Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master." ---- Colonel Andrew Jackson Hickok A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." ---- Friedrich Nietzsche "It is a shame that governments are chiefed by the devil tongues" ---- Chief Ten Bears "There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon or tool, merely obsolete thinking in its employ." ---- Mark D. (CapnCarp at yahoo.com) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From stolenbjorn at hotmail.com Thu Jul 22 18:56:52 2004 From: stolenbjorn at hotmail.com (Bjorn Stolen) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 08:56:52 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship Message-ID: I was very inspired with Maximus in "Gladiator". That he took some dirt in his hand before battle, and had wooden figures symbolizing his family are things that I'd suggest. >From: Tal Meta >Reply-To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." >To: "RuneQuest Rules @Crashbox" >Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship >Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 06:57:30 -0400 > >>Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My >>discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of >>spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the who has >>honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to >>save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) > >Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just used >those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... > > > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ MSN Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Med markedets beste SPAM-filter. Gratis! From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Thu Jul 22 19:13:51 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:13:51 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F249E@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Ha ha, thats exactly why I started this topic. -----Original Message----- From: Bjorn Stolen [ I was very inspired with Maximus in "Gladiator". That he took some dirt in his hand before battle, and had wooden figures symbolizing his family are things that I'd suggest. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jul 22 23:31:24 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:31:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040722090828.79C80222286@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040722133124.37085.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> Leon: > > In any case, once you have got Worship (Deity), > > Sanctify, Spellteaching and > > Warding then you are nearly at 10 poimts. Add a > > couple of points of Summon > > Ancestor and Divination and Bob's your uncle. > > A lot of cults do not even have Sanctify, > Spellteaching and Warding. That is why I think the > skill requirements (two at 75% and one at 50%) and a > Worship spell should sufice. Don't they? I am surprised, but I haven't looked through Gods of Glorantha for a while. I would say that all cults, no matter how large they are, should have the basic Common Divine spells of Divination, Sanctify, Spell Teaching, Spirit Block, Warding and Worship (Deity). For those people using Divine Intervention in campaigns, most cults should get that as well. These are the basic spells that come with a cult. Maybe not Warding, but I like it as a spell, especially in RQ3 where it can be stacked above 4 points. Spirit Cults would only get Contact (Spirit), Worship (Spirit) and Spirit Block. Why Spirit Block? Because, in Glorantha, Flesh Man gave it to every cult as "their vote on the spirit plane" in RQ2. Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 23 00:08:20 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 07:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040722133124.37085.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040722140820.56563.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: > I would say that all cults, no matter how large they > are, should have the > basic Common Divine spells of Divination, Sanctify, > Spell Teaching, Spirit > Block, Warding and Worship (Deity). I am not so sure. I agree on Worship, but not the others. A spirit/minor diety would not be able to grant Divination. Any communication with such a being would likely be carried out through a Worship. Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans serving as priests. Spirit Block is mostly subsumed by Spirit Screen in such cults as well. Sanctify would not be applicable for cults with a single or few specified locations Warding - a really nice spell, but i do not see a reason to give it to everybody. > For those people using Divine > Intervention in campaigns, most cults should get > that as well. I do not use this as a spell. Minor cults would have a very limited amount of things they could do with it. > Spirit Cults would only get Contact (Spirit), > Worship (Spirit) and Spirit Block. I would say that these, plus Divination are the same for a Spirit Cult. > Why Spirit Block? Because, in Glorantha, Flesh Man > gave it to every cult as > "their vote on the spirit plane" in RQ2. What about the Chaotic Spirit Cults? Do they get a vote as well? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Fri Jul 23 05:28:40 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 12:28:40 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040722140820.56563.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040722133124.37085.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> <20040722140820.56563.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040722122640.0217eec0@incoming.verizon.net> At 07:08 AM 7/22/2004, you wrote: >Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans >serving as priests. On the contrary, it is one of the most important spells. Without it the spells ancestors have are lost to time, but with it the shaman can embody the ancestor and use the spell to teach the ancestor's spell to the worshiper. Bo From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 23 05:38:00 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 12:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20040722122640.0217eec0@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <20040722193800.69725.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bo Whitten wrote: > >Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans > >serving as priests. > > On the contrary, it is one of the most important > spells. Without it the spells ancestors have are > lost to time, but with it the shaman can embody the > ancestor and use the spell to teach the ancestor's > spell to the worshiper. According to the description: Spell Teaching summons a spell spirit that then teaches (after spirit combat) the spell it knows. Based on that a shaman could never get any spell known by an ancestor by these means. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Fri Jul 23 05:55:12 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 12:55:12 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes Message-ID: <410-220047422195512171@earthlink.net> I respectfully disagree that they could never get any Ancestral spell from that spirit contact. 1) the spirit could have been from an ancestor who tests the user before revealing the spell. ie: a "Disir" (Norse Mythos) is an ancestor tutelary spirit of exceptional women who had passed away but stayed connected to preserve the tribe. BTW (Valkyrs were a subset of the Disir & were associated both with Death & Heroism by teaching & guiding young heros - thus more on the physical plain, The Idis were discorporate & often associated with a place or artifact) 2) Even in RQ terms, you use Spirits to store extra spells taught by the Shaman. If one of those spirits was taught by your ancestor, then he would know an ancestral spell. manga takk, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Leon Kirshtein > To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 7/22/2004 12:38:03 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes > > --- Bo Whitten wrote: > > >Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans > > >serving as priests. > > > > On the contrary, it is one of the most important > > spells. Without it the spells ancestors have are > > lost to time, but with it the shaman can embody the > > ancestor and use the spell to teach the ancestor's > > spell to the worshiper. > > According to the description: Spell Teaching summons a > spell spirit that then teaches (after spirit combat) > the spell it knows. Based on that a shaman could > never get any spell known by an ancestor by these means. > > ===== > Leon Kirshtein > www.godlearner.d2g.com > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 23 06:34:18 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:34:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <410-220047422195512171@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20040722203418.79353.qmail@web41108.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sven Lugar wrote: > I respectfully disagree that they could never get > any Ancestral spell from > that spirit contact. I am not arguing that. What I am saying is, that it would not be by using Spell Teaching spell. In fact the ability to summon the ancestor directly negates the need for Spell Teaching ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Fri Jul 23 06:48:53 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:48:53 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes Message-ID: <410-220047422204853421@earthlink.net> That wasn't clear from how your message was phrased. Upon re-reading your message in full as opposed to your clipping I'm still confused what you really mean if you do not mean what you wrote. Please clarify it for me. thank you, Sven > [Original Message] > From: Leon Kirshtein > To: ; RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 7/22/2004 1:34:18 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes > > --- Sven Lugar wrote: > > I respectfully disagree that they could never get > > any Ancestral spell from > > that spirit contact. > > I am not arguing that. What I am saying is, that it > would not be by using Spell Teaching spell. In fact > the ability to summon the ancestor directly negates > the need for Spell Teaching > > ===== > Leon Kirshtein > www.godlearner.d2g.com > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! > http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 23 06:51:19 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <410-220047422204853421@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20040722205119.82744.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sven Lugar wrote: > That wasn't clear from how your message was phrased. > Upon re-reading your > message in full as opposed to your clipping I'm > still confused what you > really mean if you do not mean what you wrote. > Please clarify it for me. > thank you, What I am saying is this Spell Teaching summons a spirit which teaches a spell. A shaman does not need it since he can summon an ancestor spirit by other means, such as Summon Ancestor, and learn a spell that way. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Fri Jul 23 07:05:32 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:05:32 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes Message-ID: <410-22004742221532734@earthlink.net> Assuming that you ancestors knew every spell, or that the particular spell is known by the particular spirit. If I recall the development discussions there were questions regarding jumping over cult lines to grab spells or not being able to know all your ancestors. > [Original Message] > From: Leon Kirshtein > To: ; RuneQuest rules discussion. > Date: 7/22/2004 1:51:19 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes > > --- Sven Lugar wrote: > > That wasn't clear from how your message was phrased. > > Upon re-reading your > > message in full as opposed to your clipping I'm > > still confused what you > > really mean if you do not mean what you wrote. > > Please clarify it for me. > > thank you, > > What I am saying is this Spell Teaching summons a > spirit which teaches a spell. A shaman does not need > it since he can summon an ancestor spirit by other > means, such as Summon Ancestor, and learn a spell that > way. > > ===== > Leon Kirshtein > www.godlearner.d2g.com > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From freyrvanic at earthlink.net Fri Jul 23 11:10:20 2004 From: freyrvanic at earthlink.net (Sven Lugar) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:10:20 -0700 Subject: FW: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes Message-ID: <410-22004752311020812@earthlink.net> If the assumption is made that the "Ancestor" spirit is in your familial, or your magical lineage, you may not have a full range of spells. I usually give a bonus to spirits if they come from an antithecal or (Darkness/Light), opposing tradition (Sami/Slavic), or foreign tradition. This comes from the nature of Shamanic work, discussion, & lore that I've been involved with or studied over the years. What you say can work if you make it a very generic sort of magic. Each view has it's place. BTW, thank you for clarifying what you meant, I like to understand rather than just guess. manga takk, Sven Sven Lugar freyrvanic at earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~freyrvanic/ Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. > [Original Message] > From: Sven Lugar > To: Leon Kirshtein > Date: 7/22/2004 6:08:55 PM > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes > > If the assumption is made that the "Ancestor" spirit is in your familial, or your magical lineage, you may not have a full range of spells. I usually give a bonus to spirits if they come from an antithecal or (Darkness/Light), opposing tradition (Sami/Slavic), or foreign tradition. This comes from the nature of Shamanic work, discussion, & lore that I've been involved with or studied over the years. What you say can work if you make it a very generic sort of magic. Each view has it's place. > > BTW, thank you for clarifying what you meant, I like to understand rather than just guess. > > manga takk, > Sven > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Leon Kirshtein > > To: > > Date: 7/22/2004 2:06:36 PM > > Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes > > > > --- Sven Lugar wrote: > > > Assuming that you ancestors knew every spell, or > > > that the particular spell > > > is known by the particular spirit. If I recall the > > > development discussions > > > there were questions regarding jumping over cult > > > lines to grab spells or > > > not being able to know all your ancestors. > > > > With Spell Teaching you are limited to summoning cult > > spirits which only know a certain number of spells. > > > > A shaman has the option of traveling the spirit plane > > in search of a spell spirit. So an Ancestor > > worshipper would have a much larger selection of > > spells then if he was a member of any of the other > > cult which did not have shamans. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > Leon Kirshtein > > www.godlearner.d2g.com > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! > > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From comogatas at yahoo.com Fri Jul 23 17:34:00 2004 From: comogatas at yahoo.com (Eddy) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 7, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: <20040721200601.72A9922270B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040723073400.76005.qmail@web40503.mail.yahoo.com> I have been working on developing what I hope will be an extensive mythology based an ancestor worship. The basis is that the original gods populated the planet with their "seed" and so everyone is essentially descended from them. Because of this, anyone, under the right circumstances, can ascend to deityhood, but also more importantly, dead ancestors are very interested in their children and family lines, and the more powerful ones can still have an effect on reality through their descendants. The logical goal for them is to continue helping their family/racial/species line so that more heroes will be created and hopefully one will be able to ascend to godhood, and the cycle repeats. I stole the idea from various works, (the two that pop into my head right now are Mulan (yes, the Disney animation) and Gladiator) and from various real world religions. I don't have much written down though, I lost a concept paper I had written on it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My group discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the punter who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) On the other hand, if ones culture is hugely into ancestral worship and powerful ancestors are deified on death, would this not lead to a type of divine magic. To whit many an ancient earth king/pharaoh became a god (sometimes while still alive). It could be very interesting to play. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: Send RQ-Rules mailing list submissions to rq-rules at crashbox.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to rq-rules-request at crashbox.com You can reach the person managing the list at rq-rules-owner at crashbox.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of RQ-Rules digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Tavern re-opens (Tom Zunder) 2. Ideal Forms (was Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ?) (Guy Hoyle) 3. Ancestral Worship (Den, Tony T) 4. Ancestral Worship (Tal Meta) 5. RE: Ancestral Worship (Den, Tony T) 6. Re: Ancestral Worship (Peter Johansson) 7. Re: Ancestral Worship (Leon Kirshtein) 8. Re: Ancestral Worship (Peter Johansson) 9. Acolytes (Leon Kirshtein) 10. 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph (Gianni) 11. Re: 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph (grogthing) 12. Re: 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph (Leon Kirshtein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 16:56:33 +0100 From: "Tom Zunder" Subject: [RQ-Rules] Tavern re-opens To: eternalchampion at yahoogroups.com, lawrence Whitaker , Obstreperous , graham spearing , nickspence at aol.com, Strawdogs at yahoogroups.com, Bo Whitten , andrearocci at katamail.com , colin Driver , Mark Galeotti , liam Routt , John Holmes , Simon Beaver , Oliver Dickinson , Paul Mosher , Steve Perrin , Jim , Clive Hambly , matthew Zunder , Nick Middleton , sweekes at aol.com, lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net, Savage_Worlds at yahoogroups.com, d6-weg at yahoogroups.com, MetabaronsRPG at yahoogroups.com, rq-rules at crashbox.com, martinhodgkins at blueyonder.co.uk, 'Charlie Krank' , Newt Message-ID: <40FD4EC1.25081.2D695D at localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII The Tavern re-opens! Sadly the demons that burnt it down managed to destroy all the members registrations, posts and forums. So come on by, register anew, visit the Bar and start to suggest how the new Tavern should look, do we want the same forums or a new structure? http://tavern.elric.org.uk Come on down. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:47:35 -0500 From: Guy Hoyle Subject: Ideal Forms (was Re: [RQ-Rules] Re: Elements and Elementals, Continuum RQ?) To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <40FDE757.1040001 at sbcglobal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed If you want to expand beyond "elementals", why not try the idea of Platonic ideal forms (I've also seen them called "essences")? These are perfect forms of Earthly objects and beings that exist on a higher plane of reality. All the plants, animals, etc, that we see here are rough, crude forms of these higher beings. You wouldn't have lots of different types of plants, but you'd have a "Plant Ideal" that encom[passes the total idea of plant, e.g. You might even have hierarchies, such as a Tree ideal, a Grass Ideal, etc. Guy (Hoyle) ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:17:59 +0200 From: "Den, Tony T" Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: RQ Rules List Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2469 at scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My group discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the punter who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) On the other hand, if ones culture is hugely into ancestral worship and powerful ancestors are deified on death, would this not lead to a type of divine magic. To whit many an ancient earth king/pharaoh became a god (sometimes while still alive). It could be very interesting to play. T?ny aka tiberius at runequest.za.org __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 06:57:30 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: "RuneQuest Rules @Crashbox" Message-ID: <40FE4C1A.6000108 at talmeta.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Has anyone put thought into how one would handle ancestral worship? My discussed it briefly the other day and we seem to lean towards a kind of > spirit worship, where the spirits of ones ancestors can assist the who has honoured them well. (Or can assist an incompetent descendant just to > save face with their colleagues on the spirit plane:-) Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:21:26 +0200 From: "Den, Tony T" Subject: RE: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: "'RuneQuest rules discussion.'" Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2480 at scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Izzit, never saw that section. Then again it has been a while since I cracked that box open. Will have a looksee. -----Original Message----- From: Tal Meta Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:58:08 +0200 From: Peter Johansson Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <40FE9290.2030302 at comhem.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed There is also Daka Fal from (Cults of Prax?) that is a whole cult devoted to ancestor worship with spells like summon and incarnate ancestors. /Peter J Den, Tony T wrote: >Izzit, never saw that section. Then again it has been a while since I >cracked that box open. Will have a looksee. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tal Meta > > > >Gods of Glorantha had some rules for Ancestor Worship... I always just >used those, with bits of variation dependent on the underlying culture... > > ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 09:25:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Leon Kirshtein Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <20040721162527.92369.qmail at web41102.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --- Peter Johansson wrote: > There is also Daka Fal from (Cults of Prax?) that is > a whole cult > devoted to ancestor worship with spells like summon > and incarnate ancestors. Daka Fal (RQ2) = Ancestor Worship (RQ3) ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:50:17 +0200 From: Peter Johansson Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Ancestral Worship To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <40FE9EC9.10103 at comhem.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Well, yes sort of. The Daka Fal cult in CoP is however more fully described than the general Ancestor Worship in GoG and since the question was for input on Ancestor worship I wanted to wave in that direction. :-) /Peter J Leon Kirshtein wrote: >Daka Fal (RQ2) = Ancestor Worship (RQ3) > > >===== >Leon Kirshtein >www.godlearner.d2g.com > > ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:04:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Leon Kirshtein Subject: [RQ-Rules] Acolytes To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <20040721170445.61335.qmail at web41101.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii All of this talk about Ancestor Worship reminded me what I wanted to ask a question. I have decided what IMW, every cult has an Acolyte status (including Ancestor Worship). Now generally speaking to become an Acolyte one would need 5 Cult skills at 50% (some cults ask for specific skills and at greater %) and 10 pts of divine magic. This generally works fairly well except in cases there the cult in question does not have access to ALL common divine spells. What do you think should be the "general" requirements in such cases? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:34:03 +0200 From: Gianni Subject: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph To: rq-rules at crashbox.com, ml at basicrps.com Message-ID: <1090434842.40feb71b0fb9c at imp.webhuset.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello all Anybody received their 'Advanced BRPS' monograph? I'm really curious! cheers Gianni ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:52:31 -0700 (PDT) From: grogthing Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <20040721195231.17579.qmail at web41505.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yes I recieved mine yesterday, and have not gone over it in detail yet. I have never seen RQ2 so I can't compare it to that, but It looks like the same system material as RQ3 without graphics or setting info. Even has good ole' Cormac as the example. Black tape and glue binding. All black, white and grey. No artwork other than the B&W cover. I guess it's good for BRP beginners who don't already have a version of RQ, CoC, or Elric!/Stormbringer as an advanced system to pull from as needed. But since I collect games, I'm happy with it. Any specific questions? I will try to answer. Gregory --- Gianni wrote: > Hello all > > Anybody received their 'Advanced BRPS' monograph? > I'm really curious! > > cheers > > Gianni > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/ ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Leon Kirshtein Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] 'Advanced BRPS' Monograph To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Message-ID: <20040721200541.94076.qmail at web41114.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Any specific questions? I will try to answer. > > Gregory Is it all RQ3 rules? Including Sorcery? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules End of RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 7, Issue 16 *************************************** --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Fri Jul 23 21:45:41 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:45:41 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040722193800.69725.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040722122640.0217eec0@incoming.verizon.net> <20040722193800.69725.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040723044343.021ceec0@incoming.verizon.net> At 12:38 PM 7/22/2004, you wrote: >--- Bo Whitten wrote: >> >Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans >> >serving as priests. >> >> On the contrary, it is one of the most important >> spells. Without it the spells ancestors have are >> lost to time, but with it the shaman can embody the >> ancestor and use the spell to teach the ancestor's >> spell to the worshiper. > >According to the description: Spell Teaching summons a >spell spirit that then teaches (after spirit combat) >the spell it knows. Based on that a shaman could >never get any spell known by an ancestor by these means. The ancestor IS a spirit, and if it created the spell it would be it's spirit, and if it didn't it would know (and thus summon) the said Spell Spirit needed. So, the spell still makes a great deal of sense. Bo From gkahla at chromebob.com Sat Jul 24 08:43:23 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 17:43:23 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] well - has anyone seen the new books from Chaosium? -- Message-ID: <4101948B.3010609@chromebob.com> in an effort to support Chaosium [who have arguably given me many hours of gaming entertainment], i have ordered the 'new' BRP Player's and Magic books... from the descriptions on the website, there should be few differences between these books and the RQ rules proper. [though i wonder if they use 10 or 12 strike ranks...] anyway, my email server has been down for the last few months. if everyone's had their flamewars over this, just give me a hint and i'll don my fire-retardant longjohns. :) if there hasn't been all that much traffic about this, i'd like to hear any opinions. try and keep the bail low -- -- Gerall Kahla - the Celestial Mechanics [http://chromebob.com/] From Michael.Christian at corbis.com Sat Jul 24 12:57:19 2004 From: Michael.Christian at corbis.com (Michael.Christian at corbis.com) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:57:19 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] well - has anyone seen the new books from Chaosium ? -- Message-ID: <306F012D0A00D611BC9D0008C79192741094209A@seamail1.continuum.corbis.corp> They are essentially the same as the Magic and Players books respectively. No new info really, but complete removal of the Runequest name. I ordered them as well figuring that if this is a trial balloon by Chaosium that buying them was likely to push the scales a bit more in the direction of a proper reprint. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Gerall Kahla Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 3:43 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [RQ-Rules] well - has anyone seen the new books from Chaosium? -- in an effort to support Chaosium [who have arguably given me many hours of gaming entertainment], i have ordered the 'new' BRP Player's and Magic books... from the descriptions on the website, there should be few differences between these books and the RQ rules proper. [though i wonder if they use 10 or 12 strike ranks...] anyway, my email server has been down for the last few months. if everyone's had their flamewars over this, just give me a hint and i'll don my fire-retardant longjohns. :) if there hasn't been all that much traffic about this, i'd like to hear any opinions. try and keep the bail low -- -- Gerall Kahla - the Celestial Mechanics [http://chromebob.com/] _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com Sat Jul 24 13:15:11 2004 From: katkin_kalvin at yahoo.com (John Raner) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 20:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] well - has anyone seen the new books from Chaosium? -- In-Reply-To: <4101948B.3010609@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <20040724031511.69808.qmail@web53706.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gerall Kahla wrote: > from the descriptions on the website, there should > be few differences > between these books and the RQ rules proper. > [though i wonder if they > use 10 or 12 strike ranks...] 10 strike ranks but the melee round is 12 seconds long. Any other questions? I got my copy in the mail today.... Cheers, John ===== "Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master." ---- Colonel Andrew Jackson Hickok A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, the state, am the people." ---- Friedrich Nietzsche "It is a shame that governments are chiefed by the devil tongues" ---- Chief Ten Bears "There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon or tool, merely obsolete thinking in its employ." ---- Mark D. (CapnCarp at yahoo.com) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jurrubin at earthlink.net Sat Jul 24 22:36:02 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 07:36:02 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes References: <6.1.2.0.0.20040722122640.0217eec0@incoming.verizon.net> <20040722193800.69725.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20040723044343.021ceec0@incoming.verizon.net> Message-ID: <410257B2.4060402@earthlink.net> I'm of the same mind. For me, gaining knowledge of a spell from a spell spirit is similar to learning from a book or a teacher in school. It's a copying of knowledge, not a permanent movement of knowledge. I've come in this thread rather late though; apologies if I've missed a basic point here. David Bo Whitten wrote: >At 12:38 PM 7/22/2004, you wrote: > > >>According to the description: Spell Teaching summons a >>spell spirit that then teaches (after spirit combat) >>the spell it knows. Based on that a shaman could >>never get any spell known by an ancestor by these means. >> >> > >The ancestor IS a spirit, and if it created the spell it would be it's spirit, and if it didn't it would know (and thus summon) the said Spell Spirit needed. > >So, the spell still makes a great deal of sense. > > From grogthing at yahoo.com Sun Jul 25 00:52:27 2004 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 07:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] well - has anyone seen the new books from Chaosium? -- In-Reply-To: <4101948B.3010609@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <20040724145227.76788.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com> Strike RANKS = 10. I posted a small review earlier this week. It seems to be RQ3 word for word , with illustrations removed and the term "Runequest" replaced with "Basic Roleplaying". Gregory --- Gerall Kahla wrote: > in an effort to support Chaosium [who have arguably > given me many > hours of gaming entertainment], i have ordered the > 'new' BRP Player's > and Magic books... > > from the descriptions on the website, there should > be few differences > between these books and the RQ rules proper. > [though i wonder if they > use 10 or 12 strike ranks...] > > anyway, my email server has been down for the last > few months. if > everyone's had their flamewars over this, just give > me a hint and i'll > don my fire-retardant longjohns. :) if there > hasn't been all that > much traffic about this, i'd like to hear any > opinions. > > try and keep the bail low -- > > -- > Gerall Kahla - the Celestial Mechanics > [http://chromebob.com/] > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > ===== "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From gkahla at chromebob.com Sat Jul 24 22:53:11 2004 From: gkahla at chromebob.com (Gerall Kahla) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 07:53:11 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- Message-ID: <41025BB7.9040301@chromebob.com> i mentioned on the brpsystem list earlier today that Chaosium seems deliberately to be testing the waters here... maybe they need more submissions to find an appropriate new universe for their BRP system. Glorantha was good; not enough effort was put into Alternate Earth. What worlds are we wandering nowadays? -- Gerall Kahla - the Celestial Mechanic "What does a giant laser death ray run under?" said Van. "OpenBSD. And X Windows." "Awsome." - _The Zenith Angle_ - Bruce Sterling 2004 From gianni at basicrps.com Sun Jul 25 05:23:51 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 21:23:51 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <41025BB7.9040301@chromebob.com> References: <41025BB7.9040301@chromebob.com> Message-ID: <1090697031.4102b7471d344@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Gerall Kahla : > What worlds are we wandering nowadays? I wrote a Chinese supplements myself: http://www.basicrps.com/chine/ Cheers Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From gianni at basicrps.com Sun Jul 25 17:09:09 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 09:09:09 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RQ3 Daka Fal (was: ancestor worship) Message-ID: <1090739349.41035c952969a@imp.webhuset.no> Hey I've just noticed there was a RQIII Daka Fal cult write-up in 'River of Cradles' (p.150) cheers Gianni From jurrubin at earthlink.net Mon Jul 26 04:54:46 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (D. Smart) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 13:54:46 -0500 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- References: <41025BB7.9040301@chromebob.com> <1090697031.4102b7471d344@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <410401F6.9090203@earthlink.net> And my group is wandering my own world. Been doing that for some years now. I do use the various Gloranthan supplements (with modifications) as an occasional plug-in. David Gianni wrote: >Quoting Gerall Kahla : > > > >>What worlds are we wandering nowadays? >> >> > >I wrote a Chinese supplements myself: http://www.basicrps.com/chine/ > >Cheers > >Gianni >webmaster of basicrps.com >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jul 26 07:06:27 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 14:06:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <410401F6.9090203@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20040725210627.19782.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> >What worlds are we wandering nowadays? Glorantha, Middle Earth, Young Kingdoms, Atlantis, Egypt. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Mon Jul 26 07:34:48 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 14:34:48 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <20040725210627.19782.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040725210627.19782.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41042778.5060406@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: >>What worlds are we wandering nowadays? > > > Glorantha, Middle Earth, Young Kingdoms, Atlantis, > Egypt. Atlantis and Egypt, tell me more!! Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jul 26 14:14:22 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <41042778.5060406@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040726041422.21373.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Stephen Posey wrote: > Atlantis and Egypt, tell me more!! In the Egyptian campaign (sorcery and divine magic) I am using a Necropolis suppliment (for Dangerous Journeys). The players are attempting to stop the plans of Set's High Priest to become the next Pharoah and gain immortality. In the Atlantis campaign (sorcery) the players are currently involved in a war vs. the Aztec empire. This is a second group of characters. The first group managed to get themselves killed, but one of them is is going to be resurrected as a true dragon (in 666 years.) Both campaigns are currently on hold as we are playing a Gloranthan campaign in Pavis. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Mon Jul 26 14:37:01 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:37:01 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <20040726041422.21373.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040726041422.21373.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41048A6D.8090101@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > Stephen Posey wrote: > >>Atlantis and Egypt, tell me more!! > > > In the Egyptian campaign (sorcery and divine magic) I > am using a Necropolis suppliment (for Dangerous > Journeys). The players are attempting to stop the > plans of Set's High Priest to become the next Pharoah > and gain immortality. > > In the Atlantis campaign (sorcery) the players are > currently involved in a war vs. the Aztec empire. > This is a second group of characters. The first group > managed to get themselves killed, but one of them is > is going to be resurrected as a true dragon (in 666 > years.) > > Both campaigns are currently on hold as we are playing > a Gloranthan campaign in Pavis. They both sound very cool. If you've got any write ups of special materials for either I'd love to see them. Particularly anything by way of custom magic or cults of Egyptian, Atlantean, or Aztec gods? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Jul 26 17:02:34 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:02:34 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <20040725210627.19782.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040725210627.19782.qmail@web41101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1090825354.4104ac8a8b118@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting Leon Kirshtein : > Egypt. If you read French, you might find the following interesting, then http://www.tentacules.net/toc/pages_d/scen_rech.php?id=108&action=rech_sce Gianni From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Jul 26 17:59:21 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:59:21 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- Message-ID: >i mentioned on the brpsystem list earlier today that Chaosium seems >deliberately to be testing the waters here... > >maybe they need more submissions to find an appropriate new universe >for their BRP system. > >Glorantha was good; not enough effort was put into Alternate Earth. In defence of Alternate Earth, it did put Vikings and Land of Ninja in the product line, both of which are good source-books/sets (especially compared to the "Gateway material"). And whilst Glorantha was well covered as a background, fresh scenario material did not appear until the 1990's: and scenarios (i.e. material that helps people PLAY the game) is the life blood of RPG's. You can smother a setting all you like in detailed exegesis of the sociopolitical history, and a lot of people may well buy it, but unless it actually helps them play it's not constructive. So I think Chaosium should be less concerned about finding a new world (A Glorantha, Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Jorune, Tekumel or Cidri) as all the evidence suggests that gamer's are more willing than ever to make their own and fit published material in to it. What they should be working on is the format of playable material, as straight adventures are traditionally poor sellers (as they are effectively single use). I think Chaosium already knows the answer there, in fact they are selling two: Griffin Mountain and Pavis and the Big Rubble. Two campaign packs that talk about interesting locations in a game world in _concrete_ terms ("The person who runs this place is like this..." "Going here will typically draw notice from these things...") such that there are huge possibilities for play and the pack is never "exhausted". Griffin Mountain in particular I still think after all these years is a pretty darn near perfect mix of concrete setting, plot hooks and ideas. So, I'd say what Chaosium needs is a new Griffin Mountain: in fact, a Griffin Mountain as it was _originally_ submitted: a wide ranging non-Gloranthan campaign set bursting at the seams with ideas, hooks, encounter seeds and scenario outlines. Somewhere players and GM's will happily return to year after year without it becoming stale or repetitive. >What worlds are we wandering nowadays? Bubbling at the top of the "Notes I'm tinkering with" pile: The Realm of Yrth (Sky Galleons of Mars/Fantasy setting, currently aimed at Elric!/SB 5 but considering shifting to RQIII), The last Refuge (The Sunset Warrior/the Night Land inspired closed environment setting, CoC/Elric!), Notes towards an RQIII Dark Sun (mostly pinched from Gerall Kahla and Leon Kirshtein's Sites though, mostly just my own version of adapting the magic systems and). Festering in a bottom draw: Realm of Darx Lohw (my original RQ setting circa 1981), Ulfland (my original RQIII setting, circa 1988, currently being mined for ideas for my Wednesday night D&D), Frontiers of Alusia (The Dragonquest Setting), The Isle of Pendalith (a stand alone RQII high level scenario; shipwrecked on a magical island that hides the broken fragment of a very mad demigod...) Actually Playing (not running RQ/BRP at present): Pavis and the Big Rubble! Hmm, I must actually finish some of these! Cheers, Nick Middleton From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Jul 26 17:38:45 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:38:45 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1090827525.4104b505ccfc2@imp.webhuset.no> Hi gang > >What worlds are we wandering nowadays? > Anybody tried to run a campaign based on the 'Bone' comics series (http://www.boneville.com/)? Gianni webmaster of basicrps.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jul 26 21:24:24 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 04:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <1090825354.4104ac8a8b118@imp.webhuset.no> Message-ID: <20040726112424.73772.qmail@web41109.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gianni wrote: > Quoting Leon Kirshtein : > > > Egypt. > > If you read French, you might find the following > interesting, then > http://www.tentacules.net/toc/pages_d/scen_rech.php?id=108&action=rech_sce My French 05% ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Jul 26 21:35:04 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 04:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <41048A6D.8090101@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040726113504.71492.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > If you've got any write ups of special materials for > either I'd love to > see them. Particularly anything by way of custom > magic or cults of > Egyptian, Atlantean, or Aztec gods? Most of what I have is in bits and pieces, so let me know if you are interested in anything in particular, but this is a special type of Sorcery school which is present in Atlantis: Resonant Magic is a science to the Atlanteans. In many ways, it defines their perception of reality. Atlantean wizards study the magic inherent in many disciplines. Only a rare few, however, possess the depth of understanding needed to reach out to touch the Resonance: the current of magic itself. By understanding the Resonance, such a character learns to affect it directly. Requirements to be accepted as a Resonant: Intensity 75% Magic or Sorcery Lore 50% Ceremony 50% Enchant 50% Craft Gems 25% Must know at least two Sorcery Manipulation skills in addition to Intensity, Range, Multispell. Must know at least seven Sorcery Spells. -------------------------------------------------------------- Orichalcum - Rune Metal This rare metal, found only in mines deep beneath the surface of Atlantis, is reddish-gold in color. It is as easy to work as bronze but much harder in consistency. Armor an weapons made of it have +1AP over items made of bronze. Orichalcum's true value is in its innately magical nature. Atlantean enchanters use the metal as the bases for many items they plan to enchant. Every Enc point of Orichalcum used in creating an item has an effect of substituting for a point of POW used in making the enchantment. Orichalcum can not compromise more than 50% of the items POW cost. The base price for an Enc point of Orichalcum is 1500sp (or price of Iron x2). -------------------------------------------------------------- Arcane Understanding - Hard, Rare The Resonant's understanding of the arcane arts enhances his or her ability to cast spells. The Resonant gains a special skill of Arcane Understanding. This special skill cannot be improved by normal means, Instead, when the Resonant is first aprentised, he gains a score in this skill equal to his (Int+Pow)-20. No category modifiers apply. This skill may be increased only by research on the part of the student himself. This skill allows the caster to enhance his spells at a rate of 1 point per every 10% in this skill. The enhancement takes form of ever spell boosting (at no magic point cost) or power enhancement for purposes of overcoming target's Pow. -------------------------------------------------------------- Enchant Metaprism. Ritual (Enchant), Hard, Rare This ritual allows its caster to expend Pow to create an object(gem) capable of storing sorcery manipulations. A single gem is capable of handling 1pt point of enchantment per 1000L of base value and must be flawless. The chance to succeed is based on the caster's Enchant Metaprism skill. Each point of Pow expended in the ritual creates a metaprism that adds 5% to a specific sorcery manipulation. One cannot create a matrix that adds more to a manipulation skill than the skill one has in that manipulation. If the individual using the metaprism does not know the manipulation at all, it allows him to use that manipulation at a percentage equal to the bonus given by the metaprism. Multiple metaprisms of the same type do not combine their bonuses. Skills of Ceremony, Enchant, and Summon can not be enchanted into a metaprism. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From slposey at concentric.net Tue Jul 27 02:44:00 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:44:00 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] DoD and quality control -- In-Reply-To: <20040726113504.71492.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040726113504.71492.qmail@web41103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <410534D0.9090307@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Stephen Posey wrote: > >>If you've got any write ups of special materials for >>either I'd love to >>see them. Particularly anything by way of custom >>magic or cults of >>Egyptian, Atlantean, or Aztec gods? > > > Most of what I have is in bits and pieces, so let me > know if you are interested in anything in particular, > but this is a special type of Sorcery school which is > present in Atlantis: Very very cool, thanks for your willingness to share! Got anything on cults of Isis, Osiris, and Set? How about Quetzalcoatl or Tezcatlipoca? How do you envision Atlantean society and background? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Jul 27 04:27:09 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Egypt/Atlantis In-Reply-To: <410534D0.9090307@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040726182709.63268.qmail@web41109.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > Got anything on cults of Isis, Osiris, and Set? IMW, Egyptian cults use Sorcery and Divine magic, but there are no socery "schools". Each cult trains their priesthood in the sorcerous arts. For example the cult of Set would look something like this: Set Skills: Sneak, Hide, Bribe, Cult Lore, Weapon Attack, Conceal, Ceremony, Enchant. Common Divine: All Special Divine: Blindness, Absorption, Increase Wind, Thunder Bolt, Cloud Call, Fear, Conceal, Shield, Summon Minion of Set. Allied Cults: Apep gives Command Snake Set's special sorcery spells: Wave of Pain = Palsy Hand of Set = Resist Life (barrier) Will of Set = Resist Magic Curse of Weakness = Diminish Str Curse of Clumsiness = Diminish Dex Eye of Set = Diminish Con (followers of Set are immune to this spell) The Turning of Eyes = Cloak Sight Domination = Dominate Human (True Name must be known to cast this spell) Summon Mummy = Call Mummy Vision of Pain = Mind Probe Form of the Beast = Transform to [boar, crocodile] > How about Quetzalcoatl or Tezcatlipoca? For the Aztec I use the GURPS suppliment (Aztecs). I envision their religion as rellying mostly on Spirit magic and Divine, but no shamans. Tezcatlipoca for example gets the divine spells of: All Common, Transform of a Jaguar, Reflection, Command Jaguar. Allied cults: Xochiquetzal - Heal Body (he takes it from her) > How do you envision Atlantean society and background? I use the Avalanche Press suppliment for it: http://www.avalanchepress.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=AP&Product_Code=0905&Category_Code=d20 ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Jul 27 07:21:51 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 22:21:51 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: <20040726112446.B7FD622278B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040726212151.62360.qmail@web51008.mail.yahoo.com> Leon Kirshtein: > Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans > serving as priests. > Spirit Block is mostly subsumed by Spirit Screen in > such cults as well. But, it is nowhere near as powerful, Spirit Block 1 is equivalent to Spirit Screen 5. > > Spirit Cults would only get Contact (Spirit), > > Worship (Spirit) and Spirit Block. > > I would say that these, plus Divination are the same > for a Spirit Cult. I like the idea of Contact (Spirit) that allows a shaman or practitioner to contact a spirit for worship abilities. The problem with using Worship (Spirit) for this is that Worship (Spirit) is a Divine spell that is granted by the spirit, so you can't use it to get the spirit without having the spirit in the first place. > > Why Spirit Block? Because, in Glorantha, Flesh Man > > gave it to every cult as > > "their vote on the spirit plane" in RQ2. > > What about the Chaotic Spirit Cults? Do they get a > vote as well? Oh yes, absolutely, Flesh Man was mad, after all. Bo Whitten: > >Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans > >serving as priests. > > On the contrary, it is one of the most important spells. Without it the > spells ancestors have are lost to time, but with it the shaman can embody > the ancestor and use the spell to teach the ancestor's spell to the > worshiper. Strictly according to the RQ3 rules, this is not true. In RQ2, Spell Teaching allowed the caster to duplicate one of his spells for the recipient. RQ3 Spell Teaching, however, calls up a specific type of spirit - a Spell Spirit - that has only one function, that of teaching its spell to someone who defeats it in spirit combat. It then loses the spell and has to return to the source of the spell to renew it. Summoning an Ancestor and embodying it does not allow Spell Teaching to be used to transfer the spell to someone else. You would need a spell such as Exchange Spell from Etyries to do this. Even using the RQ3 version of Daka Fal, or ancestor worship, Gift Spell allows you to gift an ancestor with a spell, but not vice versa. Although I can see the logic in learning a spell from an ancestor, I can see some problems with it. Firstly, it would need a separate spell, perhaps called Learn From Spirit, but that isn't a problem as it could be writtem up. However, the more imortant problem is that learning such a spell in RQ3 would involve the transfer of a spell (all similar spells in RQ3 are transfers - Gift Spell, Exchange Spells, Spell Trading, Spell Teaching) which would mean the ancestral spirits becoming weaker over time. Sven Lugar: > I respectfully disagree that they could never get any Ancestral spell from > that spirit contact. > > 1) the spirit could have been from an ancestor who tests the user before > revealing the spell. ie: a "Disir" (Norse Mythos) is an ancestor tutelary > spirit of exceptional women who had passed away but stayed connected to > preserve the tribe. BTW (Valkyrs were a subset of the Disir & were > associated both with Death & Heroism by teaching & guiding young heros - > thus more on the physical plain, The Idis were discorporate & often > associated with a place or artifact) Now that is a very nice idea. Perhapos some cults could have a spell that summons such a Spirit Teacher, or a shaman could summon such a Spirit Teacher or Disir. I prefer to use generic terms rather than terms specific to cultures for these things. > 2) Even in RQ terms, you use Spirits to store extra spells taught by the > Shaman. If one of those spirits was taught by your ancestor, then he would > know an ancestral spell. But that would be an Intellect Spirit, not an ancestral spirit. Sven Lugar: > Assuming that you ancestors knew every spell, or that the particular spell > is known by the particular spirit. If I recall the development discussions > there were questions regarding jumping over cult lines to grab spells or > not being able to know all your ancestors. That isn't actually a problem, because a good ancestor worshipping cult will have an idea, written or verbal, of the spells known by their normal ancestors. Of course, summoning random ancestors is very risky and could findunknown ancestors, some of whom may not be in the ancestral cult and may have outside spells. > If the assumption is made that the "Ancestor" spirit is in your familial, > or your magical lineage, you may not have a full range of spells. I usually > give a bonus to spirits if they come from an antithecal or > (Darkness/Light), opposing tradition (Sami/Slavic), or foreign tradition. Ancestors in opposing traditions may be grumpy (malign) and not want to teach you the spells. Even ancestors in your own cult may not like you and won't help you. > This comes from the nature of Shamanic work, discussion, & lore that I've > been involved with or studied over the years. What you say can work if you > make it a very generic sort of magic. Each view has it's place. Yes, but it needs new powers for shamans, new spells to transfer the knowledge or new types of spirit. Bo Whitten: > >According to the description: Spell Teaching summons a > >spell spirit that then teaches (after spirit combat) > >the spell it knows. Based on that a shaman could > >never get any spell known by an ancestor by these means. > > The ancestor IS a spirit, and if it created the spell it would be it's > spirit, and if it didn't it would know (and thus summon) the said Spell > Spirit needed. But in RQ3 a Spell Spirit is a specific type of spirit that is not an ancestor spirit. > So, the spell still makes a great deal of sense. Makes sense in theory, but not in actual RQ3 practise. David Smart: > I'm of the same mind. For me, gaining knowledge of a spell from a spell > spirit is similar to learning from a book or a teacher in school. It's a > copying of knowledge, not a permanent movement of knowledge. I've come > in this thread rather late though; apologies if I've missed a basic > point here. RQ2 Spell Teaching would work perfectly for this. RQ3 Spell Teaching would not. The principle is fine with another spell or with a rewrite of the Spell Teaching spell. As a matter of interest, I wouold much prefer the spirit types to be a lot vaguer. So, a spirit may be summoned as a Magic Spirit, an Ancestor or bound as a Ghost. This has a few problems with the more restricted types of Spirit, such as Intellect Spirit, Power Spirit or Spell Spirit. Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://www.allnewmessenger.com From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Jul 27 07:32:41 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 22:32:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic Roleplaying Deluxe Edition In-Reply-To: <20040726112446.B7FD622278B@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040726213241.30449.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> I have just come back from the Continuum roleplaying convention in Leicester, which had Charlie Krank as a Guest of Honour. He said that Chaosium are publishing a Deluxe Basic Roleplaying some time next year. This is an updated form of "Chaosium's Roleplaying System". When pressed a little, he said that this is RuneQuest but would contain extensions from other games, such as things from Ringworld to allow for SciFi campaigns. There are supplements planned for the Deluxe BRP. A supplement for Egypt was mentioned as perhaps being in the works. In the Ringworld seminar, he once again, but this time explicitly, said that this was RuneQuest with extra bits being added. I think that this is very good news indeed. It woluld allow people to produce fan-based material based on BRP but for different areas. In particular a BRP Known Space fan publication was mentioned. However, a BRP-Glorantha is probably never going to be on the cards, so we will just have to use the HeroQuest background and adapt it for RQ. Conversely, there is a HeroQuest Mythic Russia being planned which could be converted to RQ Alternate Earth Mythic Russia fairly easily. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://www.allnewmessenger.com From DevinC at aol.com Tue Jul 27 09:47:22 2004 From: DevinC at aol.com (DevinC at aol.com) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 19:47:22 EDT Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes Message-ID: In a message dated 7/26/2004 2:22:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, soltakss at yahoo.com writes: <> If you want an ancestor to teach a descendant a spell, why can't the ancestor summon a spell spirit and command it to engage the descendant? It;s basically the same thing as the ancestor teaching the spell himself in that it is the ancestor's to give or withhold. Devin From lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net Tue Jul 27 10:44:18 2004 From: lorgryt.detroll at verizon.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 17:44:18 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20040726174358.02171ec0@incoming.verizon.net> At 04:47 PM 7/26/2004, you wrote: >If you want an ancestor to teach a descendant a spell, why can't the >ancestor summon a spell spirit and command it to engage the descendant? It;s >basically the same thing as the ancestor teaching the spell himself in that it is >the ancestor's to give or withhold. > >Devin This was what I was trying to convey... I fail... sorry. Bo From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 27 17:58:57 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:58:57 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic Roleplaying Deluxe Edition Message-ID: Hi Simon, >I have just come back from the Continuum roleplaying convention in Leicester, >which had Charlie Krank as a Guest of Honour. Jammy git... ;-) >He said that Chaosium are publishing a Deluxe Basic Roleplaying some time >next year. This is an updated form of "Chaosium's Roleplaying System". When >pressed a little, he said that this is RuneQuest but would contain extensions >from other games, such as things from Ringworld to allow for SciFi campaigns. Cool, so this is back on the "coming soon pile"? It was hinted at a couple of years back (early 2003 on this very list IIRC), but rather dropped below the horizon what with Cthulhu Dark Ages etc... >There are supplements planned for the Deluxe BRP. A supplement for Egypt was >mentioned as perhaps being in the works. IIRC that was also mentioned previously. Sounds good - especially if it's on a par with Vikings or Land of Ninja. >In the Ringworld seminar, he once again, but this time explicitly, said that >this was RuneQuest with extra bits being added. Will this have any impact on Dave Gordon & Co's efforts to release Ringworld as a free PDF? Since the last I heard of that he had Chaosium and Larry Niven's blessing, it was just the original author's widow who needed to be contacted and to give permission, I'd assume not. >I think that this is very good news indeed. Well, I'm certainly grinning from ear to ear! >It woluld allow people to produce fan-based material based on BRP but for >different areas. In particular a BRP Known Space fan publication was >mentioned. Cool! >However, a BRP-Glorantha is probably never going to be on the cards, so we >will just have to use the HeroQuest background and adapt it for RQ. I'm not bothered there really: Glorantha stopped being interesting even to read for me some time ago. The version I have in the RQIII material (with the odd borrowing from the Hero Wars Glorantha trade paperback) will suffice if I ever want to run there: that's quite enough to run my own game version from. >Conversely, there is a HeroQuest Mythic Russia being planned which could be >converted to RQ Alternate Earth Mythic Russia fairly easily. Sounds fun. Although, as I said yesterday, what Chaosium needs is "Griffin Mountain" - a solid campaign set that is full of useful material and plot hooks and outlines that can sustain play for ages. The BRP Egypt may be that, although I do hope that they have a number of these lined up and, given that "Deluxe BRP" is going to cover SF as well, they could do with both a full on fantasy pack and an SF one to demonstrate the range... But all in all, woo hoo! Great news all round! Cheers, Nick Middleton From tom at zunder.org.uk Tue Jul 27 18:47:56 2004 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Tom Zunder) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:47:56 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Good News In-Reply-To: <20040721200601.D299F222707@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <410624CC.17957.38BAE93@localhost> Having spoken to Charlie K at Continuum this weekend I can report that the monographs follows a reply from Hasbro stating that they have no claim on the system/body text. The Gloranthan stuff was then removed and the monographs put up as a legal placemarker, protecting right through use. Charlie has since commissioned the writing of the Deluxe BRP core book. This will cover everything from axes to muskets to lasers, will include most of the variants as options (hit locations, strike ranks, etc.) and will form the core BRP book upon which new settings and games can be based. I do not know how much like RuneQuest 3 this will be, I suspect it's too early to say. It is however, exciting news. Charlie said that the next step is to bring back RuneQuest, but that will involve discussions with the current trademark holder and previous authors. -- Tom Zunder - tom at zunder.org.uk ICQ: 152799 YM!: tzunder AOL: tomzunder MSN: (as email) http://tavern.elric.org.uk http://www.zunder.org.uk From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 27 19:58:32 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 10:58:32 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Good News Message-ID: >Having spoken to Charlie K at Continuum this weekend I can report >that the monographs follows a reply from Hasbro stating that they >have no claim on the system/body text. The Gloranthan stuff was >then removed and the monographs put up as a legal placemarker, >protecting right through use. He he, someone in Ha$bro is asleep at the wheel - I doubt this'll go down well with WotC's accountants... >Charlie has since commissioned the writing of the Deluxe BRP core >book. This will cover everything from axes to muskets to lasers, will >include most of the variants as options (hit locations, strike ranks, >etc.) and will form the core BRP book upon which new settings and >games can be based. Bloody Hell ! I am dreaming, right? Even the fact that this is Chaosium we are talking about can't dampen my enthusiasm! >I do not know how much like RuneQuest 3 this will be, I suspect it's >too early to say. It is however, exciting news. Well, the key differences between BRP and RQ were Strike Ranks and Hit Locations. In general I hope they build forward from RQIII, borrowing some of the better ideas from RQIV but aiming more for RQII 'robust simplicity' rather than RQIII or IV's 'fiddly comprehensiveness': RQII had gaps, but one could extrapolate from the existing rules easily; RQIII has a much more detailed rules, but frankly that detail bogs the game down a bit and the RQIV draft on the net appears to be more of the same... >Charlie said that the next step is to bring back RuneQuest, but that >will involve discussions with the current trademark holder and >previous authors. This surprises me to be honest. Unless Issaries are prepared to agree very easy terms, I can't really see the financial or creative incentive for either side: Glorantha as published has moved a long way from the world as described by RQ and Issaries have invested a lot of time and effort persuading the fan base to move to Hero Wars/Quest. Likewise, the die hard RQ players have (as discussed here) largely moved on to other worlds and settings that match the RQ feel. Trying to join the two back together again will probably just stir up old divisions and I doubt will generate much in the way of sales. A one-off "Advanced BRP for Glorantha book" possibly... But, at the risk of repeating myself ;-) WOO HOO!! cheers, Nick Middleton From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Tue Jul 27 20:33:25 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:33:25 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Good News In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200407271233.25829.peter.brink@brinkdata.se> tisdag 27 juli 2004 11:58 skrev Nick.Middleton at invensys.com: > >Charlie said that the next step is to bring back RuneQuest, but that > >will involve discussions with the current trademark holder and > >previous authors. > > This surprises me to be honest. Unless Issaries are prepared to agree very > easy terms, I can't really see the financial or creative incentive Chaosium has something to bargain with: the trademark "Glorantha". Search for glorantha at http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=er6d60.1.1 From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Tue Jul 27 20:50:08 2004 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:50:08 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Good News Message-ID: <66843F9F2730F9468F0418D28D17866C017E54@frpar-exch1.eu.uis.unisys.com> So, Chaosium owns the trademark "Glorantha" (and not Greg) and Issaries owns "RuneQuest" ! Well, that open a world of possibilties doesn't it ? Pascal -----Message d'origine----- De : rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] De la part de Peter Brink Envoy? : mardi 27 juillet 2004 12:33 ? : RuneQuest rules discussion. Objet : Re: [RQ-Rules] Good News tisdag 27 juli 2004 11:58 skrev Nick.Middleton at invensys.com: > >Charlie said that the next step is to bring back RuneQuest, but that > >will involve discussions with the current trademark holder and > >previous authors. > > This surprises me to be honest. Unless Issaries are prepared to agree > very easy terms, I can't really see the financial or creative > incentive Chaosium has something to bargain with: the trademark "Glorantha". Search for glorantha at http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=er6d60.1.1 _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Jul 27 20:59:48 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 06:59:48 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic Roleplaying Deluxe Edition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <410635A4.4080301@talmeta.net> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > Will this have any impact on Dave Gordon & Co's efforts to release > Ringworld as a free PDF? Since the last I heard of that he had Chaosium and > Larry Niven's blessing, it was just the original author's widow who needed > to be contacted and to give permission, I'd assume not. While slumming in the darker reaches of cyberspace one night, I actually came across a set of pdfs of the Ringworld material.... so it would seem the work is already done. -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - I want to do terrible things to you From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Jul 27 21:06:16 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:06:16 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic Roleplaying Deluxe Edition Message-ID: >Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >> Will this have any impact on Dave Gordon & Co's efforts to release >> Ringworld as a free PDF? Since the last I heard of that he had Chaosium and >> Larry Niven's blessing, it was just the original author's widow who needed >> to be contacted and to give permission, I'd assume not. > >While slumming in the darker reaches of cyberspace one night, I actually >came across a set of pdfs of the Ringworld material.... so it would seem >the work is already done. Ahem, yes. Well, put like that 3/4's of Call of Cthulhu is available as PDF's... But David Gordon's attempt was entirely above board and legal, and unlike some of the pirate PDF's I have seen it would presumably be done with reasonable care and attention and properly OCR's as well. Although I'm less bothered by getting Ringworld if the new Advanced BRP will cover SF elements. Cheers, Nick Middleton From talmeta at talmeta.net Tue Jul 27 21:22:41 2004 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 07:22:41 -0400 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Basic Roleplaying Deluxe Edition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41063B01.3090203@talmeta.net> Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > Ahem, yes. Well, put like that 3/4's of Call of Cthulhu is available as > PDF's... But David Gordon's attempt was entirely above board and legal, and > unlike some of the pirate PDF's I have seen it would presumably be done > with reasonable care and attention and properly OCR's as well. Well, come to think of it, other than the ugly logo on the inside cover of some of the books, these were quite nicely done, and, as you say, properly ocr'd. While I realize that pdf's are often a losing proposition for game companies, as a collector, they save me a hell of alot of shelf space... -- talmeta at talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - My wife made me join a bridge club. I jump off next Tuesday. From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 00:52:26 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 07:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Acolytes - Spellteaching In-Reply-To: <20040726212151.62360.qmail@web51008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040727145226.72339.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Phipp wrote: > > Spell Teching is useless to any cult with shamans > > serving as priests. > > > Spirit Block is mostly subsumed by Spirit Screen > > in such cults as well. > > But, it is nowhere near as powerful, Spirit Block 1 > is equivalent to Spirit Screen 5. True, but it is available to initiates who are more likely to use it vs. one use divine magic. Besides, power level of spells should not be the determining value for detemining availability. > The problem with using Worship > (Spirit) for this is that Worship (Spirit) is a > Divine spell that is granted > by the spirit, so you can't use it to get the spirit > without having the spirit in the first place. Yes, but its the same for any other cult. Besides a shaman has the opition of traveling the spirit plane to contact the spirit. > > > Why Spirit Block? Because, in Glorantha, Flesh > > > Man gave it to every cult as > > > "their vote on the spirit plane" in RQ2. > > > > What about the Chaotic Spirit Cults? Do they get a > > vote as well? > > Oh yes, absolutely, Flesh Man was mad, after all. I can accept that in the case of Glorantha. That would be valid > > >Spell Teching according to the RQ3 rules, this is not > true. In RQ2, Spell Teaching > allowed the caster to duplicate one of his spells > for the recipient. RQ3 > Spell Teaching, however, calls up a specific type of > spirit - a Spell Spirit > - that has only one function, that of teaching its > spell to someone who defeats it in spirit combat. It > then loses the spell and has to return to the > source of the spell to renew it. Yes, I can not even tell you how much confusion this caused in the groups I play with. That messed with us more than any other change between RQ2 and RQ3. > Although I can see the logic in learning a spell > from an ancestor, I can see > some problems with it. Firstly, it would need a > separate spell, perhaps > called Learn From Spirit, but that isn't a problem > as it could be written up. Just use the RQ2 wording, but I would strictly limit this spell. In fact I would make it a spirit ceremony spell, which can only be performed by a willing target. Teach Variable, Ceremony By means of this spell a caster can teach another any spirit spell the caster knows. The size of the spirit spell taught can not be more than the size of Teach. Teaching takes 1 hour per point of the spell being taught and requires a successful Ceremony roll by the caster and Intx3 (or Memory Skill if you use it) by the recepient. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 01:41:21 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040727154121.63894.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com> Has anyone come up with an alternative spirit combat rules? I am not sure I like the current POW vs. POW system. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 01:42:40 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 08:42:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Learning Spells - POW checks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040727154240.49219.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> Do you give power gain rolls if a player chracter defeats a spell spirit? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From pmj at comhem.se Wed Jul 28 03:27:38 2004 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:27:38 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Learning Spells - POW checks In-Reply-To: <20040727154240.49219.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040727154240.49219.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4106908A.7020505@comhem.se> I treat it just as if the character had been casting an attack spell and succeeded. In other words, Yes, unless it was a very weak spirit. /Peter J Leon Kirshtein wrote: >Do you give power gain rolls if a player chracter >defeats a spell spirit? > >===== >Leon Kirshtein >www.godlearner.d2g.com > > From slposey at concentric.net Wed Jul 28 03:49:27 2004 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 10:49:27 -0700 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: <20040727154121.63894.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040727154121.63894.qmail@web41115.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <410695A7.7050400@concentric.net> Leon Kirshtein wrote: > Has anyone come up with an alternative spirit combat > rules? I am not sure I like the current POW vs. POW system. Here's some I've stumbled across on the web: Simon Phipp's: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1481/spirit4.html Ouija's: http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/ouija.htm http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/rqspirit.htm Frederic Moulin (aka Stabbing Cat): http://www.msu.edu/user/moulinfr/spirit.html Sandy Petersen's Revised Shaman rules: http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/docs/shamans.doc HTH Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From bick10 at comcast.net Wed Jul 28 04:07:26 2004 From: bick10 at comcast.net (bick10 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 18:07:26 +0000 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat Message-ID: <072720041807.5190.410699DD000AE1B7000014462200750744CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Just to add to the list. I used Steve Perrin's rules for Spirit Combat in my standard RQ3 rules. It worried the ultra high POW players though. > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > Has anyone come up with an alternative spirit combat > > rules? I am not sure I like the current POW vs. POW system. > > Here's some I've stumbled across on the web: > > Simon Phipp's: > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1481/spirit4.html > > Ouija's: > http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/ouija.htm > http://www.eskimo.com/~ouija/rqspirit.htm > > Frederic Moulin (aka Stabbing Cat): > http://www.msu.edu/user/moulinfr/spirit.html > > Sandy Petersen's Revised Shaman rules: > http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/docs/shamans.doc > > HTH > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net From jurrubin at earthlink.net Wed Jul 28 04:10:19 2004 From: jurrubin at earthlink.net (David Smart) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 13:10:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Learning Spells - POW checks Message-ID: <20549225.1090951819694.JavaMail.root@beaker.psp.pas.earthlink.net> I don't. The gain roll is for stressful situations like combat. A character learning a spell from a spell spirit knows beforehand that he/she can't be hurt. David -----Original Message----- From: Leon Kirshtein Sent: Jul 27, 2004 10:42 AM To: "RuneQuest rules discussion." Subject: [RQ-Rules] Learning Spells - POW checks Do you give power gain rolls if a player chracter defeats a spell spirit? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 04:21:48 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Learning Spells - POW checks In-Reply-To: <20549225.1090951819694.JavaMail.root@beaker.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20040727182148.17330.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Smart wrote: > I don't. The gain roll is for stressful situations > like combat. I use the "does it matter" rule as well, but in that case I would have to ask: How many attempts do you let the character make to defeat the spirit? If it is a set number (I usually give 3) then there is a possibility that the character will fail to learn the spell altogether and lose the money he paid for it. Therefore, it is a stressful situation. BTW, I only give the POW gain roll if the spirit's power was ever equal to or greater then the characters during the combat. > A character learning a spell from a > spell spirit knows beforehand that he/she can't be > hurt. Hmm, I beg to differ. I have seen and played otherwise. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 04:44:42 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: <410695A7.7050400@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20040727184443.77351.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > Has anyone come up with an alternative spirit > combat > > rules? I am not sure I like the current POW vs. > POW system. > > Here's some I've stumbled across on the web: > > Simon Phipp's: > http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1481/spirit4.html > > Sandy Petersen's Revised Shaman rules: > http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/docs/shamans.doc Yes, I use the Sandy Petersen Shaman rules, but I think Simon Phipp's spirit combat rules (or a modified version there of) would be a good addition. So what would be a good Spirit Combat skill to start characters at? ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From patrice.bousquet at gso.fr Wed Jul 28 18:19:47 2004 From: patrice.bousquet at gso.fr (Patrice BOUSQUET) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:19:47 +0200 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f=2E_=3A_Re=3A_[RQ-Rules]_Spirit_Combat?= Message-ID: >Yes, I use the Sandy Petersen Shaman rules, but I >think Simon Phipp's spirit combat rules (or a modified >version there of) would be a good addition. So what >would be a good Spirit Combat skill to start >characters at? I no more use POw vs POW. Each Character have a spirit combat Attack skill and Defense Skill. The % is 5xPOW for each one. Only people who can reach or see spirit plane can check this skill box. By this way, spirit combat works the same way as real world combat. It also open the way to new spells equivalents to bladesharp, etc... Patrice. PS: I've also modified the spirit damages because I think a big POW is roughly the same as a big STR in the physical world. From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Jul 28 18:22:20 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:22:20 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat Message-ID: >Yes, I use the Sandy Petersen Shaman rules, but I >think Simon Phipp's spirit combat rules (or a modified >version there of) would be a good addition. So what >would be a good Spirit Combat skill to start >characters at? 5% plus Magic category skill modifier, or possiby as high as 15% in cultures where such focused application of Will power was cultural ideal... Cheers, Nick Middleton From leonbk at yahoo.com Wed Jul 28 23:13:41 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 06:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040728131341.52723.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >So what would be a good Spirit Combat skill to > >start characters at? > > 5% plus Magic category skill modifier, or possiby as > high as 15% in cultures where such focused > appplication of Will power was cultural ideal... That would make learning spells very difficult. I was thinking more like POWx3 ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Jul 29 00:18:59 2004 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:18:59 +0100 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat Message-ID: >--- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: >> >So what would be a good Spirit Combat skill to >> >start characters at? >> >> 5% plus Magic category skill modifier, or possiby as >> high as 15% in cultures where such focused >> appplication of Will power was cultural ideal... > >That would make learning spells very difficult. Why? If it's a skill, it can be learnt through experience to some extent (probably) and certainly taught. I imagine I'd give Assistant Shaman something like X 4 multiplier in previous experience, possibly higher for full Shaman. > I was >thinking more like POWx3 I see no reason to set it such that my dilettante PC's can go "Ooh, I'll spend a season with a Shaman..." and suddenly come out brilliant at it... ;-) Mind, I'd apply the same base chance to most Spirits, and would probably preclude them from increasing (since I tend to think of the Spirit Plane as timeless) but if I was going to make it a skill, I'd want it to fit in to the rules like any other skill and in RQ, base chances are not stat related. In other BRP games, STAT x N is used for some base chances however, so a starting score of POW X 3 is certainly plausible - albeit I'm not convinced that a pernickety Sorcerer (POW 20, thus base Spirit Combat of 60%) who has had very little experience or training in Spirit Combat should be able to instantly out do the Assistant Shaman (POW 15, thus base Spirit Combat of 45%) who's whole culture is permeated by interaction with the Spirit Realm... as ever, YMMV. Cheers, Nick Middleton From patrice.bousquet at gso.fr Thu Jul 29 00:30:10 2004 From: patrice.bousquet at gso.fr (Patrice BOUSQUET) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:30:10 +0200 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f=2E_=3A_Re=3A_[RQ-Rules]_Spirit_Combat?= Message-ID: >In other BRP games, STAT x N is used for some base chances however, so a >starting score of POW X 3 is certainly plausible - albeit I'm not convinced >that a pernickety Sorcerer (POW 20, thus base Spirit Combat of 60%) who has >had very little experience or training in Spirit Combat should be able to >instantly out do the Assistant Shaman (POW 15, thus base Spirit Combat of >45%) who's whole culture is permeated by interaction with the Spirit >Realm... as ever, YMMV. I feel spirit combat more like a sumotori combat, where each one try to cast away or control/block each other. In this case, POW would be equivalent to the SIZ, and a POW20 sorcerer would be a big opponent to a POW15 shaman (who in my own version is nearly the only one who can increase spirit combat). Patrice (and STATxN is also in use in RQ, luck roll for exemple or CON roll when wounded) From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Jul 29 00:47:51 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040728144751.93110.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > >That would make learning spells very difficult. > > Why? If it's a skill, it can be learnt through > experience to some extent (probably) and certainly > taught. Under the current system spirit combat is fairly quick since both parties have a good chance of success or one is overwhelmingly superior. With a small starting percentage it would forever to play it out. > > I was thinking more like POWx3 > > I see no reason to set it such that my dilettante > PC's can go "Ooh, I'll > spend a season with a Shaman..." and suddenly come > out brilliant at it... Some people are just naturally better at this sort of thing. Besides with an average power of 11 to start it is not that much. > ;-) Mind, I'd apply the same base chance to most > Spirits, I would give spirits much greater percentage, more like POWx5. > and would > probably preclude them from increasing (since I tend > to think of the Spirit Plane as timeless) I disagree with you here, but that is just my philosophy. > but if I was going to make it a skill, I'd want it to > fit in to the rules like any other skill and in RQ, > base chances are not stat related. I have several skills which are stat related, so this would not be something new. > In other BRP games, STAT x N is used for some base > chances however, so a > starting score of POW X 3 is certainly plausible - > albeit I'm not convinced > that a pernickety Sorcerer (POW 20, thus base Spirit > Combat of 60%) who has > had very little experience or training in Spirit > Combat should be able to > instantly out do the Assistant Shaman (POW 15, thus > base Spirit Combat of > 45%) who's whole culture is permeated by interaction > with the Spirit I agree with you here, however since I am talking about a starting percentage for a character this would not come into play in such a fashion. It is likely that both characters would start with a similar Spirit Combat skill lets say 45% and as time goes on the Assistant Shaman who is constantly dealing with spirits, by learning spells and may be binding them would get the checks to increase this, while the sorcere's apprentice would not. Basically what I am saying is that I would use the POWx3 instead of RQ3 Base+(Age-15)x4 to start, since I do not use the RQ3 method of generating new characters. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From matti.jarvinen at nysalor.net Thu Jul 29 05:45:13 2004 From: matti.jarvinen at nysalor.net (Matti Järvinen) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:45:13 +0300 Subject: [RQ-Rules] The Zin Letters # 2 Message-ID: <016e01c474db$6ef18b80$8900a8c0@matti> The second issue of The Zin Letters, the Fanzine of Kalikos - the Finnish Gloranthan Association, was published at Ropecon 2004 (http://www.ropecon.fi/eng/), a big Finnish RPG con, and it will be soon available from Tradetalk (http://www.Tradetalk.de). The Magazine has 44 pages (including covers) of Gloranthan material, for RuneQuest and HeroQuest. The articles are: Kralorela - Secrets of Lur Nop by Terra Incognita and Olli Kantola - On the Rule of Exarchs by Olli Kantola - The Order of Celestial Geomancy by Olli Kantola - Dr. Pin by Olli Kantola Loskalm - The Province of Easval by Klaus Viljanen - The City of Ease by Klaus Viljanen - The Army of Loskalm by Antti Karjalainen and Klaus Viljanen - The Brotherhood of Siglat's True Light by Klaus Viljanen Daran - Daran by Matti J?rvinen - The Church of Saint Ehilm by Matti J?rvinen - Important Places in Daran by Matti J?rvinen - The Barony of Ornim by Matti J?rvinen - Scenario Ideas by Matti J?rvinen The Zin Letters' website is at http://zin.kalikos.org/, and there is a bit additional Daran material for ZL #2. Matti "Nysalor" J?rvinen, Chief Editor of The Zin Letters Email: matti.jarvinen at nysalor.net From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Thu Jul 29 08:10:09 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 00:10:09 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Sorcery variant for BRP/RQ Message-ID: <00c201c474ef$a724a960$9d2aa8c0@skadebyran.se> Sorry for posting this on both brpsystem and rq-rules, but when Chaosium are publishing the RQ III magic rules under the BRP brand, "crossovers" are inevitable. In any case I've put together a rules variant usable with both RQ and most likely the majority of BRP games. These rules are inspired by ideas from Sandy Petersen's Sorcery rules, Magica (a port of the AD&D magic system to RQ) and the Ars Magica, Harnmaster and GURPS magic rules. The idea was to create a rules system that can be used with spells ported from AD&D, Ars Magica, GURPS and Harnmaster. Anyway, the rules variant is available as a pdf file: www.rollspelshornan.se/files/wizardry.pdf I have also created a few run of the mill spells, they can be accessed at: www.rollspelshornan.se/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/BasicRolePlaying/WizardrySpel ls I've have written a short text detailing a "magic theory", as written it's not specific to any particular setting. The document is not needed to use the rules, but the rules document does refer to a term in the magic theory document. In any case, this document is also available as a PDF file: www.rollspelshornan.se/files/magic_theory.pdf Comments and criticism are most welcome! /Peter From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Thu Jul 29 18:49:31 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:49:31 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2544@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Hi All. I am going to post a wee news article on my site re the latest on the RQ status question, so am recapping what I have read on this list. Please correct me if I go wrong anywhere: 1. Chaosium has obtained information from Hasbro that they are no longer interested in the RQ rules copy write. As such, they have published RQ as an Advanced BRP - in a monograph format. The reason - to stake their ownership of the rules. Said Advanced BRP has all reference to RQ or Glorantha removed but is in essence, RQIII. 2. Issaries (The Glorantha People) own the US Trademark for Rune Quest. Chaosium owns the US Glorantha Trademark. Who owns the UK trademarks, Games Workshop? watch this space. 3. Chaosium has not yet issued an official release regarding their future plans for the RQIII (aka Advanced BRP) rules. Is that it, in a nutshell? T?ny aka tiberius at runequest.za.org __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From gianni at basicrps.com Thu Jul 29 18:37:24 2004 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:37:24 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. In-Reply-To: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2544@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> References: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2544@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <1091090244.4108b74483be3@imp.webhuset.no> Quoting "Den, Tony T" : > 3. Chaosium has not yet issued an official release regarding their future > plans for the RQIII (aka Advanced BRP) rules. No, nothing official. But rumours of a 'DeLuxe Basic Roleplaying'. Cheers Gianni From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Thu Jul 29 19:37:54 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:37:54 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. References: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F2544@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <010201c4754f$b951f9c0$9d2aa8c0@skadebyran.se> On Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:49 AM, Den, Tony T wrote: > 2. Issaries (The Glorantha People) own the US Trademark for Rune > Quest. > Chaosium owns the US Glorantha Trademark. Who owns the UK trademarks, > Games Workshop? watch this space. No one owns either the trademark 'RuneQuest' or 'Glorantha' in the UK. You can search the UK trademark register here: http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/text AFAIK no RPG company (including WotC) has made any international registrations of their trademarks, that is a registration with WIPO (more info here: http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/). Dungeons & Dragons is a registred trademark in both the UK and Sweden, and possibly elsewere as well. That is the *only* RPG industry trademark I'm aware of which is also registred outside the US. From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Thu Jul 29 20:49:24 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 12:49:24 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F254C@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Makes one start to wonder if it may be worthwhile registering RuneQuest where I stay (South Africa) and approaching Chaosium for permission to print RQ here. Printing and postage costs to other countries would run a bit high, but with exchange rates factored in, it could be economically viable. QUOTATIONS ON BASIS RAND PER UNIT FOREIGN CURRENCY BRITISH STERLING GBP 11.1424 11.1164 11.0999 11.6176 11.6826 EURO EUR 7.3498 7.3294 7.3163 7.7584 7.7584 UNITED STATES DOL USD 6.1193 6.0918 6.0618 6.3868 6.3868 -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Peter Brink Sent: 29 July 2004 11:38 To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. On Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:49 AM, Den, Tony T wrote: > 2. Issaries (The Glorantha People) own the US Trademark for Rune > Quest. > Chaosium owns the US Glorantha Trademark. Who owns the UK trademarks, > Games Workshop? watch this space. No one owns either the trademark 'RuneQuest' or 'Glorantha' in the UK. You can search the UK trademark register here: http://webdb4.patent.gov.uk/tm/text AFAIK no RPG company (including WotC) has made any international registrations of their trademarks, that is a registration with WIPO (more info here: http://www.wipo.int/madrid/en/). Dungeons & Dragons is a registred trademark in both the UK and Sweden, and possibly elsewere as well. That is the *only* RPG industry trademark I'm aware of which is also registred outside the US. _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Thu Jul 29 21:09:15 2004 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:09:15 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. References: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F254C@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Message-ID: <011801c4755c$7c7d6450$9d2aa8c0@skadebyran.se> On Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:49 PM, Den, Tony T wrote: > Makes one start to wonder if it may be worthwhile registering > RuneQuest where I stay (South Africa) and approaching Chaosium > for permission to print RQ here. Printing and postage costs to > other countries would run a bit high, but with exchange rates > factored in, it could be economically viable. > I wouldn't do that unless I've had some legal counseling. The question becomes whether or not you could be seen as being marketing your RQ product in the US. If you sell it from an South-African website one could argue that your customers, so to speak, comes to SA when buying from you, but I'm sure there are arguments against it. From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Thu Jul 29 21:13:05 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:13:05 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F254D@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> For sure, I suppose anything like this needs some serious copywriter lawyer to review the ins and outs. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com]On Behalf Of Peter Brink Sent: 29 July 2004 01:09 To: RuneQuest rules discussion. Subject: Re: [RQ-Rules] Review of Current RQ Status. On Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:49 PM, Den, Tony T wrote: > Makes one start to wonder if it may be worthwhile registering > RuneQuest where I stay (South Africa) and approaching Chaosium > for permission to print RQ here. Printing and postage costs to > other countries would run a bit high, but with exchange rates > factored in, it could be economically viable. > I wouldn't do that unless I've had some legal counseling. The question becomes whether or not you could be seen as being marketing your RQ product in the US. If you sell it from an South-African website one could argue that your customers, so to speak, comes to SA when buying from you, but I'm sure there are arguments against it. _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Jul 29 22:26:32 2004 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Simon=20Phipp?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:26:32 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Spirit Combat In-Reply-To: <20040728221052.14EEC2227C0@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20040729122632.58983.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Leon Kirshtein: > Yes, I use the Sandy Petersen Shaman rules, but I > think Simon Phipp's spirit combat rules (or a modified > version there of) would be a good addition. So what > would be a good Spirit Combat skill to start > characters at? Nick: > 5% plus Magic category skill modifier, or possiby as high as 15% in > cultures where such focused application of Will power was cultural > ideal... I would say 5% base for western/sorcery cultures, 15% for barbarian cultures and 25% for primitive spirit-based cultures such as Trolls, Prax or Balazar. Note, even though Prax uses the Nomad character generation, I would give them 25% as they use spirits all the time. The skill adds Magic Bonus on top, of course. Leon: > That would make learning spells very difficult. I was > thinking more like POWx3 That's a bit high, but I like high powered games, so why not? Leon/Nick: > >That would make learning spells very difficult. > > Why? If it's a skill, it can be learnt through experience to some extent > (probably) and certainly taught. I imagine I'd give Assistant Shaman > something like X 4 multiplier in previous experience, possibly higher for > full Shaman. Nomads/Primitives would probably get x2 just for being in the culture and Barbarians would get x1. Nasty sorcerers don't get any previous experience. > I see no reason to set it such that my dilettante PC's can go "Ooh, I'll > spend a season with a Shaman..." and suddenly come out brilliant at it... > ;-) Mind, I'd apply the same base chance to most Spirits, and would > probably preclude them from increasing (since I tend to think of the Spirit > Plane as timeless) but if I was going to make it a skill, I'd want it to > fit in to the rules like any other skill and in RQ, base chances are not > stat related. Spirits would normally run at POWx5% for convenience, and yes I would not let spirits increase their chance except by increasing POW. However, this does allow for hunter-killer spirits/shamans roaming the Spirit Plane with POW 50 and Spirit Combat 250% doing an incredible amount of MP damage. Is this a bad thing? I don't think so. > In other BRP games, STAT x N is used for some base chances however, so a > starting score of POW X 3 is certainly plausible - albeit I'm not convinced > that a pernickety Sorcerer (POW 20, thus base Spirit Combat of 60%) who has > had very little experience or training in Spirit Combat should be able to > instantly out do the Assistant Shaman (POW 15, thus base Spirit Combat of > 45%) who's whole culture is permeated by interaction with the Spirit > Realm... as ever, YMMV. No, poxy sorcerers would get 5% base and not a penny more. Arkati sorcerers troll sorcerers might get a higher base. Patrice: > I feel spirit combat more like a sumotori combat, where each one try to > cast away or control/block > each other. In this case, POW would be equivalent to the SIZ, and a POW20 > sorcerer would be a big > opponent to a POW15 shaman (who in my own version is nearly the only one > who can increase spirit > combat). Yes, in my aforementioned rules, the Spirit Combat skill shows the expertise and the POW is the muscle behind it, in the same way that people with high STR/SIZ do a lot of damage, spirits with high POW do a lot of damage. In a combat between 2 people with the same skill but vastly different POW, the higher POW will probably win. Between 2 people with similar POW and vastly different skills, the person with the higher skill will normally win. I don't know about combats between low skill high POW and high POW low skill, my gut feeling is that the higher skill will win through in the end. Also, in my rules the shaman's fetch is the thing that goes awandering as it is his spirit-self, so a POW 15 fetch is quite small, not a beginning shaman but an inexperienced one. It will still beat a POW 20 sorcerer as the POW levels are similar and the fetch's skill should be higher. Under standard RQ rules, the POW 20 sorcerer will be better at beating spirits than a POW 15 shaman. Simon ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Fri Jul 30 00:22:07 2004 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:22:07 +0200 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Runequest.za.org site updates Message-ID: <52B26EB23446704C801FCF722CF8D2063F255E@scmbjhbmsg03.scmbdirectory.com> Greetings. I have updated my site with the Blend spell, thanks Leon and Stephen for input. I have also updated the caltrop section of missile weapons, thanks Peter for identifying my mistake there. Please also see my attempt at a RQ GM's shield. I only have word to work with so formatting is not so nice, but any ideas on additional tables to take up the last available page appreciated. Lastly, loaded a PDF version of the character sheet and made a small adjustment to make space for sidekick/animals skills www.runequest.za.org scroll down LHS to see latest updates T?ny aka tiberius at runequest.za.org __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of Standard Bank Group Limited is proprietary to the group. It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, disclose or use the content in any way. Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jul 30 05:35:55 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?ASHLEY=20MUNDAY?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 20:35:55 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040729122632.58983.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040729193555.8987.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> ...about all this base chance for success in spirit magic. What's wrong with making it a 0% base magic skill and using previous experience as normal? You'd learn it the same way as Enchant or Summon. You could say that members of a spirit magic culture would get x 1, assistant shaman get x 3 and shaman get x 5; Divine magic users get x 1, priests get x 3 while Sorcery users don't get any yearly increases at all. As an aside: You'd use spirit combat to attack and defend. Allow only one attack/defence per round to allow ganging up. You could also allow combatants to split attacks and blocks as they could in melee. Each un-countered attack EITHER inflicts 1d3 Mpt loss per 10 POW of the attacker OR allows a Mpt vs characteristic roll to possess the target. Spirit screen reduces the damage by 1/pt, spirit block reduces the damage by 2/pt. Resist spirit (or whatever the damned sorcery spell is called) has to be overcome by spirit damage to hurt the protected individual. Un-countered special success causes EITHER causes 2d3 Mpt loss per 10 POW OR adds the special success chance to a possession attack. Un-countered critical success causes EITHER 6 Mpt loss per 10 attacker POW, ignoring spirit screen and spirit block OR automatically possess the target. This has the nice effect of making spirit combat very similar to ordinary combat, saving yourself the effort of teaching new players how the rules work. In addition you could raid HQ for such interesting abilities as Shamanic Escape (allows a shaman to return to his body at any time) and Open Spirit World (learnable by non-shaman to see into the spirit world and find spirits). You could also convert second sight and visibility to magic skills rather than making them spells. Additional things you could throw in: - Shaman add the POW of their fetches to their POW to determine the damage they inflict and resist possession. - Priests can use add their allies POW to their own when interacting with a being they've got some sort of runic association with (i.e. Helamakt initiates tackling a sheep spirit). Sorry for the length of the post, the rules heavy part of my character has been invigorated by purchasing "I can't believe it's Not RuneQuest" from Chaosium at Continuum. Cheers, Ash From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 30 06:11:45 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040729193555.8987.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040729201145.43627.qmail@web41108.mail.yahoo.com> --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > ...about all this base chance for success in spirit > magic. What's wrong with making it a 0% base magic > skill and using previous experience as normal? You'd > learn it the same way as Enchant or Summon. > > You could say that members of a spirit magic culture > would get x 1, assistant shaman get x 3 and shaman > get > x 5; Divine magic users get x 1, priests get x 3 > while > Sorcery users don't get any yearly increases at all. Not everybody uses this system for starting characters. I, for example, use a system which allows a starting character to purchase skills. Since this skill will now be a determining factor in learning spirit spells, there is a need for a starting(base) percentage. > Spirit screen reduces the damage by 1/pt, spirit > block > reduces the damage by 2/pt. Resist spirit (or > whatever > the damned sorcery spell is called) has to be > overcome > by spirit damage to hurt the protected individual. This makes these spells too powerful. With a Spirit Screen 6 or Spirit Block 3, I can pretty much ignore any spirit with a power of 20 or less. I am not sure at the moment, but there has to be a better way to play these spells. > Additional things you could throw in: > > - Shaman add the POW of their fetches to their POW > to > determine the damage they inflict and resist > possession. Not if they are discorporated. > - Priests can use add their allies POW to their own > when interacting with a being they've got some sort > of > runic association with (i.e. Helamakt initiates > tackling a sheep spirit). Oh no, not the sheep Ghost!!! I am not sure this is needed. They are already friendly. > Sorry for the length of the post, the rules heavy > part > of my character has been invigorated by purchasing > "I > can't believe it's Not RuneQuest" from Chaosium at > Continuum. Please, this what this list is for. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jul 30 08:18:51 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?ASHLEY=20MUNDAY?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 23:18:51 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040729201145.43627.qmail@web41108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040729221851.84654.qmail@web86204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Leon suggested that spirit screen and block would be overpowered with my (random) ideas for spirit combat. With the "real" rules Spirit Block 3 (if that's the Divine Version TM) renders any spirit of less 30 POW totally powerless, so I can't see the problem! At least in my variant a critical spirit combat roll would do some damage. As for the character generation problem, you still don't need a starting percentage. Your adventurers would use the same mechanism (whatever that is) as they use to gain enchant and summon. I can't see the problem with letting Shaman keep their fetch bonuses when they're discorporate - it lets them tackle far bigger spirits and makes them truly the people to call when spirit combat is needed. I don't think learning spirit spells is a biggy. Most spell spirits doled out by priests and shaman are going to be feeble as feeble things - POW much less than 10 in most cases. Even a mediocre skill will see it off - no doubt the Shaman would throw in a dose of Spirit Screen to help the student. Cheers, Ash From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 30 09:41:42 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:41:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040729221851.84654.qmail@web86204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040729234142.25668.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: > With the "real" rules Spirit Block 3 (if that's the > Divine Version TM) renders any spirit of less 30 POW > totally powerless, so I can't see the problem! At > least in my variant a critical spirit combat roll > would do some damage. I did not say I like it the way it is now either, besides currently this does not hold true for Spirit Screen. > As for the character generation problem, you still > don't need a starting percentage. Your adventurers > would use the same mechanism (whatever that is) as > they use to gain enchant and summon. I would say that each character(person) has certain amount of will power naturally to fend of such attacks from birth (like breathing its innate). > I can't see the problem with letting Shaman keep > their > fetch bonuses when they're discorporate - it lets > them tackle far bigger spirits They are bad enough already. I do not see the need to give them an additional advantage. > I don't think learning spirit spells is a biggy. > Most > spell spirits doled out by priests and shaman are > going to be feeble as feeble things - POW much less > than 10 in most cases. Even a mediocre skill will > see it off - no doubt the Shaman would throw in a > dose of Spirit Screen to help the student. I disagree. I play that a spell spirit will have POW equal to 1d6 per point of spirit magic it knows. I also play that the presence of any spell like Spirit Screen voids the chance for a POW gain roll in such situation. Besides, with the Spirit Combat skills in the 10s it will take forever, in real time, to get through this. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aescleal at btinternet.com Fri Jul 30 16:12:05 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?ASHLEY=20MUNDAY?=) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 07:12:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040729234142.25668.qmail@web41104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040730061205.80940.qmail@web86210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I said: "I don't think learning spirit spells is a biggy. Most spell spirits doled out by priests and shaman are going to be feeble as feeble things - POW much less than 10 in most cases. Even a mediocre skill will see it off - no doubt the Shaman would throw in a dose of Spirit Screen to help the student." Leon replied: "I play that a spell spirit will have POW equal to 1d6 per point of spirit magic it knows." That's a case of "my house rule breaks yours" - which I can't really comment on. Presumably you did that to stop characters being able to learn really high intensity spirit spells. He goes on: "I also play that the presence of any spell like Spirit Screen voids the chance for a POW gain roll in such situation." With the variant I suggested characters wouldn't get POW gains from spirit combat - there's very little active use of POW. And again: "Besides, with the Spirit Combat skills in the 10s it will take forever, in real time, to get through this." I wouldn't bother playing out a spirit combat to learn a spirit spell, even with the current rules. It's a bit like watching paint dry for the other players. Cheers, Ash From patrice.bousquet at gso.fr Fri Jul 30 22:23:49 2004 From: patrice.bousquet at gso.fr (Patrice BOUSQUET) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:23:49 +0200 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f=2E_=3A_Re=3A_[RQ-Rules]_I'm_a_bit_confused=2E=2E=2E_?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?and_POW_gain_rolls?= Message-ID: >"I also play that the presence of any spell like >Spirit Screen voids the chance for a POW gain roll in >such situation." >With the variant I suggested characters wouldn't get >POW gains from spirit combat - there's very little >active use of POW. Do everyone still make POW gain roll, and in which cases? Even when spirit combat skills can increase with experience? Patrice From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Jul 30 23:34:37 2004 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 06:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [RQ-Rules] I'm a bit confused... In-Reply-To: <20040730061205.80940.qmail@web86210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20040730133437.25148.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com> --- ASHLEY MUNDAY wrote: Regarding spirit power being equal to spirit magic x 1d6. > Presumably you did that to > stop characters being able to learn really high > intensity spirit spells. Actually no. I did that specifically to give characters an extra opportunity for POW gain rolls and at the same time provide rule mechanics which limit low "level" character with plenty of cash in getting ahead of themselves in terms of magic. the rest of our disscusion is pretty much differences in the style of play. ===== Leon Kirshtein www.godlearner.d2g.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From aescleal at btinternet.com Sat Jul 31 00:30:41 2004 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?ASHLEY=20MUNDAY?=) Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 15:30:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [RQ-Rules] YASCP - yet another spirit combat post In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040730143041.14216.qmail@web86210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Patrice asked wrt to my suggestions: "Do everyone still make POW gain roll, and in which cases?" The only time I'd allow a POW gain roll would be if someone's magic points overcame someone elses. So, if you use my variant and my ruling on when they're allowed you wouldn't give a POW gain roll for spirit combat. As for increasing the skill by experience, it depends. If spirit combat is like the other magic skills and only raisable by training or research, then you wouldn't get an experience roll at it. Cheers, Ash